From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 01:06:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA09227; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 00:42:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 00:42:31 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Magnetic deformation Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 08:42:56 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32cbb9f9.11230086 mail.netspace.net.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-5g4-2.0.1G2.rDYoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3038 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have been wondering if the magnetic field produced by a rapidly rotating nucleus would be sufficient to appreciably deform the normal electron orbitals of an atom, resulting in different chemical behaviour? Does anyone have some formulae to offer in this regard? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 04:21:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA22249; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 03:59:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 03:59:15 -0800 Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:56:17 +0100 Message-Id: <199701011156.MAA09207 atom.bbtt.com> X-Sender: harti bbtt.de (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: freenrg-l eskimo.com From: bauer.d krypta.aball.de (Wolf-Dietrich Bauer) (by way of harti@bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann)) Subject: Naudin's Bedini-generator efficiency calculation Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"4dWYg2.0.YR5.H6boo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3039 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hallo Jean-Louis Naudin ! I think even your cheap and simple but quite inefficient Bedini generator setup shows overunity efficiency! To explain this I resume first your experimental informations: SETUP: > >You can find this G-field generator plan in Bedini lab's note at : >http://rand.nidlink.com/~john1/motor.html> Coils and magnets: >Two coils made with 450 turns of 0.35 mm wire (0.01 H inductance). Coils >have 2 cm X 2 cm section and are made out of iron rods. >Cores of coils are made with 5 irons rods of 4x35 mm each >to prevent eddy currents. >4 barrium ferrite magnets >Motor: > model Graupner Speed 600 / 8.4V > Nominal voltage : 8.4 V > blocking-current drain : 70 A > Operating voltage range (direct drive ) : 4.8...9.6 V > Operating voltage range (inc.gearbox) : 8.4...16 V > No-Load speed 15500 RPM > Idle-current drain 1.8 A > Current drain at max. efficiency : 11 A > Max efficiency (without gearbox) 75% > >G-FIELD INPUT POWER : > > with NOLOAD : > INPUT = 8.4 V / 2.8 A about 24 watts > > with LOAD ( lamp 12V/5W ) > INPUT = 7.8 V / 3.5 A about 27 watts > >RESULTS : > >G-Field generator turn at 2400 RPM with 24 Watt input ( 8 volts, 3 A DC) >Signal waveforms on scope have the same shape of Bedini's G-Field showed in >picture with frequency of 40 Hz at 2400 RPM. > >AC mode with NO LOAD > In CUR mode : 9.2 Volts RMS output > In VTG mode : 19 Volts RMS output > >AC mode with LOAD ( 5 watt 12 volt lamp ) > In CUR mode : U = 8 volts / I = 0.252 A power output about 3.5 Watt > In VTG mode : U= 11.4 volts / I = 0.31 A power output about 2 Watt > >DC mode with NO LOAD > In CUR mode : U = 15 volts > In VTG mode : U = 29.5 volts > >DC mode with LOAD ( 5 watt 12 volt lamp ) > In CUR mode : U = 8.4 volts / I = 0.25 A power output about 2.1 Watt > In VTG mode : U= 7.1 volts / I = 0.22 A power output about 1.56 Watt >From your data we can estimate the mechanical work input: mechanical work input for conversion into electricity = (input with load -input without load) * efficiency =(7.8*3.5 - 8.4*2.8)*75% = 3.78*75% <= 2.8 W Your best power data for electrical work output (AC and VTG mode) are work output= 11.4V * 0.31A = 3.534W (It would be better if you had taken an usual electronic resistors for testing because we have to assume in your RMS-calculation that your lamp works as a linear resistor) Therefrom we can estimate an efficiency of your generator efficiency = mechanical input / electrical output >=3.5/2.8= 125% The greater sign stands because you do not operate the motor at optimum efficiency. Therefrom we conclude that the problem of your setup is that the (overunity-) efficiency of your generator is too low to overcome the internal losses. I did not build a generator - but if you want to improve the efficiency of your generator (at your own risk !!) I recommend you to do the following things: 1) Take Neodymium Boron Magnets (as Bedini) Neodymium magnets have about 4 times more power than Barium ferrites Magnets of 2 cm diameter 1 cm length cost about 30.- DM ( ~ 20 US $) The surface field is about 1.2 T. (firms: Thomson CSF, Vacuumschmelze) The higher the field ampitude the higher the energy output. 2) Make the airgap closer This will rise the flux through the coil and you will get higher voltage spikes. I will you give typical values vesus distance according to (1) for the magnet cited above: gap 2mm - mean field <1.2 T; gap 5 mm - mean field < 0.949T; gap 7mm - mean field <0.484 T; gap 10 mm - mean field < .32T 3) Use appropriate iron materials with transformer laminations For the high fields of these magnets special iron materials which saturate at high fluxes are strongly demanded if you use high field magnets to get high voltages. For example, a suited material I think is PERMAX F by VACUUMSCHMELZE(Hanau) It saturates at 1.5 T and has a quite flat (and low) hysteresis. It is used in puls transformers and chokes. The laminations of this material should be normally 0.1- 0.2 mm ! 4) Fit your load resistor to your generator Remember my Brown-Ecklin article part 2 (http://www.overunity.de/ theory.htm) fig.10. You can read therefrom: the higher the load the higher the energy output and the lower the mechanical input from 20 to 240 Ohm. This means: the efficiency can rise if you go to higher ohmic load. 5) Make friction losses as little as possible. Use a flywheel if you have problems with steady rotation. Use high efficiency motors in their optimum and avoid gearboxes if possible. 6) Make the radius of rotation bigger. This will enhance the velocity of the rotating magnets and therefore the voltage spikes become higher. 7) Make the magnets and iron cores facing each other of equal area. The sense of this is that you get a sharp discontinuity in the derivation of the magnetic resistance of the magnetic circuit at the point of maximum flux. This allows fully to use the energy stored in the coil to give the iron bar a little kick out in the starting phase if it leaves the gap. (The effect is enforced as well if you go to higher load because R/L rises) All these measurement proposed above are restricted mainly by the iron core materials. If the iron material saturates or it is to slow to follow the H- field no further improvement is possible at all. Best regards Dieter Bauer (1) Citation source: Magnetismus Dauermagnete Werkstoffe und Systeme Catalog 1995 by IBS Magnet Kurfuerstenstr.92 D-12105 Berlin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 06:17:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA31719; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 05:55:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 05:55:46 -0800 Date: 01 Jan 97 08:54:11 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: NOVA Resources Message-ID: <970101135410_76570.2270_FHU49-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"0tdTo1.0.Xl7.Xpcoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3040 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott wanted to know about Nova Resources Group. Let me say they are a 100% legitmate operation. Chip Ransford, the CEO, is a highly experienced mechanical engineer who has worked on many conventional projects in the past. He has designed and begun to manufacture very safe test vessels for electrochemical and gas-loaded CF experiments. These units may become, he thinks, the modular units for large power farms in the multimegawatt range. More recently he has designed nad marketed a SEM for "personal" use -- i.e. a "cheap" SEM. NRG has a very classy lab/workshop/manufacturing space in Denver. Why don't you call up Chip at the number in the ad and visit him there. He has a physics graduate student (working on a cold fusion thesis!) who is working for him. NRG is NOT (yet) in the business of preparing or packaging the cell contents for their reactor vessels. That is the job for people like Ed Storms and Tom Passell of EPRI. Recently NRG has had a lot of success interesting monied partied from the far eats in their developing business. By the way, in the NRG ad, the SEM photo of a crater formed during a cold fusion experiment was from Oak Ridge National Laboratory --this CF evidence has been hidden (for fear of reprisals there) since 1989. Chip knows the whole story, so don't ask me the details. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 06:26:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA32039; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 06:05:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 06:05:13 -0800 Date: 01 Jan 97 09:03:27 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Bose Message-ID: <970101140326_76570.2270_FHU49-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"KV6MO2.0.Wq7.Nycoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3041 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, On what date and page is the Bose article in the WSJ? I need to get the full text. The article contains an outrageously false statement -- *most likley* generated by the reporter (but I want to be sure it was not Bose putting that out): "They concluded, as did many others who tried to reproduce the cold-fusion findings, that the process didn't put out any more energy than was put in." This is not true. The Bose engineers on that project, with whom I had contact, made only a highly restricted statement about their particular experiments. They were well aware of the cathode materials and other problems relating to "nonreproducibility of conditions." They assured me that they meant no blanket dismissal of cold fusion by their negative publication in Fusion Technology. They just went on to other projects. That was most unfortunate, since at the time there were many other avenues in CF they could have followed and did not. I will be contacting the people at Bose to try to get this Wall Street Journal misinformation clarified. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 06:52:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA02411; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 06:30:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 06:30:21 -0800 Message-ID: <32CA750B.6047 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 09:30:35 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hank-Candle in microwave oven References: <32CA0030.27B7 pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"G31KZ2.0.Yb.yJdoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3042 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: hjscudde pacbell.net wrote: > (snip) The operating frequency of mine is 2450 MHz, with a wavelength of > 1.22 cm. The .625" length of my candle was reduced to about .25" or about > a length of .375", or .952 cm, which is close enough for kitchen physics. Hank, are you not off by a factor of 10? In free space I get: L = c/f = (3 x 10^10 cm/sec)/(2450 x 10^6 /sec) = 12.2 cm I think? More like 5 inches - about the length of a hot dog! Maybe this is why a lone hot dog in the MW gets quarter-wave burn spots? Looking for the ketchup, Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 09:33:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA24662; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:17:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:17:11 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:16:34 -0500 Message-ID: <970101121633_405651289 emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: junk mail Resent-Message-ID: <"Lec6e1.0.G16.Lmfoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3043 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Do we all get to much junk mail? Do what I do. Email one junk mailer and to him to send info to another junk mailer. Subscribe one to the other. If we all to this once a week they will get the hint. Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 12:27:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA18977; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:04:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:04:38 -0800 Date: 01 Jan 97 15:02:47 EST From: Michael Forsyth <72020.45 compuserve.com> To: Subject: junk mail Message-ID: <970101200246_72020.45_FHH29-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"kRMMZ1.0.Me4.LDioo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3044 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Good Idea but may i suggest gather up all junk into one message and send to each one - daily if possible - clog the system. -- Mike -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 12:27:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA19000; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:04:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:04:46 -0800 Date: 01 Jan 97 15:02:42 EST From: Michael Forsyth <72020.45 compuserve.com> To: Subject: help please Message-ID: <970101200241_72020.45_FHH29-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"lnu6x2.0.oe4.SDioo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3045 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Don, You wrote: "just a thought that needs a little claification i remember that if you have two sounds identicle they will cancel out each other and there will be no sound is this correct. and if it is does it also apply to electro magnetic forces ( such as radio waves) such as to identicle radio waves. " According to vector analysis there is cancellation of two wave 180 deg out of phase but this is fundamentally incorrect. What you get is a scalar field (no directional component) which is part of maxwell's original equations (written in quaternions). Maxwell's equations were rewritten into vectors by Heaviside (?) about the turn of the century discarding two of four possible solutions. Whittaker, about 1902, corrected some of this but was ignored except by some soviet theoreticians. Tom Bearden has written extensively on this (available from Tesla International) The difference between the vector form and the original is an explaination of how o/u devices work. With a little luck someone else will send a better post - but don't hesitate to ask for more. -- Mike -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 14:53:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA05700; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:30:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:30:44 -0800 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970101223909.0070e86c mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 14:39:09 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Radio Talk Show Resent-Message-ID: <"_jCfc.0.-O1.IMkoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3046 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:14 PM 12/31/96 -0700, you wrote: >For those interested, I just completed a one hour interview with the Radio >Talk Network, hosted by the International Tesla Society. It will air >nationwide at 6:00PM PST. > >I was questioned about CETI. To avoid from being removed from this forum, Sounds like a backhanded accusation, Joey. What makes you think you would be removed? There is only one person who could do that, the list administrator, and he clearly stated the reasons why he would do that to someone. Criticizing cold fusion on the air? For shame. Actually that's just debate. Doesn't apply. --Gary Hawkins >I will not state at this time what I said. I am suppose to receive a >listing of the radio stations carrying this broadcast on the 2nd. If >anyone is interested you may contact me direct outside of the forum. > > >___________________________ >Joe Champion >discpub netzone.com >http://www.netzone.com/~discpub > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 18:41:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA06681; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 18:06:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 18:06:27 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 02:06:01 GMT Message-Id: <199701020206.CAA15405 popmail.dircon.co.uk> X-Sender: dominic popmail.dircon.co.uk (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Dominic Murphy Subject: Happy New Year to the Grail Knights Resent-Message-ID: <"Ek1wF2.0.Je1.XWnoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3047 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Happy new year to Vortex. You have my deepest respect. You are the modern equivalent of the Knights of the Holy Grail. That may seem a sensational statement but I do not believe that it is. All the marvellous technology that we have created is based on an energy system unchanged since prehistoric times. Man, the master of fire, is a tree burner. Now, as our demand for energy exponentiates, the smoke from our fires is so great that it poisons the planet. We need new clean energy systems to survive. New energy systems may also enable us to leave the confines of this perilous little planet and establish ourselves on other bodies in space. That would secure the prospect of life eternal for our species. "Infinity welcomes careful drivers!" You are searching of our Holy Grail, something so precious that it can save the whole of humanity and offer new limitless horizons. But the Grail holds a threat. It is said that death, not eternal life, awaits unworthy sinners who drink from the Grail. What if the new energy technology proves so potent that it gives the power of planetary destruction to individual humans? Could we bear such responsibilities? This is perhaps the question posed by Dr. Arthur C. Clarke, when he mused recently that supernova my just be someone else's industrial accident. Maybe this is why we have not obviously been visited by other space faring species. No-one yet has survived the discovery of the energy source necessary to make that space faring viable. But we cannot stop the quest, that would be certain destruction. Whilst the threat of discovering power beyond our control is only a possibility. You may recall that I originated a program called "It runs on water". In it we featured the Patterson cell. I was concerned to read that the take-up of the units being offered for public test may not be as great as originally thought. I *may* be able to get money to fund tests in the UK. Is anyone doing work in the UK already? Is this a good idea? Whatdoyouthink? In any event good luck to you all in 1997. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Dec 31 09:26:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA11853; Tue, 31 Dec 1996 09:17:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 09:17:20 -0800 Message-Id: <199612311714.AA13868 gateway1.srs.gov> Alternate-Recipient: prohibited Disclose-Recipients: prohibited Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 11:59:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Kirk L Shanahan Subject: Diffusion Rates To: Private_User srs.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 12:01:00 -0400 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal A1-Type: MAIL Hop-Count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"qtfba2.0.3v2.UgKoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3022 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In Prof. Bockris' response to Richard Murray's critique of the Miley/CETI paper, he said: "Solid state diffusion coefficients limit the diffusion of impurities adsorbed on the surface to 50 Angstroms in two weeks." Does anyone have any references to support that statement? TIA! Kirk Shanahan {{My opinions...noone else's}} From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 21:48:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA30629; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 21:13:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 21:13:35 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 00:13:26 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199701020513.AAA17651 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: <199612311930.LAA09369 dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> (aki@ix.netcom.com) Subject: JT claims to be catching up. (was Re: Japan achieves fusion breakeven!) Resent-Message-ID: <"yWxx51.0.RU7.zFqoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3048 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Akira Kawasaki (aki ix.netcom.com) said: > I wonder how this affects the latest future hot fusion programs.. Not at all. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is not even a "scientific breakeven" result, as irrelevant as that goal is. Basically what this says is, "If we had been running with a 50/50 DT mixture (which is highly uneconomical, but that is a detail), and all other plasma conditions had been the same--they wouldn't have been--then we calculate that we might have reached "scientific breakeven." Both TFTR and JET have now run with DT mixtures, and while the results are somewhat encouraging, I think that the realistic consensus position is now that a lot more DT testing is needed before the ITER design process goes much further. There are indications of instability problems which could result in changing the design. (For those of you who still pay attention to such things, the probable effect would be to FINALLY build a "skinny" tokamak. For research purposes, it is nice to minimize that ratio of wall to volume by making the central hole as small as possible. Maximizing stability calls for making the difference between the radius on the inner wall and on the outer wall as small as possible. Some of this can be accomplished by making the cross-section non-circular, but at some point they will have to bite the bullet and build something that looks like an operational device. All IMHO, of course.) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 23:44:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA13678; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 23:09:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 23:09:28 -0800 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970102071744.00b0a57c mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 23:17:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Sagan Resent-Message-ID: <"8l9mU2.0.eL3.cyroo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3049 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Carl Sagan: "But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 00:28:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA21970; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 23:53:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 23:53:54 -0800 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970102080215.0068c2b4 mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 00:02:15 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Been in the punch again Resent-Message-ID: <"okWTA1.0.CN5.Gcsoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3050 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Arthur C. Clarke: "If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible he is almost certainly right, but if he says that it is impossible he is very probably wrong." Popular Mechanics, March 1949: "Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equpped with 18,000 vaccuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vaccuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1 1/2 tons." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 00:57:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA26627; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 00:23:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 00:23:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:23:17 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Diffusion Rates In-Reply-To: <199612311714.AA13868 gateway1.srs.gov> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"S62ar3.0.zV6.c1too" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3051 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Kirk L Shanahan wrote: > In Prof. Bockris' response to Richard Murray's critique of the Miley/CETI > paper, he said: > > "Solid state diffusion coefficients limit the diffusion of impurities > adsorbed on the surface to 50 Angstroms in two weeks." > > Does anyone have any references to support that statement? I would write "private communication, J. O'M. Bockris, 1996" {:]. Bockris no doubt used the simple expression for the Nernst diffusion depth L, L = SQRT (pi*D*t) using a value for D (as I make it, on the back of an envelope) about 10^-19 cm^2/s. This looks reasonable, but no doubt someone out there knows something about solid state diffusion rates. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | | http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~britz | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 01:57:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA02385; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:22:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:22:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:21:53 -0800 Message-Id: <199701020921.BAA09633 dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: JT claims to be catching up. (was Re: Japan achieves fusion breakeven!) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"K8Ibc3.0.8b.Lvtoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3052 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: anuary 1, 1997 You wrote: > >> AK wrote: >> I wonder how this affects the latest future hot fusion programs.. > > Not at all. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is not even a >"scientific breakeven" result, as irrelevant as that goal is. Glad to hear it categorized as irrelevant. No apologies needed. Be blunt. Notice that it is the poster and media coverage of similar activities claim it to be a goal that was sought. I thought it was -- if simply to attain a milestone considering all the resources being spent worldwide, particularly in the United States. I visited the web site maintained by JT and noticed that they simply make a status report of their progress. No hot press, no claims to 'scientific breakeven', no claims to 'catching up' as you say. They did have enough pride in their work to set up a web site for the public with information. You take from there. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 02:16:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA03991; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:41:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:41:12 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 97 01:40:59 PST From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <9701020940.AA25563 joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: JT claims to be catching up. (was Re: Japan achieves fusion breakeven!) Resent-Message-ID: <"sIzYd.0.H-.sAuoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3053 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scientific breakeven is a major milestone, and deserving of widespread attention. In actuality people are a bit subdued about it simply because it was expected to happen, and we have been close to it for some time. AS for those who whine about it not being break even because its extrapolated to a DT burn, as opposed to the DD burn it really was---they have a valid technical point, but if they want to see a DT breakeven they should fund the development of machines capable of handling the radioactivity, rather than simply chiding those who are getting the best possible results from the existing machines. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 03:09:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA08259; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 02:35:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 02:35:00 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 21:34:52 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Some advice from the bleachers. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"SUxAD1.0.v02.Jzuoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3054 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Now that Scott Little and Earthtech are halfway into the CETI circle I thought I'd offer some advice for testing the Patterson Cells. 1. When doing transmutation tests a good control would be to simulatanously run a Erastz glass Bead cell of exactly the same geometry as the main test cell in series with the main cell. It would make a good control. 2. If the "un-optimized for heat production" beads don't give any heat production, it may be fruitful to ask Dennis Cravens to loan his 5-watt cell he demoed at the ANS meeting. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 05:38:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA21951; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 05:16:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 05:16:50 -0800 Date: 02 Jan 97 08:15:14 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: JT claims to be catching up. (was Re: Japan achieves fusion breakeven!) Message-ID: <970102131513_76570.2270_FHU48-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"FdJD7.0.vM5.0Lxoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3055 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Let me remind all here that cold fusion cells achieved breakeven in 1989 --a ctually shortly brefore that. This JT news is just another dying gasp from the deranged tokamak white elephant. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 05:56:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA25042; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 05:34:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 05:34:31 -0800 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 08:33:47 -0500 Message-ID: <970102083346_1156406661 emout18.mail.aol.com> To: bauer.d krypta.aball.de cc: harti harti.de, vortex-l@eskimo.com, harti@bbtt.de, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE> Naudin's Bedini-generator efficiency calculation Resent-Message-ID: <"g0mK32.0.B76.cbxoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3056 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To : Dieter Bauer CC: Stefan Hartmann >From : Jean-Louis Naudin On 01/01/1997 13:22:07, you wrote : << Hallo Jean-Louis Naudin ! I think even your cheap and simple but quite inefficient Bedini generator setup shows overunity efficiency! To explain this I resume first your experimental informations: mechanical work input for conversion into electricity = (input with load -input without load) * efficiency =(7.8*3.5 - 8.4*2.8)*75% = 3.78*75% <= 2.8 W Your best power data for electrical work output (AC and VTG mode) are work output= 11.4V * 0.31A = 3.534W (It would be better if you had taken an usual electronic resistors for testing because we have to assume in your RMS-calculation that your lamp works as a linear resistor) Therefrom we can estimate an efficiency of your generator efficiency = mechanical input / electrical output >=3.5/2.8= 125% The greater sign stands because you do not operate the motor at optimum efficiency. >>..snip ..snip << All these measurement proposed above are restricted mainly by the iron core materials. If the iron material saturates or it is to slow to follow the H- field no further improvement is possible at all. Best regards Dieter Bauer >> ===== HAPPY NEW YEAR 1997 ===== Thanks Dieter, for your very interesting advices about my G-Field generator. I use four (45x20x6 mm) ferrite barium magnets mounted in pairs on two 10 cm arms. The mean gap between coils and magnets is 2 mm. I project to build another device, more optimize and mechanically frictionless. But after reading your excellent document on Brown-Ecklin generator, I project to start in priority to build this kind of generator, because I think that flux gating with static magnets and static coils is more efficiency (mechanical moment reduced). I expect from you some advices about how to construct a powerful generator (if you have a ready made diagram). I have found recently an interesting patent which describe a full static gating flux commutator : The patent is "Electromagnetic Generator" from Villasenor de Rivas (US Pat :4,006,0401), you have a short description below: " The present invention relates to apparatus for generating electrical energy from magnetic energy and, more particularly, to a low cost electromagnetic generator wherein the direction of magnetic flux from a permanent magnet and flowing in a core member is rapidly alternated to generate an alternating current in a winding on the core member. Permanent magnets have long been recognized and used as sources of magnetic flux both separately and in combination with electromagnets as means of intensifying current flow. In such instances, as the frequency of the control signal to the electromagnet has increased, so has the coil inductance of the electromagnet and the effective reluctance of the magnetic flux path to limit the magnitude of the generated current. It is an object of the present invention to provide an electromagnetic generator including a permanent magnet as a flux source wherein the magnitude of the generated current increases as a function of the frequency of the signals applied to control the direction of flux flow from the magnet. Another object of the present invention is to provide a low cost electromagnetic generator including a permanent magnet and a core member in combination wherein the direction of magnetic flux flowing from the magnet in the core member is rapidly alternated by switching means to generate an alternating current in a winding on the core member. A further object of the present invention is to provide an electromagnetic generator including a permanent magnet and two separate magnetic flux circuit paths between the north and south poles of the magnet each including switching means for opening and closing the flux circuits in combination with a core member and means for alternately operating the switching means such that the direction of magnetic flux in the core member is rapidly alternated to generate an alternating current in a winding on the core member. " You can find the full patent with picture at this web address : http://www2.meshnet.or.jp/~smori/netforest/free-energy/rivas/us4006401.html I would like to have your opinion this patent, it is very interesting because it has only static components. Nice to speak with you soon, Sincerely, Jean-Louis Naudin Email : JNaudin509 aol.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 07:00:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA02574; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:38:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:38:56 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701020835.ZM17556 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 08:35:31 -0600 In-Reply-To: FZNIDARSIC aol.com "junk mail" (Jan 1, 11:18am) References: <970101121633_405651289 emout01.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: junk mail Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"523HE.0.8e._Xyoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3057 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 1, 11:18am, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > Subject: junk mail > Do we all get to much junk mail? Do what I do. Email one junk mailer and to > him to send info to another junk mailer. Subscribe one to the other. If we > all to this once a week they will get the hint. > >-- End of excerpt from FZNIDARSIC aol.com Net ediquette is to forward junk maill back to the sender via the return address. If the problem persists, you are encouraged to send it also to their net server's webmaster or sysop. That address may need to be researched a little, but worth the time. Alerting your own sysop is a good idea also, they can set up filters if enough people complain. Several hundred emails will eventually gets someone's attention. A "friend" of mine stopped a persistent bugger by writing a simple batch job that forwarded 1000 replies back to the sender *and* the sysop for every one recieved. Filled up that mail server in no time. Only took two days to get off that list. Ha! Keep in mind, I neither promote or endorse such extream activity............ -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 07:14:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA04904; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:52:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:52:54 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:52:13 -0800 Message-Id: <199701021452.GAA18330 dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: JT claims to be catching up. (was Re: Japan achieves fusion breakeven!) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Resent-Message-ID: <"oF-NM2.0.GC1.3lyoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3058 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 2, 1997 'Gene, you wrote: > >Let me remind all here that cold fusion cells achieved breakeven in >1989 --actually shortly brefore that. This JT news is just another >dying gasp from the deranged tokamak white elephant. But what an elephant! Hot nuclear studies (fission & fusion) have helped win a war, added to understandings of existance, fueled weapons of war and provided national security, and added to our electrical needs. Everything on an macro scale with plenty of earnest tax money. Even to clean up from behind. CF started on a micro scale and have yet to ramp up to a similar scale of money, involvement, or endorsement. And it has such a short timeline. Perhaps it takes an issue of national security or crisis (not the creeping variety) to add impetus to the CF studies. Go macro. See how CF can be scaled up and designed to make a bomb -- 'for national security' and it may attract attention. See how the 'cold' can go real hot, fast. It might have happened already in early experiments. Imagine, a nuclear explosion with no residual radiation. Something to attract attention all right. Clean destruction first, peaceful use later. Nothing like unstable political situations internationally to promote progress. Or at least a simple Einstenian letter to the Prsident for effect. Excuse me, I went lucidly crazy for a moment. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 08:02:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA11787; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:27:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:27:44 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199612310520.XAA11843 natashya.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:27:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: excess enthaply - Wharton Resent-Message-ID: <"VwVkQ1.0.5u2.kFzoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3059 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I have noticed that Larry's expression: >P = Cv * Flow Rate * Ambient Temperature * Log ( Tout / Tin) (Eqn #1) >gives the same result as the "usual" expression: >P = Cv * FLow Rate * (Tout-Tin) (Eqn #2) >only when the Ambient Temperature is the average of Tout and Tin.... Eqn # 1 here has a missing term (Tout-Tin). It should be P = Cv * Flow Rate * Ambient Temperature *(Tout-Tin)* Log ( Tout / Tin) This is an approximation valid at small delta T and perhaps the exact form P = Cv * Flow Rate * { Tout - Tin + Tin Log (Tin / Tout) } should be used as there are some claims of excess heat at large delta T. For the alleged Pons claim of 100% heat excess at 100 degrees we would have the potential mechanical power output of P = Cv * Flow Rate * { 100 + 300 Log (300 / 400) } or P = Cv * Flow Rate * { 100 -37.5 } = Cv * Flow Rate * 62.5 So for the potential mechanical power output the 100 degrees gets converted into 62.5 degrees or the 100% heat excess gets converted into 62.5% mechanical power excess. Let me repeat my argument for using the potential mechanical power output. If a CF cell, being used in flow calorimetry, was forcing an internal exchange between chemical potential and heat then the heat excess would vanish as the chemical perturbation relaxed to its equilibrium state, or if the heat was extracted before chemical equilibrium is achieved the device would act as a heat pump. While the heat may be taken away or be delivered as in a heat pump, the implied available mechanical power will not vanish. It doesn't matter what the chemical potential difference between the cell inflow and outflow is, mechanical work may always be done between the temperature difference. So the mechanical output power is real and no argument will ever make it go away. No, as Jed Rothwell says, "magic crystals" or any internal chemical potential shifts may make it vanish. My equation was confusing only because it is approximate and a term was left off. The exact form, given above, is conceptually quite simple as it results from the trivial integration in temperature of the Carnot cycle efficiency. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 08:27:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA22257; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 08:18:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 08:18:18 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <961228171902_76016.2701_JHC69-1 CompuServe.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:18:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: CETI Beads Resent-Message-ID: <"ImJaN2.0.hR5.9_zoo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3060 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 28 Dec 1996, Terry Blanton wrote: > As I posted recently, a representative of CETI stated that they were >working on > a prototype water heater (presumably for home use). This could be why >they have > clammed up on discussions of the heating phenomenon. I think this unlikely. There is no reason to drop public claims of the remarkable alleged excess heat being obtained because a product is in the works. I think it is more likely that CETI found out that there is no excess heat in a closed system and they know that their cell is useless as a water heater. They have abandoned their heat claims, in effect, by only concentrating on the alleged nuclear transmutations. That is a much more difficult problem but in time I believe we will find that the alchemy part is also non existant. Note that there has never been a report of the performance of my simple test to comfirm the reality of the excess heat output. This test is very simple and conclusive and it is likely that it has been done. I believe that CETI did this test, found out that the excess heat went away and that is the reason they have shut up about the excess heat. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 09:07:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA02505 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:07:49 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:07:49 -0800 X-Envelope-From: mjwilli ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Thu Jan 2 09:07:43 1997 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (mjwilli ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA02478 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:07:42 -0800 Received: (from mjwilli localhost) by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) id LAA07374; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:07:40 -0600 (CST) Old-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:07:39 -0600 (CST) From: williams michael j To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Please change my e-mail address for getting vortex-l news to: mjwilli uiuc.edu and please add Dr. George H. Miley to the group: g-miley uiuc.edu Thanks... Mike From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 09:52:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA12087; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:41:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 09:41:26 -0800 Message-ID: <32CBF31C.3A14 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 12:40:44 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: CETI Beads References: <961228171902_76016.2701_JHC69-1 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Z2I_K3.0.Qx2.tC_oo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3061 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry Wharton wrote: (snip) > I believe > that CETI did this test, found out that the excess heat went away and that > is the reason they have shut up about the excess heat. Larry, let's assume that your hunch about CETI is wrong - that the CETI beads really do work to generate excess heat. IMO CETI must do the following: 1. Convince the "friendly fire" that the beads work. (The kits were a great step in this direction.) 2. Find out where the energy is coming from. (If it's real, and it's not chemical - then the MAINSTREAM boys will say it's nuclear.) 3. Convince the MAINSTREAM boys that CETI is right! 4. Produce a product that I can buy and install in MY home. I put 3 where it is because, attached to the MAINSTREAM is the LIBILITY INSURANCE BUSINESS! If the MAINSTREAM boys are as evil as Eugene M. says they are, then all they have to do to stop CF is to drop a bug in the ear of the insurance industry (CF = nuclear = unknown = risk = bad). How many of you will install a 100 lb (?) device under your wife and children that works on an UNKNOWN process - not chemical! Falling in love with the CETI beads is not good enough! We need to "prove" not only if, but WHY they work. I hope this process is in progress. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 10:28:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA26703; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:14:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:14:46 -0800 Date: 02 Jan 97 13:11:55 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Pons uses static calorimetry Message-ID: <970102181154_72240.1256_EHB83-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"BwiQH3.0.aW6.Gi_oo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3062 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Larry Wharton writes: This is an approximation valid at small delta T and perhaps the exact form P = Cv * Flow Rate * { Tout - Tin + Tin Log (Tin / Tout) } should be used as there are some claims of excess heat at large delta T. For the alleged Pons claim of 100% heat excess at 100 degrees we would have the potential mechanical power output of P = Cv * Flow Rate * { 100 + 300 Log (300 / 400) } As I have pointed out about a million times, Pons uses a static calorimeter. There is no flow involved. Wharton's hypothesis is predicated upon the idea that *any* cold fusion device might be a heat pump in disguise, therefore any CF device must exceed the level of Carnot efficiency. It must produce more than a reversible heat engine could. First of all, Wharton's claims are factually wrong: many cells have exceeded the limits of Carnot efficiency, particularly the ones that have run for weeks without any electrical or mechanical input in heat after death reactions. Second, if a cell placed in a bath could be heat pump, this would destroy the whole experimental basis of calorimetry, electrochemistry and thermodynamics going back 200 years. It would be like finding out that telescopes do not work and stars are an optical illusion. If Wharton can prove any part of his hypothesis he will win the next ten Nobel prizes. In all the years of the CF debate, only one hypothesis has ever been proposed that might make a static calorimeter into a heat pump. If the wire going into a cell was composed of two different metals, and the bimetallic junction was placed carefully at the cell wall, it might act as a Peltier device to cool the bath water and heat up the cell content. Needless to say, no cell has ever been constructed in this manner and even if one was, the amount of heat it would shift into the cell would be four to six orders of magnitude too small too explain the CF effect. And it would not even begin to explain the heat after death phenomenon. This is also the case for standard flow calorimeters in which pure water is circulated. Wharton's hypothesis might possibly apply to CETI's calorimeter in which the electrolyte itself circulates, although Miley and I believe that is practically impossible and not worth investigating, but it cannot begin to be true where only pure water circulates, contacting only the cell walls. Finally, Wharton has repeatedly stated that CETI has abandoned their claims of excess heat and that "I think it is more likely that CETI found out that there is no excess heat in a closed system and they know that their cell is useless as a water heater." These statements refer to simple matters of fact -- not experimental results, not theories. A "matter of fact" means a fact that anyone can verify with a telephone call. An example is the claim that Ontario Hydro sells used reactor moderator water. Either they do, or they do not. You do not verify such claims by performing an experiment or by arguing about data as Hoffman did. You call Ontario Hydro and ask them. Several people have reported here that they saw a CETI cell at the recent A.P.S. meeting, and that CETI claimed the cell was producing excess heat. Therefore it is a matter of fact that CETI has *not* abandoned such claims, and Wharton's statements are absolutely false. Please note there is a difference between asserting: 1. CETI has retracted their claims. (A matter of fact.) 2. I do not believe CETI's claims for thus and such reasons. (A point amenable to scientific discussion; a debatable statement.) You simply cannot debate Type 1 statements. You might as well argue that Jed's auto tag is not WEM 188. I find Wharton's repeated denials of matters of fact annoying, disruptive, and opposed to the spirit of serious academic debate. I ask him to please stop. It is acceptable to say that "CETI should perform such and such a test." It is NOT acceptable to say that they have done that test and they are hiding the results. It is NOT acceptable to say they have retracted when several people saw them recently reiterate their claim. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 12:58:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA04200; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 12:37:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 12:37:43 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 12:35:49 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Looking for supplier of Barium ferrite magnets Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"mpNT32.0.T11.Lo1po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3064 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Anyone know wher to get it, in US? -Nils Also looking for barium titanium oxide (a baked ceramic) - anyone know where to buy it? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 14:20:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA28221; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:11:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:11:15 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:10:49 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Looking for email address of Micheal Watson... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ecxnR1.0.ru6.1A3po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3067 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ... who did some work on the Floyd Sweet VTA device. Anyone know his email? -Nils From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 14:21:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA28015; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:09:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:09:55 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:04:12 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! In-Reply-To: <199701022128.WAA02123 atom.bbtt.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CQ4U41.0.er6.n83po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3066 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yes, I have heard this story many times of the years. His herbs were known and I bought few of them to try out. I discontinued the program after I learned that the man was a son from a man with the same name. It was believed that the man was only 125 some years - which is still amazing, but right in on line of human maximum lifespan. I am sure we all could live that long if we did not create the stress we get into in modern living. (smile) -Nils On Thu, 2 Jan 1997, Stefan Hartmann wrote: > Hi, > > a friend just called me and told me a true story she read > in a book from the author: > Benjamin Hoff: "the Tao of Pooh" > > There is told that in 1933 in almost all newspapers around the world > was brought the story of a Chinese man just died at the age of > 256 years ! > He was born in 1677 and died in 1933. > He was called: > > Li Chung Yun > > and lived in China. > He has eaten many unknown herbs, which he had specialized > in, cause he lived in the mountains and thus probably found > the right herb for extra long living ! > > Does anybody heard of this true story ? > > Where can I find more info on this man and his extremly long > life ? > I tried already some search engines with his name, but did get no > result. Can anybody please help ? > > I know this is a bit off-topic, but maybe to live for 200+ years is also > in the interest of this group ??? :) > > I still want to fly to MARS or to other far away galaxies, which is probably > still away about 100 years from now ! :) (just dreamin... ) > > Best regards, Stefan. > -- > Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann > Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany > NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 > email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de > Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de > Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de > My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 14:30:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA29326; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:15:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:15:01 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CC335A.41C67EA6 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 14:14:50 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! References: <199701022128.WAA02123 atom.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Pd-7m2.0.8A7.aD3po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3069 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > Hi, > > a friend just called me and told me a true story she read > in a book from the author: > Benjamin Hoff: "the Tao of Pooh" > > There is told that in 1933 in almost all newspapers around the world > was brought the story of a Chinese man just died at the age of > 256 years ! Rest assured that the "story" probably is true, but that the man did not live 256 years. There has never been a documented case of a human living to the age of 130, even. What is far more typical is for people to claim to have advanced age for various societal reasons, such as enhanced status, or evading military service. One thing to notice is that claims of extreme longevity have dropped in recent times, as records keeping has become better and as tests exist that can approximately determine a persons age (from analysis of tooth material, for e.g.). -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 15:28:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA12390; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:10:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:10:53 -0800 Message-ID: <32CC4070.1A15 worldnet.att.net> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 13:10:42 -1000 From: Rick Monteverde X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for supplier of Barium ferrite magnets References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5sm2S.0.V13.y14po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3070 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nils Rognerud wrote: > > Anyone know wher to get it, in US? > > -Nils > > Also looking for barium titanium oxide (a baked ceramic) - anyone know > where to buy it? I keep hearing a persistent rumor that sales of new barium ferrites are now banned because : A: (conventional). toxicity associated with the barium B. (paranoid conspiracy) allows a route to free energy Is the ceramic compound a magnet too? Sounds like one of those high-dielectric ceramics used as transducers for ultrasonics. If so, try: http://www.thomasregister.com:8000/cgi/register There might be some manufacturers listed there, or try a search engine on ultrasonic - transducer - etc. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 16:26:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA17349; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:36:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:36:28 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:36:21 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199701022336.SAA19702 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: <9701020940.AA25563 joshua.math.ucla.edu> (message from Barry Merriman on Thu, 2 Jan 97 01:40:59 PST) Subject: Re: JT claims to be catching up. (was Re: Japan achieves fusion breakeven!) Resent-Message-ID: <"sRrRy1.0._E4.xP4po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3073 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman (barry math.ucla.edu) said: First: > Scientific breakeven is a major milestone, and deserving of widespread > attention. In actuality people are a bit subdued about it simply > because it was expected to happen, and we have been close to it > for some time. True breakeven would be such a milestone. Unfortunately, the definition of "scientific breakeven," is such that there have been lots of experiments where it is observed, but irrelevant. (Heat a DT plasma, then cut the neutral beam injection.) Ignition, is a much better defined and significant milestone: you cut the NBI, and the plasma keeps getting hotter. > AS for those who whine about it not being break even because its > extrapolated to a DT burn, as opposed to the DD burn it really > was---they have a valid technical point, but if they want to see a > DT breakeven they should fund the development of machines capable > of handling the radioactivity, rather than simply chiding those > who are getting the best possible results from the existing > machines. Not chiding, and I look forward to DT results from Japan. Those could help decide what ITER should look like. (I don't take the gloom-and-doom view that is going around right now, but I do think that waiting 6 months to a year before finalizing the ITER design could save lost of $$ down the road.) If some of the funds not spend on ITER this year, could go to getting more results out of Alcator and TFTR, great. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 16:26:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA16956; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:31:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:31:58 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:31:20 -0800 Message-Id: <199701022331.PAA15622 dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: Looking for supplier of Barium ferrite magnets To: vortex-l eskimo.com To: rognerud best.com Resent-Message-ID: <"mQYwc2.0.o84.iL4po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3072 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >Anyone know wher to get it, in US? > >-Nils > >Also looking for barium titanium oxide (a baked ceramic) - anyone know >where to buy it? > Alfa Aesar (of Johnson Matthey) has both listed as powders in their catalog. Barium ferrite is catalog 87688 and Barium titanium oxide is catalog 39755, & 12348, & 86267, & 88267, 88268, & 10652. Call 800 343-0660 and they will send you their chemical catalog. Good reference source. If they will not sell any to you as an individual, then try Strem Chemicals, tel. 800-647-8736 for their catalog. You'll have to do your own sintering and magnetising. Or consult with the supply houses for leads and ideas. Or if you live in a large city, look up the business Yellow pages under Magnets. In L.A, I find 24 listings. Here's one: Magnet Sales & Mfg. 310-391-7213, fax 310-390-4357 (free catalog on request) Its motto: If Its a Magnet, We Make it. Good Luck. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 16:30:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA15922; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:25:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:25:45 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <970102181154_72240.1256_EHB83-1 CompuServe.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:25:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry Resent-Message-ID: <"kuNfe2.0.iu3.tF4po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3071 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Its good to see Jed Rothwell achieving an appreciation of the unacceptable nature of the flow calorimetry used by CETI and George Miley. He writes > Wharton's hypothesis might possibly apply >to CETI's calorimeter in which the electrolyte itself circulates, although >Miley and I believe that is practically impossible and not worth >investigating, but it cannot begin to be true where only pure water >circulates, contacting only the cell walls. Yes indeed standard flow calorimetry would work just fine. If this was realized early on I think CETI would be much further on in their development or the process would have been totally debunked at present. Jed talks of 200 years of calorimetry but, in fact the CETI technique of combining the electrolyte with a coolant flow is a new and unacceptable calorimetry technique. The CETI combined flow calorimetry technique has a history of 2 years (and it likely will not make 3) with no scientist competent in calorimetry willing to accept it and an unanimous rejection of it by scientists competent in calorimetry who have looked at it. So now that we agree that standard flow calorimetry is valid then lets see the data using it. As far as I know there is none. So then we may look at static calorimetry which is also valid. The published data here is most unimpressive with very small alleged heat excesses. The Pons claim of 100% heat excess at 100 degrees should be looked at but as far as I know there is not anything to look at yet. When and if it becomes available I would be most anxious to look at it. There are no published static calorimetry results for the Patterson cell. The reason for this is clear - it doesn't work for static calorimetry. Jed has claimed repeatedly that it does work for static calorimetry but there are no papers, reports or even presentations making this claim. If there is anything available that I could read I apologize for my ignorance and ask for the references so that I may correct myself. > Several people >have reported here that they saw a CETI cell at the recent A.P.S. meeting, and >that CETI claimed the cell was producing excess heat. Therefore it is a matter >of fact that CETI has *not* abandoned such claims, and Wharton's statements >are absolutely false. My guess is that CETI is now abandoning their claims of excess heat as indicated by any valid calorimetry technique. Their combined flow calorimetry technique is not valid and any claimed heat excess using that technique is irrelevant. It is true that a guess is not a scientific fact but it is nevertheless interesting to look at the accumulating indicators. All of CETI's latest press releases make no mention of heat excess and instead discuss the nuclear alchemy aspect. The REFLEX kits contain beads that are "not optimized" for heat production. George Miley's first paper on the new CF technique, in collaboration with CETI and with Patterson as coauthor, makes no mention of excess heat. Jed likes to make the analogy with the Wright brothers and flight. So lets suppose that they stopped making claims of successful flight in their papers and press releases and started selling aiirplanes that were "not optomized for flight" but instead intended for studing air flows around the wings. Would not a reasonable conclusion be that they were having trouble with air flight? Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 16:36:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA21370; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 16:11:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 16:11:34 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 01:02:33 +0100 Message-Id: <199701030002.BAA03085 atom.bbtt.com> X-Sender: harti bbtt.de (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: harti bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Resent-Message-ID: <"UXihn1.0.nD5.rw4po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3074 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Stefan Hartmann wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> a friend just called me and told me a true story she read >> in a book from the author: >> Benjamin Hoff: "the Tao of Pooh" >> >> There is told that in 1933 in almost all newspapers around the world >> was brought the story of a Chinese man just died at the age of >> 256 years ! > >Rest assured that the "story" probably is true, but that the man >did not live 256 years. There has never been a documented case >of a human living to the age of 130, even. I just heard, that there is a women living in the Netherlands that is about age 150 ! I will try to nail down if it is true... Regards, Stefan. -- Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 17:25:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA08257; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:09:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:09:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:08:14 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970102200801.33bfe180 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry Resent-Message-ID: <"GUqYT2.0.w02.1n5po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3080 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:25 PM 1/2/1997 -0500, Lawrence E. Wharton wrote: > The Pons claim of >100% heat excess at 100 degrees should be looked at but as far as I know >there is not anything to look at yet. When and if it becomes available I >would be most anxious to look at it. As previously posted, the cover issue of the COLD FUSION TIMES is available at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html reports this and the issue itself COLD FUSION TIMES (v5,n1) ISSN#1072-2874 has reported in more detail on the confirmation, as have the papers themselves by the French Atomic Energy Commission and CEREM, of course. Not to mention the confirmations by the US Navy, and the Italians. Details of those two are also on the CFTimes home page (URL above) ----------------------------------------------- > George Miley's first paper >on the new CF technique, in collaboration with CETI and with Patterson as >coauthor, makes no mention of excess heat. > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 > That is not entirely true. The paper says circa ~500 milliwatts excess heat in the copy in front of me. "Nuclear Transmutations in thin film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis", G. Miley, J. Patterson 2ndIntConfLENR (1996) Perhaps you have a preprint, or bad copy, Lawrence? Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 17:44:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA15214; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:30:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:30:08 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CC6110.59E2B600 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 17:29:52 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! References: <199701030002.BAA03085 atom.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D24Cq.0.Zj3.R46po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3081 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > > I just heard, that there is a women living in the Netherlands > that is about age 150 ! > > I will try to nail down if it is true... > There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many such claims. Another interesting point in his book is that there are many immortal species, i.e. species which have no fixed lifespan, and would seem to live forever if properly protected from diseases and predators. These species also have no fixed size, i.e. they continue to grow in size as long as they live (examples: some fish, most crustaceans and some mollusks). If there were a 256 year old man, perhapos we should expect him to be about 20 feet tall and 900 lbs :-) -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 18:05:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA00223; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:53:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:53:30 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CC6695.3F54BC7E math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 17:53:25 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! References: <199701030002.BAA03085 atom.bbtt.com> <32CC6110.59E2B600@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ElGIb2.0.O3.PQ6po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3085 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: By the way, the oldest living *anything* that has ever been documented was a Mollusck, which lived to be 220---250 years (I don't recall precisely; ref: Hayflick's book). (As for those who object and cite bristlecone pines, redwoods and and the like: trees are colony lifeforms, like coral. We don't normally consider a coral reef to be a 10,000 year old animal, and so nor should we consider a tree to be a 1000 year old "living thing"; the cells that are alive on a tree typiclly live only a few decades. The tree iteself is more comparable to a human civilization rather than an individual human, as "lifeforms" go). -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 18:13:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA01263; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:01:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:01:26 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 19:50:07 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <199701030002.BAA03089 atom.bbtt.com> from "Stefan Hartmann" at Jan 3, 97 01:02:52 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mYERD2.0.cJ.rX6po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3086 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > So the conclusion is: > Eat as many minerals as I can get ? Is this right ? Stefan, I think you have swallowed plenty enough already! :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 19:14:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA10967; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:42:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:42:41 -0800 Date: 02 Jan 97 21:40:44 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Message-ID: <970103024044_100433.1541_BHG54-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"1vT2m2.0.Eh2.W87po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3088 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry, > As for those who object and cite bristlecone pines, redwoods and > and the like: trees are colony lifeforms, like coral. I'm no botanist, but this seems a bit - um - 'unsatisfactory'. It seems to me that you are saying that a plant is always a colony, and that seems wrong. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 19:32:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA05752; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:16:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:16:14 -0800 Message-Id: <199701030203.TAA11960 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: Subject: Re: Repost: It's on Sunday Jan. 5, 1997 at 6:00PM PST Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 19:16:33 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D3ArR.0.oP1.il6po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3087 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- I received several request for stations and times. I placed it in a file at the following address: http://www.netzone.com/~discpub/stations.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 20:30:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA29622; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:20:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:20:57 -0800 Date: 02 Jan 97 23:18:40 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Pons uses static calorimetry Message-ID: <970103041840_72240.1256_EHB121-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"w6DPY3.0.mE7.ea8po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3089 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Larry Wharton writes: " . . . the CETI technique of combining the electrolyte with a coolant flow is a new and unacceptable calorimetry technique. The CETI combined flow calorimetry technique has a history of 2 years (and it likely will not make 3) with no scientist competent in calorimetry willing to accept it and an unanimous rejection of it by scientists competent in calorimetry who have looked at it." That is false. SRI replicated CETI's calorimeter, did a complete study of it, and found that it works perfectly. So did Cravens, Miley, Merriman and Little. Dozens of scientists highly competant in calorimetry at TAMU and ICCF6 looked at the work and found no errors, including Bockris, Miles, Mizuno and many others. In fact, I do not know of a single expert in calorimetry anywhere who has ever expressed any doubts about the validity of this method, and I do not know a single one who takes Wharton's "magic crystal" or heat pump theories seriously. They all believe in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The flowing electrolyte calorimeters have been thoroughly tested and calibrated over many years by Patterson, Cravens, McKubre and others. "The published data here is most unimpressive with very small alleged heat excesses." I published data here showing one watt in and over 1000 out. That is a gigantic and impressive excess. Motorola showed data showing zero watts in and 16 watts out, which is also impressive. "The Pons claim of 100% heat excess at 100 degrees should be looked at but as far as I know there is not anything to look at yet." Pons published his boil off results years ago, in Physics Letters A and elsewhere. He got 300% excess during the boil off, and infinity-percent in heat after death after that. "If there is anything available that I could read I apologize for my ignorance and ask for the references so that I may correct myself." Apology accepted. Yes, I think you should read the literature before making any further comments. As Arthur Clarke says: Over and Out. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 21:23:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA20285; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:48:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:48:53 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 19:48:20 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <32CC335A.41C67EA6 math.ucla.edu> from "Barry Merriman" at Jan 2, 97 02:14:50 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ag_sq3.0.py4.4M6po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3084 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > One thing to notice is that claims of extreme longevity have > dropped in recent times, as records keeping has become better > and as tests exist that can approximately determine a persons age > (from analysis of tooth material, for e.g.). As well as a reduction in new Saints, and Divine miracles. ;-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 22:17:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA19654; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:47:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:47:02 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 19:45:58 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Larry Wharton" at Jan 2, 97 06:25:32 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1f-TM3.0.uo4.JK6po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3083 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Lawrence Wharton writes: > ...the CETI technique of > combining the electrolyte with a coolant flow is a new and unacceptable > calorimetry technique. The CETI combined flow calorimetry technique has a > history of 2 years (and it likely will not make 3) with no scientist > competent in calorimetry willing to accept it and an unanimous rejection of > it by scientists competent in calorimetry who have looked at it. I'm curious as to the reasons such combined purpose flow calormetry is flawed. We spent quite a bit of time early on trying to come up with realistic mechanisms by which such systems could fool us, but the actual specifics of such spoofing were lacking. Also, your assertion that "scientists competent" to look at it "unanimously reject it" is a bit circular, since you merely have to assert that any scientist who doesn't reject it is incompetent. That sort of circular hyperbola doesn't really get us anywhere. I'd much prefer an appeal to evidence than an appeal to authority. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 2 23:14:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA17059; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:36:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:36:32 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CC6296.1CFBAE39 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 17:36:22 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! References: <199701030002.BAA03089 atom.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Jtr3r3.0.OA4.TA6po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3082 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > All of the oldest peoples > on earth reside on mountain tops!.. Actually, its the oldest _looking_ peoples...their long exposure to higher UV leaves them shriveled looking. > .. Ages of 130-155 not uncommon with this > peoples.. No, _claims_ of such ages are not uncommon. As you might guess, such populations have been extensively studied in the last couple decades, and it has been determined that they were generally lying about/misrecollecting their true ages, for a variety of reasons. Physical tests and the like have shown these populations to have elders in their 70's and 80's---not bad, but not too different from the rest of the human species. For a recent reference, check out Hayflick's 199x book on ageing. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 00:22:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA15214; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:30:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 17:30:08 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CC6110.59E2B600 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 17:29:52 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! References: <199701030002.BAA03085 atom.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D24Cq.0.Zj3.R46po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3081 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > > I just heard, that there is a women living in the Netherlands > that is about age 150 ! > > I will try to nail down if it is true... > There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many such claims. Another interesting point in his book is that there are many immortal species, i.e. species which have no fixed lifespan, and would seem to live forever if properly protected from diseases and predators. These species also have no fixed size, i.e. they continue to grow in size as long as they live (examples: some fish, most crustaceans and some mollusks). If there were a 256 year old man, perhapos we should expect him to be about 20 feet tall and 900 lbs :-) -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 09:27:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA00853; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:17:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:17:40 -0800 Date: 03 Jan 97 12:15:38 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Message-ID: <970103171538_76016.2701_JHC106-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"n63qx.0.ED.oyJpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3091 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman said: >>There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many such claims.<< Interesting since this corresponds with Genesis where God said His spirit no longer dwells in man as he is of the flesh and his years shall be six score years (6 x 20 years). Since man allegedly lived much longer in times before Noah, one must wonder if this upper limit of life was a result of interbreeding with the Nephilim or "those who come down". Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 09:53:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA07049; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:43:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:43:57 -0800 Date: 03 Jan 97 12:42:00 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Address from Griggs ? Message-ID: <970103174159_76016.2701_JHC43-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"yUNgO1.0.cj1.NLKpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3095 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefmann Hartmann asks: >>Can anybody please forward an address to contact the Griggs Hydrosonic pump sales office ? A FAX number also would be very welcome !<< The only office that I know of is in Rome, GA: James L. Griggs Hydro Dynamics 8 Redmond Court Rome, GA USA 30165 phone 706/234-4111 fax 706/234-0702 Hope this helps! Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 10:29:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA20653; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:18:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:18:49 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: from "Larry Wharton" at Jan 2, 97 06:25:32 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:18:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry Resent-Message-ID: <"H9GGa3.0.U25.5sKpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3097 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To answer John Logajan's question about combined flow calorimetry >I'm curious as to the reasons such combined purpose flow calormetry is >flawed. We spent quite a bit of time early on trying to come up with >realistic mechanisms by which such systems could fool us, but the actual >specifics of such spoofing were lacking. Let me say that I think that something interesting is going on that should be investigated. Contrary to Jed Rothwell's claims I do believe the data he has reported and that the heat excess exceeds the available chemical energy. So there is something significant going on, no doubt about that. Since there is not a credible case made for nuclear reactions going on, except by exclusion, my theory is that there is no energy excess and the energy out of the cell equals the energy inflow plus the cell power input. So we would then have (Heat + Chemical Potential)Out = (Heat + Chemical Potential+Power)In and the apparent heat excess would be balanced with a chemical potential deficit such that the energy was conserved without the need to invoke nuclear reactions. I have given my candidate chemical reaction associated with the chemical potential shift many times and will not repeat it. Many people have said that it would be impossible for the Patterson Cell to be causing a shift away from chemical equilibrium but that is because they do not know that high electric fields do just that. Any chemical species has a dipole moment P that will approximately be proportional to the electric field, E or P = k E and the energy associated with this is P dot E or Energy = k E^2 if E is high enough this energy becomes comparable to the chemical potential and the chemical equilibrium levels would become shifted. Some introductory texts in chemistry discuss this shift at high electric fields but most do not so it is understandable that many chemists have no knowledge of this effect. The very high electric field at the bead surface in the cell, about 10^8 volts/meter, would be of high enough magnitude to effect the chemical equilibrium levels. In a normal electrochemical cell the induced chemical species are stuck at the electrode surface because they are attracted to the electrode surface and moving them away would take energy. In the Patterson Cell, however, the electrolyte is flowing past the cell surface and this flow can expend energy and carry the induced chemical species away. There has been much debate as to why the Patterson Cell needs to have flow to work, with the most popular explanation being that the hydrogen bubbles forming on the bead surface are harmful and must be carried away. My explanation that the flow is needed to detach the induced chemical species from the attractive bead surface is much more reasonable. There are several simple tests to detect this effect: The time test: Since the chemical shift is no longer in equilibrium when the electric field is removed, the electrolyte will relax to its equilibrium level in time. The cell outflow may be diverted into an insulated container and the temperature may be measured as a function of time. Chemically dependent tests: The properties of the cell outflow as opposed to the cell inflow may be measured. Such properties as Ph, dielectric constant, and resitivity would be relevant and simple to measure. Notice that none of these simple tests have been reported upon. Jed Rothwell says that no one believes my theory. I would say that no competent scientist disbelieves my theory. A competent scientist working in this field would have looked up the dipole moments of the chemical species involved and taken the product with the electric field to see if the interaction energy is comparable with the chemical potential. I did that and it is. Let me end with a word of warning here. The combined flow calorimetry technique is seriously flawed and any forthcoming papers based upon it will be greeted by the general scientific community as another graphic example of the gross incompetency endemic in the CF field. It is essential to do the simple tests to check for any chemical transformations across the cell before publication of any results. Sure, Jed Rothwell can discuss this effect with George Miley and they can convince themselves that there is no effect but just think of the reaction of the skeptical outside scientific community. I have told a number of scientists, holding the majority view of CF, of the combined flow calorimetry technique, with the possibility of chemical transformations but absolutely no measurements to check for them and they think it is a great joke. When Robert Park came out here to Goddard to give a general lecture on bogus physics his lead off item was the video showing Patterson demonstrating his cell. I told him about the serious flaw in the calorimetry technique and believe me, if any one goes ahead and publishes any results based on this technique without checking the chemical composition, Park and others like them will be delighted with such an example of incompetency. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 11:28:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA03752; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:18:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:18:35 -0800 From: Xkan aol.com Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 14:17:55 -0500 Message-ID: <970103141754_944282200 emout18.mail.aol.com> To: fstenger interlaced.net cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: what is electromagnetic field anyway? Resent-Message-ID: <"9DcBV2.0.Ww.9kLpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3099 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Stenger wrote: <> There is a good drawing of it in Graneau's book Newtonian Electrodynamics. <> There is one that Assis proposed, and I might get a chance to do it. It is DC, simple in principle(but maybe not in practice) and elementary. Its idea is to test one of the prediction of Weber's theory: that inside a hollow and uniformly charged sphere, a charged particle will experience a Weber's force proportional to its acceleration, thereby altering the apparent mass of the particle under a external force. Equipment needed: a electron source such as Radium or hot filament, a magnetic field, vacuum equipment, a high pontential (e.g.Van der Graaf )electrostatic generator. If you are interested, take a careful look at Assis's paper: Changing the Inertial Mass of a charged Particle, J. of the Physical Society of Japan, Vol.62, No.5, May, 1993, page 1418. BTW, this experiment is a Aladin's lamp carries three genii in one: longitudinal force, antigravity and free(or some thing rather subtle that we can't see) energy. Isn't it a gift from God? The last two genii will come out of the bottle when the charged sphere is raised to a potential of a few million volts, electron will aquire a negative mass and start to generate energy instead of spending energy. Regards. Xiaobo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 11:42:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA08897; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:31:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:31:52 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 14:30:12 -0500 Message-ID: <970103143011_1655707769 emout16.mail.aol.com> To: 76570.2270 compuserve.com, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, zettsjs ml.wpafb.af.mil, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, Puthoff@aol.com, tkepple third-wave.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702 compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, zap@dnai.com, reed zenergy.com, ross@pacificnet.net, GeorgeHM@aol.com, david vesicle.ibg.uu.se, vortex-l@eskimo.com, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Subject: links Resent-Message-ID: <"MluGa3.0.wA2.cwLpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3101 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: E-Quest Sonoluminescence Weird Science (Bill-Beaty) Puthoff's Inst for Advanced Study John Logajan's Skypo int Page Read Huish and Zenergy Corporation Potapov reference< /A> Horizon Technology Teri York Lanl cold fusion page Free energy links Overunity homepage > ZAP ; COLD FUSION ; GRAVITICS ; Electrogravitic References:# 9 Elektr omagnum Tampere Anti-Gravi ty Report Infinite Energ y Mag. TMX Cold Fusion Research Cold Fusion Times Planetary Association for Clean Energy Cold Fusion Germa ny Muller Magnet Motor Clean Energy Technology 2d web site Takahashi motor Tesla Society Institute for New Energy B-MOVIES WEB Yusmar, Znidarsic, From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 12:15:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA15933; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:03:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:03:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:02:25 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! In-Reply-To: <970103171538_76016.2701_JHC106-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"OXMLM2.0.ju3.aOMpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3102 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Actually the max cell-divison problem has been overcome with megadose of vitamin-E. It has been tested and proven to increase cell-division to 100-125 times with vitamin-E. I personally take 10,000 units of vitamin-E per day for 10 years now. My younger wife is still happy and I feel like I am lamost as good as 25 years of age (now 43). If there is anything I would value more than anyhting, it is my daily dose of vitamin-E. Ginko Biloba aslo seem to have the same effect on me. I hope you are also reading this Stephan? Time will tell. -Nils On 3 Jan 1997, Terry Blanton wrote: > Barry Merriman said: > > >>There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor > named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and > proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite > lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous > professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. > > Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We > Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, > and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of > age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many > such claims.<< > > Interesting since this corresponds with Genesis where God said His spirit no > longer dwells in man as he is of the flesh and his years shall be six score > years (6 x 20 years). Since man allegedly lived much longer in times before > Noah, one must wonder if this upper limit of life was a result of interbreeding > with the Nephilim or "those who come down". > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 12:47:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA23079; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:31:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:31:13 -0800 Date: 03 Jan 97 15:29:15 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Pons uses static calorimetry Message-ID: <970103202915_72240.1256_EHB90-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"PChbY2.0.Re5.EoMpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3104 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Larry writes, and writes: Since there is not a credible case made for nuclear reactions going on, except by exclusion, my theory is that there is no energy excess and the energy out of the cell equals the energy inflow plus the cell power input. Look, Larry, PLEASE! Your theory is: Ecell = Einput + Cpower BUT THEY DO NOT EQUAL!!!! In many cases, Ecell is 100 or 1000 times more than all input energy from all sources, over an extended period of time. I mean days, weeks! So your theory is wrong. It does not agree with the data. That's what I have been trying to tell you. We *know* how much electrical and mechanical energy goes into the cell. We know that it is, in many cases, far less than the thermal energy out. Even if the pump somehow acted as a heat pump it could not gather up and insert 10, 100 or even 1000 times more energy into the fluid than the total energy it transfers by pumping action. In some cases, the total energy output is far more than all of the energy consumed by electrolysis, the pump motor, the thermistors, voltmeters and all -- so even if a pump was a perfectly reversible heat engine your theory would fail. Look, it is very simple. You have a theory. You write an equation based on your theory. The facts show that where you want an equal sign, nature has given you 1 on one side and 1000 on the other, so your theory goes down the drain: glug, glug, glug. Furthermore, there *is* a credible case made for nuclear reactions. Transmutations! X-rays! Tritium! Okay, you may not find it credible, but do not pretend that we have not made it. Miley, Bockris, Mizuno and the others who have observed these things believe they constitute good evidence of a nuclear reaction. I don't see what else they could possibly indicate. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 12:47:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA22667; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:29:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:29:23 -0800 Message-Id: <199701032016.NAA15843 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Heat After Death -- Chemical Explanation Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:20:17 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lqKFi2.0.5Y5.WmMpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3103 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Heat After Death -- Chemical Explanation In 1988 I produced a number of experiments at the University of Tennessee Space Institute using a modified form of electrolysis stimulated with R.F. energies. During three months we observed numerous occurrences of "life after death." Twice, we observed the Pd cathode igniting after the system was turned off. During the electrolysis process, you have two major events occurring, the absorption of H in the lattice of the cathode and the formation of metallic alkali metals associated with the electrolyte. As long as you have electrolysis action, the alkali metals will stay in their metallic form. However, after the electrolysis is removed O returns to the presence of the cathode and heat of formation occurs during the reduction of the alkali metals to their oxidized state. Exemplary model: Li + H2O ==> LiOH + H The same occurs with the release of H from the cathode which is aggravated by the heat of formation of the alkali metals. In small cells where you have an exaggerated cathodic surface area, i.e. the Ceti bead concept, the amount of metallic alkali metal and absorbed H is likely to be increased. One other effect may be observed: Assuming transmutation is occurring, you will have the formation of numerous new metals at, or near the surface of the cathode. Many of the observed metals will immediately react with O. Again, O is not present at the cathode during the electrolysis action and this reaction will not be seen until the electrolysis is terminated. With one exception, if pulsing electrolysis is use, formation of oxides can occur during the normal course of cell operation. Historically, in my research, I have seen the anomalous formation of isotopes with mass less than 50. In most cases, the elements in this range immediately react with water forming various O, or OH compounds. Hence, the generation of heat. When using small calorimetry vessels this event is easier to observe. However, when one starts to attempt linear integration, the event subsides. This is not assumption, but an imperical fact. I was going to stay quiet on this, but since it is a main point of controversy, I decided to open mouth and insert foot. Whether or not transmutation is occurring in these cells is of a mute point. A logical explanation exists for the famed "Heat AFTER Death" syndrome! ___________________________ Joe Champion discpub netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 13:01:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA24278; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:38:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:38:45 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:39:41 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for supplier of Barium ferrite magnets Resent-Message-ID: <"JwEAV.0.Gx5.JvMpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3105 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >-Nils asks... > >Also looking for barium titanium oxide (a baked ceramic) - anyone know >where to buy it? Barium titanate is the basic ceramic in many (most?) ceramic capacitors, though I suspect that other ingredients are added to the basic ceramic to achieve desired properties. To my knowledge, barium titanate, like most other ceramics, is not toxic, though I have no certain knowledge. It might be relevant that Ba salt(s) are given to patients as a contrast enhancer for certain x-ray diagonis. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 13:43:11 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA03485; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:20:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:20:06 -0800 Date: 03 Jan 97 16:18:08 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Miles letter to Britz Message-ID: <970103211807_72240.1256_EHB104-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"F0f1W1.0.Ns.4WNpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3107 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Mel Miles sent me a copy of this letter with a note saying "please post this on Vortex." Since I have a scanner and Dieter doesn't, I'll scan it & post it. I wish Mel would learn to use e-mail. - Jed DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER WEAPONS DIVISION CHINA LAKE, CALIFORNIA 93555-6001 December 18, 1996 Dr. Dieter Britz Kemisk Institut Aarhus Universtet Langelandsgade 140 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark Dear Dr. Britz: Thank you for your letter of 12 December 1996 and your support of scientific fairness with respect to my response to the Jones and Hansen paper criticizing my cold fusion publications. I understand your position as a skeptic on this issue and have no problem with that fact. Nevertheless, my experimental measurements convince me that anomalous effects occur in deuterated palladium. I will mail you a copy of my final report and recent papers that I submitted to ICCF-6 so that you can judge this experimental evidence yourself. I will also send you copies of letters that I have on file regarding my request to publish a rebuttal back-to-back in the same issue of J. Phys. Chem. as is their stated custom. Steve Jones, however, did not want to delay his publication. Neither Steve Jones nor Dr. El-Sayed can produce any formal letter that shows that I was officially informed of the publication criticizing my work. I challenged Steve Jones to publish his e-mail allegations regarding my work because I expected to be informed and to be allowed to write a rebuttal. This never happened. I can document the following sequences of events: Dr. Kendall Johnson, a post-doe, visited BYU on 3 January 1995 and was given an early version of the paper in question. Dr. Johnson was not involved with any publications involved in this debate and was not an appropriate person to be given this paper. He later showed this paper to me, but he did not know what stage this paper was in or to which journal it would be submitted. Furthermore, I had to leave on travel for meetings and other assignments in Washington, D.C., and I did not return until the end of January. I was expecting to receive the final manuscript and to be informed of the journal involved before writing my response. I never heard another word about this manuscript until Dr. Morrison was handing out copies of page-proofs of this paper at the ICCF-5 conference in Monte Carlo, Monaco. The rest of the story is found in my letters requesting a delay in publication to permit my back-to-back response in the same journal. This was denied. I later submitted a detailed response to J. Phys. Chem., but this response was rejected by the editor and reviewers that were selected. Based on the reviewer's comments, none of the reviewers that I proposed were selected. Unfortunately, it is difficult to find unbiased reviewers for either side of this controversy. I remain convinced of my experimental results and that I can easily respond to nearly all criticisms of my work. Sincerely, Dr. Melvin H. Miles NAWCWPNS Fellow P. S. Please post this letter on e-mail if you feel that it would be informative to others regarding this matter. copies: Dr. El-Sayed, Editor, J. Phys. Chem. Professor Steve Jones. BYU From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 14:08:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA12122; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:59:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:59:17 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com>, William Beaty , Vortex subscribe , Nils Rognerud , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:59:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uPlb73.0.Gz2.o4Opo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3108 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nils I am 61, and smoke three packs of marijuna everyday, and have a sixpack of beer everyday after work, twice on Sundays. My wife says I am much better then I was at 25.I eat lots of red meet for dinner, and weigh 350 pounds. -Hank Scudder ---------- From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Date: Friday, January 03, 1997 12:02PM Actually the max cell-divison problem has been overcome with megadose of vitamin-E. It has been tested and proven to increase cell-division to 100-125 times with vitamin-E. I personally take 10,000 units of vitamin-E per day for 10 years now. My younger wife is still happy and I feel like I am lamost as good as 25 years of age (now 43). If there is anything I would value more than anyhting, it is my daily dose of vitamin-E. Ginko Biloba aslo seem to have the same effect on me. I hope you are also reading this Stephan? Time will tell. -Nils On 3 Jan 1997, Terry Blanton wrote: > Barry Merriman said: > > >>There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor > named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and > proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite > lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous > professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. > > Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We > Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, > and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of > age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many > such claims.<< > > Interesting since this corresponds with Genesis where God said His spirit no > longer dwells in man as he is of the flesh and his years shall be six score > years (6 x 20 years). Since man allegedly lived much longer in times before > Noah, one must wonder if this upper limit of life was a result of interbreeding > with the Nephilim or "those who come down". > > Terry > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 15:26:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA23321; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 15:01:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 15:01:16 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CD8FB1.237C228A math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 03 Jan 1997 15:01:05 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry References: from "Larry Wharton" at Jan 2, 97 06:25:32 pm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hfBgY2.0.Gi5.v-Opo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3109 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry Wharton wrote: > > I have told a number of scientists, holding the majority view > of CF, of the combined flow calorimetry technique, with the possibility of > chemical transformations but absolutely no measurements to check for them > and they think it is a great joke. When Robert Park came out here to > Goddard to give a general lecture on bogus physics his lead off item was > the video showing Patterson demonstrating his cell. I told him about the > serious flaw in the calorimetry technique and believe me, if any one goes > ahead and publishes any results based on this technique without checking > the chemical composition, Park and others like them will be delighted with > such an example of incompetency. > > Lawrence E. Wharton Larry: Speaking as the CF skeptic that I am known to be, I must say that I don't think your theory accounts for the reported effects. The primary reasons are: (1) if your theory is correct, why did neither I, nor Scott Little, nor any of the other groups that replicated the CETI cell see the effect? What you are describing is a generic electrochemical effect, and therefore it should have shown up readily in replications. Indeed, I designed my experiment in large part to be able to test for such chemical potential and heat pump effects. (2) chemical energy alone would not account for the energy output of demos such as that at powergen. Thus, you must ascribe these to some other cause. You are starting to sound like someone who has fallen in love with their theory. If you really believe your theory, why don't you build a simple system that exhibits your predicted effect? You certainly have some obligation to explain why your predicted effect is not observed in many chemically and mechanically equivalent versions of the CETI type apparatus. Based on my experience, I did not find any major flaws in the calorimetry technique (minor ones, yes, but none that would mislead one at the level of watts of output for many minutes) for practical work. Nor did I see any sign of chemical potential effects. I don't necessarily believe the CETI device is nuclear in nature, but at this point I don't have any explanation for the claimed performace based on solid experimental or theoretical grounds. If the CETI device did work through some bizarre mechanism for altering chemical potential, I would think they would just as well be trumpeting that. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 15:59:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA01285; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 15:47:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 15:47:24 -0800 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 00:44:09 +0100 Message-Id: <199701032344.AAA04266 atom.bbtt.com> X-Sender: harti bbtt.de (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: harti bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Cc: rognerud best.com Resent-Message-ID: <"yV5YW3.0.yJ.9gPpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3111 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Actually the max cell-divison problem has been overcome with megadose of >vitamin-E. It has been tested and proven to increase cell-division to >100-125 times with vitamin-E. Does this not have any side-effects ?? > >I personally take 10,000 units of vitamin-E per day for 10 years now. My Hmm, no side effects yet ? How do you take it ? Via pills ?? >younger wife is still happy and I feel like I am lamost as good as 25 years >of age (now 43). If there is anything I would value more than anyhting, it >is my daily dose of vitamin-E. Ginko Biloba also seem to have the same >effect on me. I hope you are also reading this Stephan? > What is Ginko Biloba ?? Hope it helps ! Thanks a lot for the info. Regards, Stefan. >Time will tell. > >-Nils > >On 3 Jan 1997, Terry Blanton wrote: > >> Barry Merriman said: >> >> >>There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor >> named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and >> proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite >> lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous >> professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. >> >> Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We >> Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, >> and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of >> age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many >> such claims.<< >> >> Interesting since this corresponds with Genesis where God said His spirit no >> longer dwells in man as he is of the flesh and his years shall be six score >> years (6 x 20 years). Since man allegedly lived much longer in times before >> Noah, one must wonder if this upper limit of life was a result of interbreeding >> with the Nephilim or "those who come down". >> >> Terry >> >> > > > -- Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 16:19:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA08131; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:08:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:08:49 -0800 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:05:46 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: Stefan Hartmann cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! In-Reply-To: <199701032344.AAA04266 atom.bbtt.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"em0Sg.0.p-1.F-Ppo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3112 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: No side-effects on vitamin-E, in more than 10 years. Ginko is a common (and very potent anti-oxidant) herb, found in most health-food stores. It seems to work in the same way as vitamin-E, but is more expensive. -Nils On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Stefan Hartmann wrote: > >Actually the max cell-divison problem has been overcome with megadose of > >vitamin-E. It has been tested and proven to increase cell-division to > >100-125 times with vitamin-E. > > > Does this not have any side-effects ?? > > > > >I personally take 10,000 units of vitamin-E per day for 10 years now. My > > > Hmm, no side effects yet ? > > How do you take it ? > Via pills ?? > > >younger wife is still happy and I feel like I am lamost as good as 25 years > >of age (now 43). If there is anything I would value more than anyhting, it > >is my daily dose of vitamin-E. Ginko Biloba also seem to have the same > >effect on me. I hope you are also reading this Stephan? > > > > What is Ginko Biloba ?? > > Hope it helps ! > > Thanks a lot for the info. > > Regards, Stefan. > > > > >Time will tell. > > > >-Nils > > > >On 3 Jan 1997, Terry Blanton wrote: > > > >> Barry Merriman said: > >> > >> >>There is a recent book (1995 or so) on aging by a doctor > >> named Hayflick. He is the fellow who first discovered and > >> proved that most cell lines in the human body have a finite > >> lifespan, of roughly 50 cell divisions. He's now a famous > >> professor of gerontology at UC San Francisco. > >> > >> Anyway, his book, which is titled something like How and Why We > >> Age, has a whole chapter devoted to claims of extreme longevity, > >> and he comes to the conclusion that no one in excess of > >> age ~120 has even been deomonstrated to exist, despite many > >> such claims.<< > >> > >> Interesting since this corresponds with Genesis where God said His spirit no > >> longer dwells in man as he is of the flesh and his years shall be six score > >> years (6 x 20 years). Since man allegedly lived much longer in times before > >> Noah, one must wonder if this upper limit of life was a result of > interbreeding > >> with the Nephilim or "those who come down". > >> > >> Terry > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann > Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany > NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 > email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de > Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de > Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de > My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 16:38:11 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA12907; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:29:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:29:13 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Re:3000 year old Chinese man Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:29:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-y8EF3.0.y83.NHQpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3113 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nils I am 61, and smoke three packs of marijuna everyday, and have a sixpack of beer everyday after work, I eat lots of red meet for dinner, never any vegies and weigh 350 pounds. My wife says I am much better then I was at 25, twice on Sundays. -Hank Scudder PS Isn't this discussion getting abit far afield for Vortex? ---------- From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! Date: Friday, January 03, 1997 12:02PM Actually the max cell-divison problem has been overcome with megadose of vitamin-E. It has been tested and proven to increase cell-division to 100-125 times with vitamin-E. I personally take 10,000 units of vitamin-E per day for 10 years now. My younger wife is still happy and I feel like I am lamost as good as 25 years of age (now 43). If there is anything I would value more than anyhting, it is my daily dose of vitamin-E. Ginko Biloba aslo seem to have the same effect on me. I hope you are also reading this Stephan? Time will tell. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 17:27:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23618; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 17:17:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 17:17:57 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32CDAFB3.2F1CF0FB math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 03 Jan 1997 17:17:39 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Summary: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! References: <199701032341.AAA04248 atom.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lUsRI3.0.wm5.2_Qpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3115 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > Secrets of Longevity > > by Richard A. Peterson, ND > [many accounts of meetings with people in excess of 150 deleted] > > Dr. Peterson is a Naturopathic Doctor from Minneapolis, MN, who > specializes in Herbology, > Homeopathy and Nutrition. He may be reached at 612-724-5324. > If you choose to believe articles written by Naturopathic doctors, that is fine. This article presents no evidence nor indication of investigation, though. The renowned physician Dr. Jensen mentioned in the article has apparently failed to convince the greater scientific community, and must have somehow interviewed those who's claims were not discredited in the past 20 years as discussed in Hayflick's books. You might note that the one instance mentioned where they claimed to have documentation was a fellow whose birth certificate was one file. One common trick in countries with mandatory military service was for a son to adopt his fathers/grandfathers birth certificate to avoid military service. Also, Communist governments were prone to unquestioningly propmote stories of their long lived citizens to prove the superiority of the communist system. You might want to look at studies done more recently than 1975, such as those in Hayflicks book, if you really care about the veracity of these claims. On the other hand, if you just want to take herbal potions and have faith that it will help, be my guest. (Also, about vitamin E extending the lifespan of cell lines beyond 50 divisions to 150---yes, thats true, but I have never seen claims that it has been demonstrated outside the petri dish. Vitamin E may eliminate some cancer risk, but I doubt it will triple the lifespan of a normal animal (of course, we already know it does not).) Actually, life extension and the like has been a hobby of mine for 15 years or so. The two lessons I have learned are (a) don't listen to folks trying to sell you something, and (b) don't extrapolate from test tubes, petri dishes or lab animals to humans. There do seem to be some nutrients effective in reducing mortality in healthy people, but no one knows of anything that is going to radically extend human lifespan (some times radical extension can be made in various animals and insects---but then again, as noted, there are plenty of species that are immortal anyway). If you want to see the research on vitamins and herbs based on actual human population studies, I suggest the book "The Complete Guide to Anti Aging Nutrients" by Dr. Sheldon Hendler, MD, Phd, prof of internal medicine at UCSD. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 3 10:17:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA16525; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:07:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:07:18 -0800 Message-Id: <199701031803.AA06047 gateway1.srs.gov> Alternate-Recipient: prohibited Disclose-Recipients: prohibited Date: Fri, 03 Jan 1997 09:45:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Kirk L Shanahan Subject: Re: Diffusion Rates To: Private_User srs.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Jan 1997 12:57:00 -0400 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal A1-Type: MAIL Hop-Count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"DtMQM2.0.324.JhKpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3096 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks to Dieter Britz for the diffusion equation that Prof. Bockris likely used. I also have continued to nose around, and I feel that I have identified at least three chemical reasons to conclude that diffusion of impurity atoms arriving on the surface of the CETI beads can *not* be excluded at this time. Thus I disagree with Prof. Bockris' statements in his response to the Murray critique. The gory details follow. I have found listings of solid state diffusion coefficients in the CRC Handbook and in Kittel's text "Into. to Solid State Physics". Both give data in the form of D(0) and E, for use in the equation D = D(0) * exp [-E/kT] (where k is the Boltzman constant and T the temperature). These two equations (for D(T) and Dieter's) give me a starting point for some arithmetic. Dieter backcalculated a D of 10e-19 from the Nernst equation, and that seems to agree roughly with the tabulated data I have seen. In fact it seems to be on the high end of the metal-in-metal diffusion coefficients. However, it is instructive to look at what it might take to allow diffusion of such a level as to encompass Miley's results. I will maintain Bockris' choice of a 14 day timespan, and see what kind of change would be necessary in D to get migration of a contaminant from the outer surface of the film to the inner surface. For the 50 A in 14 days: D = (50e-8 cm)**2/pi*14days = 6.6e-20 cm**2/sec For 650 A in 14 days: D = (650e-8 cm)**2/pi*14days = 1.1e-17 cm**2/sec So, we need to decide if a 2-1/2 order of magnitude change in the diffusion coefficient is possible. Note also that we may only need a fraction of that total change to explain Miley's results, depending on the actual depth profile and source of the elements. First, we need to look at the temperature dependence effect. Since I don't have the specific D(0) and E that Prof. Bockris used, I will pick one from the CRC. Since the outer surface of the beads is nickel, I will use data for that element. There are data for 14 metals plus Be and C difussion in Ni in the CRC table, with a wide range of data. Perhaps for illustration I will use the data for Sn: D(0)=.83 cm**2/sec, E= 58.0 Kcal/mole. I will also use temps of 20 and 50 C (293 and 323K). Unit conversions used are: k = 1.38044e-16 erg/deg (per molecule) E = 58 Kcal/mole * 4186.8 J/Kcal* 1e7 erg/J / 6.02252e23 molecules/mole = 4.03 e-12 erg/molecule and thus D(293K) = .83 * exp[ - 4.03e-12/ (1.38044e-16 * 293) ] = 4.4e-44 cm**2/sec D(323K) = .83 * exp[ - 4.03e-12/ (1.38044e-16 * 323) ] = 4.6e-40 cm**2/sec for Sn in Ni. The full results were: Tracer D(293) D(323) Au 1.762192e-43 1.146064e-39 Be 6.202591e-37 9.899745e-34 C 5.008885e-28 1.140157e-25 Co 8.947221e-50 3.315447e-45 Cr 2.800460e-49 9.133119e-45 Cu 5.007899e-47 9.491240e-43 Fe 1.339739e-45 1.547976e-41 Mo 1.364457e-41 4.685922e-38 Ni 3.310345e-51 1.715222e-46 Pu 4.263927e-39 1.464351e-35 Sb 1.261860e-25 9.395589e-24 Sn 4.214432e-44 4.424713e-40 V 1.996734e-50 8.142768e-46 W 8.502767e-54 7.703050e-49 A quick scan shows a couple of things: 1.) All the coefficients are much lower that the 10e-19 used by Bockris and 2.) most show a strong (several order of magnitude) dependence on temperature. Antimony (Sb) shows only about 1 order of magnitude change. Sb's data are D(0)= 1.8e-5 and E=27.0, the lowest of both parameters for any of the listed elements. However, for most elements, the temperature dependence of the diffusion coefficient (in Ni at least) does show the requisite change. The questions now posed are these: Is the 10e-19 coefficient use by Prof. Bockris the 20C or 50C coefficient? Where did the 10e-19 come from? What was the actual operating temp of the CETI cell in Miley's work? (One major caveat to this calculation is that it is likely the numbers calculated above are not numerically correct in an absolute sense because most of them were determined in much higher temperature ranges (several hundred degrees C as opposed to near room temperature). The Arrhenius-like form of the diffusion coefficient equation is probably not extrapolatable that far with any accuracy. But, there is plenty of room left to believe a large change in D with T, even at lower T's. The relative behaviors noted above could easily be correct (or not...).) So, on to my second major area of concern. The coefficients used above were for pure tracer diffusion in pure metal. The CETI bead system does not qualify for this because the materials are permeated with hydrogen. Literature studies clearly show that significant structural changes occur when hydriding metals, most usually via a lattice expansion. An expanded lattice could allow easier impurity migration. In fact there was a reference given here on Vortex for studies published in Zhur. Fizicheskoi Khimii that demonstrated hydrogen-assisted impurity migration. A little additional lit. work has led me to the Dec. '95 issue of J. Alloys and Compounds, which is the Proceeding of a Metal-Hydrogen Systems Conference held in Japan. The first 8-10 papers of that issue delve into the structure, composition, and phase changes experienced by several metals and intermetallic alloys when taken through various hydridation/ dehydridation regimens. In short, a lot happens, some reversible, some irreversible. Most of the composition changes I noted are done at elevated temperatures again, but within time spans of just a few hours. I believe there is room to expect similar changes in experiments conducted at lower temps but for longer times. However, I am still looking for specific quantitative data on hydrogen-assited impurity migration to confirm that. The CRC diffusion coefficient data table also has several instances of determinations conducted in different phases of the same material, and the diffusion coefficients are different. One other item of note. I did see reference in one of those papers (by Ted Flanagan, et. al.) to the fact that Pd and Ni form solid solutions over the whole composition range. Thus an additional concern is whether or not the Ni-Pd-Ni layers in the CETI beads are alloying with time, and whether that process would promote faster impurity diffusion as well. Further I suspect that the presence of grain boundaries can also hinder or promote diffusion of selected impurities. Does Miley's paper address any of these concerns, either implicitly or explicitly (I don't know, I am asking...)? Between the amount of change noted for 'small' temperature differences, and the possible effects of alloying and hydriding and general structure considerations, I cannot understand how Prof. Bockris can eliminate external contamination as a possible source of the detected elements. I would think some research into the diffusion rates in the CETI-style configuration would be required before rejecting the possibility. However, I will grant that such research would be extremely time consuming. But in the absence of such data, I couldn't conclude 'fast' diffusion won't happen. There are a lot of "I believe's" in the preceding. I am willing to be convinced by quality data that my concerns are unfounded. Kirk Shanahan {{My opinions...noone else's}} From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 4 14:36:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA03628; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:27:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:27:40 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701042220.OAA00774 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Whittaker on Aether To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:20:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <970103141754_944282200 emout18.mail.aol.com> from "Xkan@aol.com" at Jan 3, 97 02:17:55 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6Bhr91.0.au.Rbjpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3116 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Second paragraph of the preface of the book: "A History of the Theories of Aether & Electricity", by Sir Edmund Whittaker. A word might be said about the title "Aether & Electricty". As everyone knows, the aether played a great part in the physics of the nineteenth century; but in the first decade of the twentieth, chiefly as a result of the failure of attempts to observe the earth's motion relative to the aether, and the acceptance of the principle that such attempts must always fail, the word 'aether' fell out of favour, and it became customary to refer to the interplanetary spaces as 'vacuous'; the vacuum being conceived as mere emptiness, having no properties except that of propagating electromagnetic waves. But with the develop- ment of quantum electrodynamics, the vacuum has come to be regarded as the seat of 'zero-point' oscillations of the electromagnetic field, of the 'zero-point' fluctuations of electric charge and current, and of a 'polarisation' corresponding to a dielectric constant different from unity. It seems absurd to retain the name 'vacuum' for an entity so rich in physical properties, and the historical word 'aether' may be fitly retained. E.T. Whittaker, Edinburgh Scotland, April 1951 ================================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 4 16:05:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA22904; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 15:56:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 15:56:24 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:55:46 -0500 Message-ID: <970104185545_779337584 emout14.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Aeather Resent-Message-ID: <"4Y5ci.0.ob5.cukpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3117 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I'm inclined to believe that the Aeather does not exist but that something else an information exchange medium does. Here is the problem, how do elementary know "what to be"? Electrons, for example, are all the same. How does an electron know what to be? In engineering information must be exchanged to establish standards. For example, all generators and motors spin at multiples of the power line frequency. How do they know how fast to spin? The power line acts as the information exchange medium and sets the standard. I ascertain that quantum systems require standards to. The information that is exchanged between quanum particles by the "aeather if you will" are the value of the Compton wavelength and the magnitude of the Bohr Magnetron. These two parameters act as a foundation upon which the rest of the elementary particle is built. How are these bits of information exchanged? Its to long of a story for an email but I put my two cents in on my book on a disk. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 4 18:41:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA17868; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:08:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:08:06 -0800 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:07:54 -0800 Message-Id: <199701050207.SAA06588 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aeather Resent-Message-ID: <"WrOuO2.0.3N4.5qmpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3118 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I'm inclined to believe that the Aeather does not exist but that something >else an information exchange medium does. Here is the problem, how do >elementary know "what to be"? Electrons, for example, are all the same. How >does an electron know what to be? It is all very simple if both the universe, and the particles in the universe all consist of nothing but aether in motion. Such motion as would be acceptable is that of standing waves. A similar notion in embodied in the behavior of both oscillons and sonoluminescence bubbles which are spherically resonant fluid mechanical structures. Because the electrons are all in the same fluid, and because they are all subjected to the same background ambient mechanical properties and acoustic energy filling the quantum vacuum, all resonances of a given geometry will take on the identical vibratory frequency and amplitude at which the resonance becomes non linear and the amplification of the underdamped phenomena is shut down. Thus, the amount of aether tied up in that oscillation becomes a fixed amount dependent on the fluid mechanical and acoustic properties of the aether ocean we call a universe. It should therefore be no surprise that all particles of the same geometry take on the same properties of charge (phase angle of oscillation, 0 for positive and 180 for negative and 90 and 270 for imaginary resonances in composite particles like quarks, yes composite), and of mass, and of other more esoteric properties like spin. These are simply measures of the mechanical motions of these standing waves in this ocean of aether. The proof is in the sun. If particles are standing waves, then when those waves fail to confine the aether as well, due to fusion of standing waves with other standing waves, then the excess aether is emitted at the sound speed of the aether, ie, c. And so you find particles rushing away from one another due to these emissions of aether and we say that mass was converted to energy. This notion of equivalency is simply nonesense. SOHO has shown that there are inertial accelerations of ions in the solar corona. How can this be if not from gravitation? I say that space is expanding out of the sun just like "land" spreads out from regions of separating tectonic plates in the earths crust. But the properties of particles all being the same is so extremely simply if those particles have specific geometries tied to the mechanical properties and acoustic energy permeating the universe ocean of aether. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 4 21:08:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA11754; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 20:59:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 20:59:24 -0800 Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:59:08 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701050459.WAA20836 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: new web photos Resent-Message-ID: <"WCTiV.0.St2.gKppo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3119 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Howdy Vortexans, I have added a couple of photos to EarthTech's fledgling web page. The links are called "overall photo" and "interior photo" and they appear in the paragraph that starts "Our latest calorimeter..." which should be on the first screen you see. The web address is: http://www.eden.com/~little/ In the "overall photo", note the "Workshop on COLD FUSION Phenomena" poster on the wall...an original poster from the 1st Cold Fusion Conference, held in Santa Fe, NM, May 23-25 1989...surely a collector's item! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 4 23:29:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA30988; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 23:21:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 23:21:12 -0800 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 02:21:04 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970105022047.50ef1ad0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: JET Energy Technology Web Page Resent-Message-ID: <"TMnQE3.0.6a7.dPrpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3120 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Have just mounted the JET Energy Technology web page which is accessible at the URL http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html Some data showing excess enthalpy in nickel is at that site with references given for those interested in obtaining further informtion. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 09:13:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA21470; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:04:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:04:27 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 12:03:47 -0500 Message-ID: <970105120347_1856468145 emout02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Aeather Resent-Message-ID: <"9ddaB3.0.NF5.Qyzpo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3121 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: It is all very simple if both the universe, and the particles in the universe all consist of nothing but aether in motion. Such motion as would be acceptable is that of standing waves. A similar notion in embodied in the behavior of both oscillons and sonoluminescence bubbles which are spherically resonant fluid mechanical structures. .............................................................................. ........................................ It is not that simple. PROBLEM ONE One motion through such an aether would be detecatble. Puthoff has come up with a cubic frequency distrubution that is not detecatable. Perhaps an answer to the first part of the problem. .............................................................................. ................................... PROBLEM TWO I have thought of an aether in motion...in simple harmonic motion.. The problem is that all particles resting in such an aeather would remain at rest within the ether they possessed frequencys that were integer multiples of each other. The aeather in simple harmonic motion would act sort of like a 4 pole motor runs a half of the RPM of a 2 pole motor connected to the same power line. This is not the information that needs to be exchanged. The information that needs to be exchanged is the value of the Bohr magnetron...it has units of angular momentum. An aeather consisting of waves in harmonic motion (even a cubic frequency one) does not exchange information about angular momentum. Again the answer I came up with links the expansion rate of the universe to the angular momentum of elemenatry particles. A sort of vortex effect. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 10:28:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA32415; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:19:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:19:57 -0800 Message-ID: <32CFF045.5E64 compassnet.com> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1997 12:17:41 -0600 From: Ronald Stiffler Reply-To: stiffler compassnet.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Mail List Subject: Magnetic field and Sound Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iJGCW3.0.Lw7.C3_po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3122 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Does anyone know if it is ordinary for a magnetic field to produce audible sound due to vibration of air particles present in the field ? Here is the setup. N --- S S --- N | | | | | | | | | | | | ...................... Coil 100ft. #20 ...................... ...................... | | | | | | | | | | | | --- < 7.5cm > --- Magnets are ceramic with the following specs; 15.5 cm diameter 4.0 cm thick 2.5 cm hole in center and thru magnet Spaced 7.5 cm S -> S. The coil is excited with a sine wave of 10 milliwatts in the audio range of from 500-4000 hertz and a 20 db sound (matching the applied signal) is generated in the center hole of each magnet. Placing a 10 cm copper (circle) plate over either magnet on its N end over the hole will cause the sound to drop below audible levels. But placing the copper plate inside of the opposing S fields will only redirect the sound as if you were placing a sound deflector in the path of the sound. The sound can not be dropped by placement of the copper sheet over the center holes on the S side (facing each other. The coil is secure as is the frame (made from glued PVC) so sound is not coming from these area's. Because the copper plate on the N ends will stop the sound this is also a good indication that it is not a structure area creating the sound. Just wanted to know if someone has done this and was as suprised as I was when sound was being generated without a mass moving the air. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 11:10:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA12572; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:01:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:01:45 -0800 From: hjscudde pacbell.net Message-ID: <32CFFCAB.9E1 pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1997 11:10:35 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-PBXE (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: new web photos References: <199701050459.WAA20836 natashya.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cUujF.0.K43.Ng_po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3123 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Howdy Vortexans, > > I have added a couple of photos to EarthTech's fledgling web page. The > links are called "overall photo" and "interior photo" and they appear in the > paragraph that starts "Our latest calorimeter..." which should be on the > first screen you see. > > The web address is: http://www.eden.com/~little/ > > In the "overall photo", note the "Workshop on COLD FUSION Phenomena" poster > on the wall...an original poster from the 1st Cold Fusion Conference, held > in Santa Fe, NM, May 23-25 1989...surely a collector's item!Scott That is beautiful. I am envious. You obviously do good work, and take justified pride in it. _Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 11:32:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA17077; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:24:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:24:23 -0800 From: hjscudde pacbell.net Message-ID: <32D001F7.18D4 pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1997 11:33:11 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-PBXE (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Magnetic field and Sound Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pPEwc.0.dA4.Z__po" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3124 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ronald The obvious guess is eddy currents, but I am sure you have thought of this. If you have access to a strobe light, and some talcum powder, You could illuminate the device with the strobe, sprinkle the talcum on it, and see what surfaces are vibrating. Set the strobe to the same frequency as you are driving the coil, and check harmonics as well. Do it in the dark, with a flashlight handy so you can see what you are seeing. -Hank Scudder Ronald Stiffler wrote: > > Does anyone know if it is ordinary for a magnetic field to produce > audible sound due to vibration of air particles present in the field ? > > Here is the setup. > > N --- S S --- N > | | | | > | | | | > | | | | > ...................... > Coil 100ft. #20 ...................... > ...................... > | | | | > | | | | > | | | | > --- < 7.5cm > --- > > Magnets are ceramic with the following specs; > > 15.5 cm diameter > 4.0 cm thick > 2.5 cm hole in center and thru magnet > > Spaced 7.5 cm S -> S. > > The coil is excited with a sine wave of 10 milliwatts in the audio range > of from 500-4000 hertz and a 20 db sound (matching the applied signal) > is generated in the center hole of each magnet. > > Placing a 10 cm copper (circle) plate over either magnet on its N end > over the hole will cause the sound to drop below audible levels. But > placing the copper plate inside of the opposing S fields will only > redirect the sound as if you were placing a sound deflector in the path > of the sound. The sound can not be dropped by placement of the copper > sheet over the center holes on the S side (facing each other. > > The coil is secure as is the frame (made from glued PVC) so sound is not > coming from these area's. Because the copper plate on the N ends will > stop the sound this is also a good indication that it is not a structure > area creating the sound. > > Just wanted to know if someone has done this and was as suprised as I > was when sound was being generated without a mass moving the air. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 11:54:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA21302; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:45:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:45:47 -0800 Message-ID: <32D00463.2AC3 compassnet.com> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1997 13:43:31 -0600 From: Ronald Stiffler Reply-To: stiffler compassnet.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Magnetic field and Sound References: <32D001F7.18D4 pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OvGSk3.0.jC5.fJ0qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3125 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: hjscudde pacbell.net wrote: > > Ronald > The obvious guess is eddy currents, but I am sure you have > thought of this. If you have access to a strobe light, and some talcum > powder, You could illuminate the device with the strobe, sprinkle the > talcum on it, and see what surfaces are vibrating. Set the strobe to > the same frequency as you are driving the coil, and check harmonics as > well. Do it in the dark, with a flashlight handy so you can see what you > are seeing. > -Hank Scudder > > Ronald Stiffler wrote: > > > > Does anyone know if it is ordinary for a magnetic field to produce > > audible sound due to vibration of air particles present in the field ? > > > > Here is the setup. > > > > N --- S S --- N > > | | | | > > | | | | > > | | | | > > ...................... > > Coil 100ft. #20 ...................... > > ...................... > > | | | | > > | | | | > > | | | | > > --- < 7.5cm > --- > > > > Magnets are ceramic with the following specs; > > > > 15.5 cm diameter > > 4.0 cm thick > > 2.5 cm hole in center and thru magnet > > > > Spaced 7.5 cm S -> S. > > > > The coil is excited with a sine wave of 10 milliwatts in the audio range > > of from 500-4000 hertz and a 20 db sound (matching the applied signal) > > is generated in the center hole of each magnet. > > > > Placing a 10 cm copper (circle) plate over either magnet on its N end > > over the hole will cause the sound to drop below audible levels. But > > placing the copper plate inside of the opposing S fields will only > > redirect the sound as if you were placing a sound deflector in the path > > of the sound. The sound can not be dropped by placement of the copper > > sheet over the center holes on the S side (facing each other. > > > > The coil is secure as is the frame (made from glued PVC) so sound is not > > coming from these area's. Because the copper plate on the N ends will > > stop the sound this is also a good indication that it is not a structure > > area creating the sound. > > > > Just wanted to know if someone has done this and was as suprised as I > > was when sound was being generated without a mass moving the air. The magnets each weigh 25lbs and are well supported in their frame as the repulsive force is very great. (Not very technicial here) I am unable to by hand force the two magnets together S/S and I know I am able to apply over 150lbs of force (weight lifter). I have no real idea of the magnetic strength or actual makeup as I received the units from a source that did not know and there are no ID markings on them. Really I feel sure the sound is in some way coming thru the center holes. Placing a finger (not ver scientict again) into the hole changes the level of the sound (using a Radio Shack Weighted Audio Sound Level Meter) for measurement. Why would a copper plate being brought into the N pole area's have any effect on a surface that was vibrating other than to disrupt air flow pattern. Of course one could say why does the copper plate stop the sound at the N poles yest only reduce it at the center S poles. I don't know but it has to in some way come from the field. Remember I am detecting 20db of sound here and only puttin in 10mw of sine wave. Something must really be dancing around here. Okay I'll try you idea, although I don't relish the thought of white powder all over. Thanks. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 12:14:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA27056; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 12:06:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 12:06:10 -0800 Message-ID: <32D0092D.3C88 compassnet.com> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1997 14:03:57 -0600 From: Ronald Stiffler Reply-To: stiffler compassnet.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Mail List Subject: Magnetic Field and Sound Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JpVN81.0.fc6.mc0qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3126 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Setup with copper plate placement. N --- S S --- N | | | | + | |Q | |<--Plate placed here also + | |Q | | and stops sound +...................... Coil 100ft. #20 +...................... +...................... + | |Q | | + | |Q | | | | | | --- < 7.5cm > --- + = copper plate placement for N poles. Q = copper plate placement for S facing poles. Place at either N end of the magnets the sound drops below detectable levels. The original input power was 10mw RMS, I tried using square waves with a 50% duty cycle with a rise time greater than 50ns and adjusted input so Vp gave an RMS of 10mw to match the sine wave input power. No detectable sound with a square wave. What does this say, would not a square wave have a greater ability, (harmonics) to cause a mechanical vibration over a pure sine ? Thought this might be of interest as square waves don't do the same thing. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 14:03:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA18817; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 13:53:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 13:53:55 -0800 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 13:53:47 -0800 Message-Id: <199701052153.NAA14640 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aeather Resent-Message-ID: <"mbcZ-.0.xb4.nB2qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3127 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >It is all very simple if both the universe, and the particles in the >universe all consist of nothing but aether in motion. Such motion as would >be acceptable is that of standing waves. A similar notion in embodied in >the behavior of both oscillons and sonoluminescence bubbles which are >spherically resonant fluid mechanical structures. > >.............................................................................. >........................................ > >It is not that simple. > >PROBLEM ONE > >One motion through such an aether would be detecatble. Puthoff has come up >with a cubic frequency distrubution that is not detecatable. Perhaps an >answer to the first part of the problem. By your very comment, you show that you think of particles and aether as two separate things. You think of particles as "things", and of aether as a fluid within which those things are immerrsed. This is not what I mean. I treat the particles as resonances of the aether itself. As such, you do not get "particles" moving through aether in the classical sense of dust in air or water. Instead, you get vibrations of the aether that precess through that same aether following the acoustic nodes of energy that permeate that very same aether. As such, the spacings of particles that are stable are dependent on the wave energy communicated from one particle to the next. Thus, Michelson Morleys experiment would fail to detect any motion because their apparatus was nothing but a bunch of the very aether they were attempting to detect. When their device was moving relative to the fixed stars, the spacings of the atoms in their device were varying accoring to the light speed arrivals of wave energy that give those particle standing waves their very existence. Thus, there would be no manner to detect that sort of motion. Point 1 eliminated. >.............................................................................. >................................... >PROBLEM TWO > >I have thought of an aether in motion...in simple harmonic motion.. So did Schroedinger and he showed that one could derive QM from such a notion. So you are doing well so far. The >problem is that all particles resting in such an aeather would remain at rest >within the ether they possessed frequencys that were integer multiples of >each other. Again, here you fail the notion I put forward because you separate in your mind the concepts of particle, and aether. If you are going to do that, then you need one form of material or energy to make up particles, and you need another different form of material or energy to make up "spacetime". If instead, you get rid of that notion of separateness of particles and space and time, then you come to find that all you need is one single aether, call it energy or material or aether or whatever apeases your sensibility. But all you need or use in my construction is just the one material. So you are not talking about my universe the instant you mention the word, "particle" as something separate from and immersed in, aether. The aeather in simple harmonic motion would act sort of like a 4 >pole motor runs a half of the RPM of a 2 pole motor connected to the same >power line. This is not the information that needs to be exchanged. The >information that needs to be exchanged is the value of the Bohr >magnetron...it has units of angular momentum. An aeather consisting of waves >in harmonic motion (even a cubic frequency one) does not exchange information >about angular momentum. Again the answer I came up with links the expansion >rate of the universe to the angular momentum of elemenatry particles. A sort >of vortex effect. Standing waves do communicate angular momentum information, but not due to torque. Fluids cannot support torques or tensile forces. The aether I work with is a super fluid and only supports compressions. But when you study the timing of the arrivals of wave energy from one standing wave to another, you come to find that there is in essence, a precession of compression energy and that precession takes on the form of a "rotation". Thus, you do wind up with vortices as you say. Regarding the motors above, if you haven't already, read the Sci Am article on "Oscillons". Those are the little mounds of beads on a shaker table. You will find that they have a spin 1/2 like motion relative to the shaker table. If you take that motion and then you wrap it into a 3D vortex, or standing wave sort of like a sonoluminescence bubble, then you will have the standing waves I am working with. Also, if you review the work of Thomson (Kelvin) and Maxwell from the mid to late 1800's, you will find that they found that such standing waves would exhibit a thrust on one another that was proportional to 1/R^2, and as well proportional to the amplitude of the resonance. If you read the Sci Am article, you will find that those oscillons wind up imposing attractions and repulsions on one another too, but there are no tensile mechanisms in the beads motions! So what is going on? Well, you are getting compression information to be communicated about. And if wave energy arrives at the correct timing, then it exerts no thrust on a standing wave and instead it amplifies the internal kinetic momentum of the standing wave (assuming that the energy arrives equally from all sides. What really happens is that the standing wave is thrust away from all arriving energy. But if it arrives from all sides, then the net thrust is zero. This is why you are thrust to the ground due to incident energy from deep space where the earth is acting as a shield and filtering the out of frequency match, red shifted QVF from deep space. You are receiving filtered energy that does not push as hard from below, and unfiltered energy from above, the net is what we call gravitation). If, however, the wave energy arrives out of phase a little or a lot, then it will induce an acceleration (assymetrical arrivals of energy at a particular standing wave location). And if you have energy arriving at 180 degrees, it will break down the structure of the standing wave and the internal acoustic momentum will precess in the direction of that reduction in confinement of the surrounding standing wave. This was shown by Thomson and Bjerknes in about 1870. It was demonstrated in that oscillon experiment recently and has been shown numerous times in experiments. Standing waves that resonate in phase, repulse. And those which resonate at 180 degrees, "attract", (or more accurately, are thrust toward one another by energy incident from beyond both of those standing waves). Energy that arrives at 90 or 270 degrees has no net effect on the translation of the standing waves and thus is neutral. So, the notion of phase angle corresponds exactly to charge. The vorticity corresponds to notions like hyper charge in QCD. The concept of spin 1/2 corresponds exactly to the physical motions of the standing waves just as in the oscillon motions which are essentially a one dimensional version of the spherical standing waves I am studying. So all of the notions are there. And you even come up predicting wierd things about our universe from this standing wave notion when you consider combining standing waves into larger structures via processes like fusion. The reason is because mass is the amount of aether tied up inside the standing wave, and so in a DD fusion reaction you must wind up being able to confine less aether than in the two D nuclei on their own with a greater view factor to space. What this means is that you should expect a flux of aether out of regions of exothermy, and thus you should expect a flux of spacetime out of those regions. And, when you look at the solar corona, that is precisely what you find. The velocity dispersion of O and H ions in the solar corona has an inertial profile to it and the only manner to explain this is either that EM excitation energy just accidentally shut off at precisely that ratio of temperatures (which are not in equilibrium), or, the accelerations of the ions are inertial. I vote for the latter, and could show you a continuous trail of accelerations right on out of our solar system and galaxy and out into the cosmos leaving it their wake a trail of unexpected results and behaviors beginning with the changes in pitch of the suns interior over the 11 year solar cycle, moving to coronal mass ejections and solar coronal heating, moving to the acceleration of the solar wind right on out of our solar system (yes, the solar wind accelerates and heats, rather than cooling down due to expansion, HMMM??? wonder how that could be?, aether expansion maybe?), and then out to the regions where the aether should begin to compress in deep space where we find anamolous decelerations which we label "gravitational accelerations" being imposed by "Dark Matter". So you see, I am not studying simply the motions of particles in aether, I am instead studying the behavior of an entire ocean of aether, and the resonances that happen to exist within that ocean. We call those resonances, particles, fields, space, time, energy and the like. And we attribute properties like inertia to those motions. But what we fail to do is to realize that there need be only one substance to account for all of the universe. Even with the currently accepted theories, they need to have something called particles, and then they need to have another separate something that interacts with those particles to give them the property of translation through space. And then they need another separate substantive thing or property that is rigidly coupled to those particles and which is called time. Only when you add in each of these fundamental notions can you begin to formulate a theory of the universe. In my model, I use just one ocean of aether, so I have only one thing. Then in that ocean I have acoustic energy in the form of waves moving in all directions. It is the way those waves are refracted by regions of large aether density gradients which leads to the curvature of the propogation of energy, and ultimately to internal convergences of standing waves which we recognize as particles. But space and time are just waves crossing that ocean. And particles are just regions of that ocean that are buzzing as those waves pass by just like a buoy on the ocean is bobbing up and down, and just like the oscillons are bouncing up and down as the table wave energy excites their oscillations. When you come to this view, you come to find a large number of things that become very simple. But, I fully admit that this view is not easily attained because most of us are not accustomed to thinking in three or four dimensions, let alone accustomed to analysing standing waves in that 3D ocean of acoustic wave energy. So, while it is extremely clear to me, and while I agree with a lot of the things Hal Puthoff is working on, I have a fundamental difference in my notions as compared to all other people of whom I am aware. And that difference comes in the connection of the standing waves of aether to the ocean of aether. As such, there is little distinction between what is a particle, and what is another part of the quantum vacuum. But the beauty of this is that you can predict new things. Like you can predict that c is not the ultimate barrier we think it is. And you can predict that space expands out of stars. So you can look for evidence of inertial accelerations being imposed on matter in different regions of the universe. But you know what, when you look, there are indeed inertial accelerations taking place all over the place but we have been blinded to them because we have no notion of spacetime motions or spacetime accelerations. And by these I don't mean particles moving through spacetime, rather, I mean spacetime acceleration past particles. This induces accelerations on the particles themselves, and these accelerations are observable. And, we have observed them all over the place as I stated above. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 14:56:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA27797; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:47:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:47:34 -0800 Message-ID: <32D02F85.19F1 interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 05 Jan 1997 17:47:33 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: stiffler compassnet.com CC: Vortex Mail List Subject: Re: Magnetic Field and Sound References: <32D0092D.3C88 compassnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A59F43.0.Do6.4-2qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3128 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ronald Stiffler wrote: > > Setup with copper plate placement. > > N --- S S --- N > | | | | > + | |Q | |<--Plate placed here also > + | |Q | | and stops sound > +...................... > Coil 100ft. #20 +...................... > +...................... > + | |Q | | > + | |Q | | > | | | | > --- < 7.5cm > --- > > + = copper plate placement for N poles. > Q = copper plate placement for S facing poles. > > Place at either N end of the magnets the sound drops below > detectable levels. > > The original input power was 10mw RMS, I tried using square > waves with a 50% duty cycle with a rise time greater than > 50ns and adjusted input so Vp gave an RMS of 10mw to match the > sine wave input power. > > No detectable sound with a square wave. What does this say, > would not a square wave have a greater ability, (harmonics) > to cause a mechanical vibration over a pure sine ? > > Thought this might be of interest as square waves don't > do the same thing. Ronald: It seems to me that the coil structure is the probable source of air "driving". 1. Can you sweep the frequency slowly over the range to look for extra-strong resonances? 2. What kind of coil structure do you have - is it loose, tight or potted? 3. If the coil structure is loose, could you pot it to make a solid structure of it? 4. I think the energy in a square wave is concentrated more in the higher harmonics where the sine wave has all its energy in the fundamental (any experts here?) This may be a clue to the different action you observe. 5. It sounds like your magnets have a large and powerful field, this combined with some coil resonances may explain the high level of sound output. Just some ideas! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 20:48:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA32164; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:39:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:39:17 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Summary: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 22:39:10 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <32CDAFB3.2F1CF0FB math.ucla.edu> from "Barry Merriman" at Jan 3, 97 05:17:39 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4iZp-2.0.Us7.p78qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3129 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > (Also, about vitamin E extending the lifespan of cell lines beyond > 50 divisions to 150---yes, thats true, but I have never seen claims > that it has been demonstrated outside the petri dish. Vitamin E > may eliminate some cancer risk, but I doubt it will triple the > lifespan of a normal animal (of course, we already know it does not).) I believe it was the chemical company Monsanto? that claimed a doubling or tripling of the lifespan of chickens fed the anti-oxident, Ethoxyquin. I'll check back in 240 years and see if it does the same for people. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 5 22:30:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA13701; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 22:21:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 22:21:54 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Scott Little's graphs To: vortex-l eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:21:46 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3Ws1E3.0._L3.0e9qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3130 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, It is apparent in your graphs that you are storing some of your data as raw integers. I believe you are actually throwing away some information that way as well as making your graph lines "noisier" than necessary. If, for storage conservation reasons, we want to take only one sample per second, say, then we actually take 10's or 100's, if not 1000's of samples per second, and store the floating point average of the "block" of samples gathered during that second. Now we still end up only storing one sample per second, but it surprisingly now has sub-bit resolution! And it is not just random numbers between integer bit values. If you do a test with, say, a rising (or falling) trend, you can see the fractional values trend up between "quantas" rather than jump about as one would expect of random values. And yet it is probably random noise that makes this technique work. Noise makes the reading oscillate about its real value, sometimes registering as one digital value, sometimes the other. But since the real value is often closer to one digital quanta than the other, and since noise over many samples is fairly evenly distributed, you tend to get more readings of one quanta than the other, and upon averaging as a floating point number, get a good approximation of the real value even though each component of the measurement was forced into digital quantas. I was able to get roughly 16 bit resolution out of a 12 bit A/D this way -- trends (as well as steady levels) in these interpolated values matched the larger trends (or steady levels), something that would not be the case if they represented random variations and not the underlying measured quantity. Now I wouldn't do it any other way, since I can usually sample zillions of times faster than I want to store runtime samples. It's like getting something for nothing -- anomalous resolution. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 00:09:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA07849; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:00:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:00:59 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:00:59 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miles letter to Britz In-Reply-To: <970103211807_72240.1256_EHB104-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FjdQp3.0.Zw1.w4Bqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3131 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Thank you, Rothwell, for scanning and posting here the letter I got from Mel Miles. I also got a heap of correspondence between him and Jones, Miles with El-Sayed, etc, so I think I have the story straight now in all its gory details. I am now waiting to hear from Steve whether he has heard from El-Sayed (I haven't, but as an outsider sticking my nose into what is really not my business, I can't expect to, whereas Steve can); and what El-Sayed decides. I am sort of hanging around here against my better judgement. This morning I was faced with 44 emails, most of them from vortex-l; even just deleting and moving on takes a lot of my time. The list used to be about vortex water heaters, and/or maybe about "cold fusion" - remember those days? Anyway, what I will do is to move the case of the "Missing Miles rebuttal" to my web page, whose URL you see below (click on "fusion"). This will take me a few days to do, as I have real work to do here. There I will briefly summarise the sequence of events and letters written, and - if/when I get it - the outcome, i.e. whether El-Sayed will finally publish the Miles rebuttal, or not. In my opinion, of course, he ought to. Read my web page for more on this. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | | http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~britz | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 03:16:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA28373; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:08:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:08:23 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970106110838.006d2ba8 popd.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 06:08:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re:3000 year old Chinese man Resent-Message-ID: <"DfopW2.0.Dx6.cqDqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3132 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David Hudson's monatomic material is supposed to correct the DNA sequence. There is no direct chemical reaction between the monatom and the DNA strand. The ZPE interaction that monatomics naturally have causes an energy transfer to the DNA which could theoretically loosen the twist of the strand (as we age, the spiral of the DNA helix twists tighter causing sequence errors) and thus allow the sequence to correct itself. George Lakhovsky (who designed the Multiple Wave Oscillator) noticed that if one lived on a certain type of soil, one can expect a greater level of health. I wonder if the soil he refered to containes high levels of monatomic elements? I think that monatomic therapy would be the best antiaging technique if its' working principal can be verified. Regards; Dennis C. Lee At 04:29 PM 1/3/97 -0800, you wrote: >Nils > I am 61, and smoke three packs of marijuna everyday, > and have a sixpack of beer everyday after work, I eat lots of > red meet for dinner, never any vegies and weigh 350 pounds. > My wife says I am much better then I was at 25, >twice on Sundays. > > -Hank Scudder >PS >Isn't this discussion getting abit far afield for Vortex? > ---------- >From: Nils Rognerud >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Subject: Re: Chinese man lived for 256 years ! >Date: Friday, January 03, 1997 12:02PM > > >Actually the max cell-divison problem has been overcome with megadose of >vitamin-E. It has been tested and proven to increase cell-division to >100-125 times with vitamin-E. > >I personally take 10,000 units of vitamin-E per day for 10 years now. >My >younger wife is still happy and I feel like I am lamost as good as 25 >years >of age (now 43). If there is anything I would value more than anyhting, >it >is my daily dose of vitamin-E. Ginko Biloba aslo seem to have the same >effect on me. I hope you are also reading this Stephan? > >Time will tell. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 07:22:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA27245; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:13:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:13:35 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:13:23 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701061513.JAA07509 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Resent-Message-ID: <"FSpu91.0.cf6.TQHqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3133 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 00:21 1/6/97 -0600, you wrote: >Scott, > >It is apparent in your graphs that you are storing some of your data >as raw integers. hmmm... as far as I can recall, all data storage is FP. If you are seeing "graininess" in the data it could well be just the 12 bit resolution showing...my temp measurements often show this graininess, especially the whit line in the middle of the screen that represents the temp of the "constant-temp" environment. That trace is usually plotted on an expanded scale (e.g. 49C-51C) and you can see on the screen what 1 bit represents. The averaging-to-improve resolution is indeed a good idea and I have employed it in some instances...I suppose I should employ it everywhere. >But since >the real value is often closer to one digital quanta than the other, >and since noise over many samples is fairly evenly distributed, >you tend to get more readings of one quanta than the other, and >upon averaging as a floating point number, get a good approximation >of the real value even though each component of the measurement >was forced into digital quantas. right! glad to hear someone formalize this argument. I have realized this for some time but have never seen it written down. The problem with my grainy temp measurements stems from my use of the thermistors. They are nominally 10k ohms at 25C. I put the thermistor in a voltage divider with a fixed 10K resistor and let the ADC look at the voltage of the center node...nominally 2.5 volts. If the ADC is set up for 0-5 volts input and is 12-bit, then each bit represents about 1 mV. This works out to about 0.02C resolution when you crank thru the Steinhart-Hart eqn. 1 T = -------------------------------- - 273.15 A + B*ln(R) + C*ln(R)^3 A = 1.129241E-3 B = 2.341077E-4 C = 8.775468E-8 for these BetaTHERM brand thermistors. Any ideas on how to make this resolution a lot better? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 07:27:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28261; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:19:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:19:02 -0800 Message-Id: <199701061518.HAA11393 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:20:01 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Miles letter to Britz Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"2x08g3.0.Pv6.ZVHqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3134 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This affair has a simple explanation. The editor of any respected journal has the responsibility to make certain that an author, in this case Dr. Miles, is fully informed in a timely fashion and given the opportunity to reply in parallel. The journal editor in question did not do this. No excuses are applicable the editor had staff, a telephone, express mail, and other means at his disposal to contact Dr. Miles. He apparently choose to not inform Dr. Miles and instead hustle a simple minded piece of writing criticizing Dr. Miles work into press. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 07:52:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA32523; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:41:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:41:17 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Re: Magnetic Field and Sound Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:41:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"T0uAm2.0.5y7.SqHqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3135 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Francis, Ronald A sine wave of amplitude A has an energy half that of a square wave of the same amplitude. The other half of the energy is in the harmonics. _Hank Scudder ---------- From: Francis J. Stenger To: stiffler compassnet.com Cc: Vortex Mail List Subject: Re: Magnetic Field and Sound Date: Sunday, January 05, 1997 2:47PM Ronald Stiffler wrote: > > The original input power was 10mw RMS, I tried using square > waves with a 50% duty cycle with a rise time greater than > 50ns and adjusted input so Vp gave an RMS of 10mw to match the > sine wave input power. > > No detectable sound with a square wave. What does this say, > would not a square wave have a greater ability, (harmonics) > to cause a mechanical vibration over a pure sine ? > > Thought this might be of interest as square waves don't > do the same thing. Ronald: It seems to me that the coil structure is the probable source of air "driving". 1. Can you sweep the frequency slowly over the range to look for extra-strong resonances? 2. What kind of coil structure do you have - is it loose, tight or potted? 3. If the coil structure is loose, could you pot it to make a solid structure of it? 4. I think the energy in a square wave is concentrated more in the higher harmonics where the sine wave has all its energy in the fundamental (any experts here?) This may be a clue to the different action you observe. 5. It sounds like your magnets have a large and powerful field, this combined with some coil resonances may explain the high level of sound output. Just some ideas! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 08:02:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA02931; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:54:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:54:00 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:53:17 -0500 Message-ID: <970106105310_1123477345 emout05.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"HqBE12.0.jj.M0Iqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3136 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: So you see, I am not studying simply the motions of particles in aether, I am instead studying the behavior of an entire ocean of aether, and the resonances that happen to exist within that ocean. We call those .............................................................................. .................................. An ocean of what? If it has substance it has energy. If it has energy it has inertial mass. If it has inertial mass it has gravitational mass. Add an ocean of gravitational mass to the universe and the expansion rate of the universe is effected. Change the expansion rate and the age of the universe is shortened. Change the expansion rate and Hubble's constant changes. Astophysictists have studying this problem for years. The best answer they come up with is the universe contains ten protons worth of matter / cubic meter and is about 15 billion years old. They admitt that may be off by by a factor of 10 on the universe's age and density. They do not admit, however, that they are off by a factor of 100 billion which they would be if all of this zero point aether existed. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 08:06:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA03916; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:58:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:58:23 -0800 Date: 06 Jan 97 10:56:25 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo" Subject: Payin' My Dues Message-ID: <970106155624_76016.2701_JHC98-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"TNR7m1.0.4z.T4Iqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3137 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Bill, Could you repost your postal address for Vortex dues? I think you run a great list and would like to make my contribution. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 08:40:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA12143; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:31:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:31:28 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Scott Little , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:32:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"g4aa-1.0.az2.TZIqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3138 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott To improve your resolution you could use an opamp with a gain of 20(say) and subtract a 2.5v bias from the input. You probably would need to put a zener diode limiter on the output to keep the signal between 0 and 5 volts. I am doing this on my system, subtracting the temperature signals from two sensors. I'll fax you a sketch of my circuit. -Hank Scudder ---------- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Date: Monday, January 06, 1997 7:13AM At 00:21 1/6/97 -0600, you wrote: >Scott, > >It is apparent in your graphs that you are storing some of your data >as raw integers. hmmm... as far as I can recall, all data storage is FP. If you are seeing "graininess" in the data it could well be just the 12 bit resolution showing...my temp measurements often show this graininess, especially the whit line in the middle of the screen that represents the temp of the "constant-temp" environment. That trace is usually plotted on an expanded scale (e.g. 49C-51C) and you can see on the screen what 1 bit represents. The averaging-to-improve resolution is indeed a good idea and I have employed it in some instances...I suppose I should employ it everywhere. >But since >the real value is often closer to one digital quanta than the other, >and since noise over many samples is fairly evenly distributed, >you tend to get more readings of one quanta than the other, and >upon averaging as a floating point number, get a good approximation >of the real value even though each component of the measurement >was forced into digital quantas. right! glad to hear someone formalize this argument. I have realized this for some time but have never seen it written down. The problem with my grainy temp measurements stems from my use of the thermistors. They are nominally 10k ohms at 25C. I put the thermistor in a voltage divider with a fixed 10K resistor and let the ADC look at the voltage of the center node...nominally 2.5 volts. If the ADC is set up for 0-5 volts input and is 12-bit, then each bit represents about 1 mV. This works out to about 0.02C resolution when you crank thru the Steinhart-Hart eqn. 1 T = -------------------------------- - 273.15 A + B*ln(R) + C*ln(R)^3 A = 1.129241E-3 B = 2.341077E-4 C = 8.775468E-8 for these BetaTHERM brand thermistors. Any ideas on how to make this resolution a lot better? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 08:45:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA13187; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:36:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:36:08 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:35:55 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Payin' My Dues In-Reply-To: <970106155624_76016.2701_JHC98-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"iaa-c3.0.yD3.sdIqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3139 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 6 Jan 1997, Terry Blanton wrote: > Bill, > > Could you repost your postal address for Vortex dues? I think you run a great > list and would like to make my contribution. Thanks much Terry! See below. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page KEEP A COPY OF THIS MESSAGE IN A SAFE PLACE. IT CONTAINS INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE VORTEX-L DISCUSSION GROUP. ***************************************************************************** WELCOME TO VORTEX-L ***************************************************************************** The Vortex-L list was created for discussions of professional research into fluid vortex/cavitation devices which exhibit anomalous energy effects (ie: the inventions of Schaffer, Huffman, Griggs, and Potapov among others.) Skeptics beware, the topics also wander to any anomalous physics such as "Cold Fusion," reports of excess energy in "free energy" devices, gravity generation and detection, and all sorts of supposedly crackpot claims. Please see the rules below. This is a public, lightly-moderated list. Interested parties are welcome to subscribe. There is no charge, but donations towards expenses are accepted (see rules below for suggested donation) Admin addr: vortex-L-request eskimo.com Mail addr: vortex-L eskimo.com Webpage: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html Moderator: billb eskimo.com William J. Beaty 7040 22nd Ave NW Seattle, WA 98117 206-781-3320 USA ************************************************************************* Vortex-L subscription instructions: To subscribe, send a *blank* message to: vortex-L-request eskimo.com Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header. No quotes around "subscribe," of course. You will get an automatic greeting message in response. Once subscribed, send your email to vortex-L eskimo.com. To unsubscribe, send a blank message to vortex-L-request eskimo.com with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line. Vortex-L digest mode: If you prefer "digest" mode messages, collections of messages up to 40K total or every 2 days, then subscribe to the vortex-digest instead of to vortex-L. Send a blank message to: vortex-digest-request eskimo.com Put the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the header. Vortex-L and Vortex-digest are two separate lists. It is possible to subscribe to one or the other, or both. Address Changes: If your email address changes, you can email billb eskimo.com to fix things. Or, you can simply send a "subscribe" command while using your new account. When your old account is turned off, the vortex-L bounce detector will unsubscribe it. If you still have access to the older account address, you can unsubscribe yourself using that address. ************************************************************************* WARNING: Vortex-L software contains a mechanism which might automatically unsubscribe you. This will happen if your email address starts bouncing all vortex-L email for several days. This is done in order to stop possible email-loops, and to prevent the eskimo.com software from being overwhelmed by email-bounce warning messages. When the Unsubscriber takes you off, it sends you a message explaining its action. Unfortunately this message will usually bounce also. From your viewpoint the message traffic from Vortex-L will suddenly cease. If the email server on your internet service has a habit of overloading or crashing for several days at at time, you will probably encounter the Unsubscriber. If vortex-L traffic seems to suddenly stop, or if your messages to the group are returned with warnings that you are not subscribed, simply resubscribe to Vortex-L. ************************************************************************** Vortex-L Rules: 1. If VORTEX-L proves very useful or interesting to you, please consider making a $10US/yr donation to help cover operating expenses. If you cannot afford this, please feel free to participate anyway. If you would like to give more, please do! Direct your check to the moderator, address above. 2. This is not the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup; ridicule, debunkery, and namecalling between believers and skeptics are forbidden. The tone should be one of legitimate disagreement and respectful debate. Vortex-L is a big nasty nest of 'true believers' (hopefully having some tendency to avoid self-deception,) and skeptics may as well leave in disgust. But if your mind is open and you wish to test "crazy" claims rather than ridiculing them or explaining them away, hop on board! (For a good analysis of the negative aspects of debunkery, see ZEN AND THE ART OF DEBUNKERY by D. Drasin) 3. Small email files please. The limit is set to 40K right now, those exceeding the limit will be forwarded to Bill Beaty. If you wish to start extremely off-topic discussions, please feel free to exchange initial messages on vortex-L, but MOVE THE DISCUSSION TO PRIVATE MAIL IMMEDIATELY. Some members are on limited service, or have to pay for received email. Diagrams and graphics can be mailed to me or John Logajan and posted on our webpages for viewing. 4. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: when you reply to a message DON'T include the ENTIRE message in your reply. Always edit it a bit and dele te something. The more you delete, the less traffic overload. The entire message should really only be included if: (A) you are replying to a message that is many days old, or (B) you are doing a point-by-point reply to many parts of a message. Many vortex users must pay by the kilobyte for receiving message traffic, and large amounts of redundant messages are irritating and expensive. So, when including a quoted message in your reply, ALWAYS DELETE SOMETHING, the more the better. 5. "Junkmail" email advertizing will not be tolerated. While not illegal yet, widecasting of junk-email ads to listservers is against the Unwritten Rules of the Internet. Anyone who spams vortex-L with junkmail will be referred to the Internet Vigilante Justice team. ;) Occasional on-topic advertizing by long-time vortex-L users is acceptable. - Bill B. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 09:31:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA22696; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:18:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:18:38 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:18:28 -0800 Message-Id: <199701061718.JAA26526 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"ZDBvA.0.YY5.jFJqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3140 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >So you see, I am not studying simply the motions of particles in aether, I >am instead studying the behavior of an entire ocean of aether, and the >resonances that happen to exist within that ocean. We call those > >.............................................................................. >.................................. > Frank; I appreciate your attempting to grasp what I am saying. However, you need to open your ears and listen carefully because you are failing to grasp the fundamental nature of this theory. I will show you point by point below. >An ocean of what? Aether. A substantive super fluidic vapor near saturation pressure such that given an increase in density, it can condense into a more dense form. This occurs in black holes due to kinetic convergence and at the Planck scale E-35 meters, at the core of matter standing waves due to the convergent resonant energy density build up. This provides a backstop, or non linearity, as you prefer and it answers Lorentz' objection to Schroedinger's standing wave notion of sub atomic matter. >If it has substance it has energy. While this sounds correct it really makes no sense if you think about it. We know from E=mc^2 that what you are really saying is that if something has mass by our current definition, then it has energy. But if mass is found to be a property we observe in standing waves in aether as I am confident and as a standing wave is a region in a fluid that is buzzing kinetically due to a convergence of energy, then what you really should say is that aether in motion has the property of energy. And that what we call matter is aether with a special convergent motion. Therefore, "substance" does not have energy. Substance in motion, does. But it doesn't matter if the motion is a bulk flow or a resonance. Thus, you are correct to as well as we understand physics today. But your ideas will become old, I hope and am confident this is so because of the observations I have made where we see inertial accelerations in regions where I expect that local space to be accelerating. Anyway; >If it has energy it >has inertial mass. If it has inertial mass it has gravitational mass. Absolutely correct. Mass is a property of the amount of aether tied up in the standing wave resonance. It is the difference between the amount of aether that would have been in that region of the quantum vacuum without the particle standing wave, and the amount that is there when the standing wave is present due to convergence and resonance. Add >an ocean of gravitational mass to the universe and the expansion rate of the >universe is effected. Well, this is incorrect if you work with an aether ocean with standing waves as matter. For the above to be correct, you need for gravity to be an attractive pulling force. Now most people believe this is indeed the case and that the universe is poised between continual expansion and or collapse. It is extremely curious that the universe should be so closely perched to that balance point if you believe that the earth is pulling you down. But, if you have an ocean of aether, then you must acknowledge the fact that fluids do not exhibit tensile processes. The molecules on one side of our Pacific ocean do not extend a tensile grasp to another molecule on the other side of the ocean via any fluid mechanical connection. And so if aether permeates the universe, then all matter standing waves are resonating in cadence with one another, locally. But we have a problem here, the Hubble flow. Those standing waves have a relative velocity to the velocity of our matter nearby. And for that reason, the wave energy arriving here, now, from far away will be shifted in frequency due to the expansion of the universe. And so we should experience an interference as a result of that energy. The interference will be small, but it will be a thrust away from that energy. Now the fact is, that such energy is coming at us from all around. We are surrounded by red shifted energy just about equally on all sides as shown by the CBR. And so we should expect an interference and the derived thrust from that interference in a direction away from that energy. But if you are surrounded by energy pushing you away from all sides, you experience no net thrust and you would be weightless! Well, the physicist Le Sage noticed in Newtons day that if you used the equations of gravitation as derived, they equally could be interpreted as a shielding mechanism. The earth, acting as a shield to that distant emitted energy would lead to your body experiencing a net thrust toward the earth. So, altering our notion of the substantial nature of the universe leads to no problem whatever in cosmology. In fact, it leads to the notion of electric and magnetic fields propogating light becoming very understandable indeed. No longer do you have to propose that EM fields magically and on their own accord lead to the propogation of something, through nothing. And as far as the expansion rate leading to the force of gravity nearly balancing the amount of "mass" in the universe, of course it does. It couldn't be any other way. The thrust of "gravity" is derived from waves of energy at the Planck scale, ~E45 Hz , thrusting all matter away from all other matter, such that the thrust effectiveness is greater the further away the energy originated and the greater the Doppler shift. So matter close to other matter simply fails to repulse each other because their resonances are nearly matched and do not interfere. Thus, your notion that adding mass will alter cosmology is due to your erroneous belief that a proton in the Andromeda galaxy thousands of light years away, has the omnipotence to reach out across that space and to count all the protons in my body and to pull just the correct amount on each and every one of them. At the same time, what you must accept is that each proton in the earth, and every sub atomic particle in the sun, and in every star in the Milky way all are attached to the particles in my pinky finger and are pulling. That is the notion that requires faith. My model simply requires you to determine the view factors of one object to another and then figure out how much energy will be shielded from that arriving from deep space and thrusting all material objects toward one another. So it makes perfect sense that my pinky finger leads to some small amount of sheilding of wave energy arriving at my location and which would have passed on through and exerted a thrust on other particles in the earth, the sun, the Milky Way, and even way out to Andromeda. Shielding makes sense. Your gravitational attractions require you to manifest a faith and then you close your eyes because no one ever offered you a reason that one object was thrust toward another. They simply told you, "There is this attractive pull called gravity and you must just believe that it is there because apples fall to the ground." And if you ever thought to ask if they had ever discovered the nature of gravity to determine if it was really a pull or a compressive thrust, then your professor would have turned red in embarrassment because he simply could not answer that with anthing honest. Attractive forces of any kind are unnecessary, and simply make no sense. They require faith, of which physicists today have a lot. Just look at QM and all the "Uncertainty" and other principles they believe in. I know they work out mathematically, but what kind of principle is it that espouses that a lack of knowledge and a lack of ability to learn is something we should accept. That is like believing that the acoustic calculations "prove" that an aircraft will break up as the forces go to infinity when that craft attempts to break through the sound barrier. Change the expansion rate and the age of the universe >is shortened. Change the expansion rate and Hubble's constant changes. > Astophysictists have studying this problem for years. The best answer they >come up with is the universe contains ten protons worth of matter / cubic >meter and is about 15 billion years old. They admitt that may be off by by >a factor of 10 on the universe's age and density. They do not admit, >however, that they are off by a factor of 100 billion which they would be if >all of this zero point aether existed. You are correct in all of these assertions about how old the universe is based on current understandings. You are however, incorrect and do not understand the notion of standing waves in an ocean of aether when you make your last comment about what the mass of the aether would do to the age of the universe. It turns out that the aether ocean will not alter the age of the universe at all. Matter standing waves will move in a frictionless manner through the acoustic nodal structure we call spacetime. But when you assert that aether mass will induce an attractive pull due to gravity, you have (with all due respect as I know that you are putting forward the currently believed notions, but I am confident these notions are not correct), made an error in your projection of what such a universe is all about. I do not have four forces, and really, our current version of physics has 7 forces (3 are both attractive and repulsive). An ocean of aether has only 1 force mechanism available. The tendency to equalize local pressure fluctuations. This leads to wave propogation, period. All other "forces" are the result of the manner in which the waves propogate and the effectiveness of coupling that wave energy from one standing wave to another. This is the nature of physics, really. But it is yet to be appreciated. Our observations of inertial accelerations of ions out of the sun, the acceleration of the solar wind out of our solar system (what is heating it after it leaves the sun and is expanding?), coronal mass ejections, and the dark matter problem are all problems that arise because we believe the universe to be an empty vacuum void of an aether. This error in our perception is about to be removed. In this group, you would be amazed at how many of the topics fall right in line with what I am saying. Unfortunately, I cannot go into details on devices for a while. Later, Ross Tessien. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 09:32:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA23116; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:21:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:21:01 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:21:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Resent-Message-ID: <"6bkNK2.0.4f5.wHJqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3141 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >And yet it is probably random noise that makes this technique work. >Noise makes the reading oscillate about its real value, sometimes >registering as one digital value, sometimes the other. But since >the real value is often closer to one digital quanta than the other, >and since noise over many samples is fairly evenly distributed, >you tend to get more readings of one quanta than the other, and >upon averaging as a floating point number, get a good approximation >of the real value even though each component of the measurement >was forced into digital quantas. This is called 'dithering', and asmall amount of noise is sometimes deliberately added just to reduce digitization 'noise'. The tradeoff, noise reduction gained for bandwidth lost, is well known in signal processing circles. >Any ideas on how to make this resolution a lot better? > To improve your resolution you could use an opamp with a gain of 20(say) and subtract a 2.5v bias from the input.... Better than an op amp is an insturmentation amplifier, which has a differential input with excellent common mode rejection and low drift. An IA really simplifies circuit design. Burr Brown makes a good integrated IA in an 8-pin DIP package that is very simple to use (just one gain setting resistor and nothing more) and is cheap (about $7.00 retail in small quantities). I don't have a catalog here with me, but I think the number is MPI 118. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 09:47:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA26234; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:35:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:35:15 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:34:58 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701061734.LAA20220 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Resent-Message-ID: <"HLiYm2.0.kP6.IVJqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3142 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:21 1/6/97 -0800, Mike S wrote: >Better than an op amp is an insturmentation amplifier, which has a >differential input with excellent common mode rejection and low drift. An >IA really simplifies circuit design. Burr Brown makes a good integrated >IA in an 8-pin DIP package that is very simple to use (just one gain >setting resistor and nothing more) and is cheap (about $7.00 retail in >small quantities). my kind of device! Thanks, Mike. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 10:17:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA31792; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:01:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:01:18 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:55:27 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199701061855.TAA02698 sunny.bahnhof.se> X-Sender: grappo bahnhof.se (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: gudmund rapp Subject: E-quest Resent-Message-ID: <"4KkzR1.0.gm7.itJqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3143 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear vortexians! After a year or so on this list I have only recently noticed the activities of E-quest as displayed on their exellent web. Have I been asleep? Has anybody challenged Russ George on his claims? This sounds much more stimulating than discussing longevity or why Miles was badly treated by a journal. Jed and Chris et al must have something to say about E-quest!? So long Gudmund Gudmund Rapp Phone: +4687178913 Vinterbrinksvagen 7 Email: grappo bahnhof.se 133 32 Saltsjobaden Sweden Web "Self-knowledge": http://www.bahnhof.se/~grappo/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 11:46:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA19361; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:36:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:36:01 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:35:48 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Schaffer@gav.gat.com" at Jan 6, 97 09:21:55 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NoUc91.0.tj4.UGLqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3144 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael J. Schaffer writes: > The tradeoff, noise reduction gained for bandwidth lost, is well known > in signal processing circles. If the "oversampling" is spread evenly you also get the benefit of integration of signal variations. This is especially useful in calorimetry applications where you always want to integrate the input and output values, but where you don't really need to store such a fine granularity of runtime measurements. A single sample every minute can potentially miss a lot of variation and thus mislead, but 10's of thousands of samples in the same period averaged into a single stored sample every minute catches most of the physical world variation in the average (but not any high frequency input artifacts for which input filtering is recommended.) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 11:52:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA19731; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:37:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:37:28 -0800 Message-ID: <32D1453E.2C4D worldnet.att.net> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 08:32:34 -1000 From: Rick Monteverde X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether References: <970106105310_1123477345 emout05.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nglci3.0.Dq4.tHLqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3145 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Znidarsic wrote: > An ocean of what? If it has substance it has energy. If it has energy it > has inertial mass. If it has inertial mass it has gravitational mass. [snip] If those ZPE estimates are right, then there's a very large equivalent mass in every cc of space. But it's mostly "virtual", meaning it's hardly reacting to things in this universe at any given moment. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 12:41:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA28041; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:20:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:20:23 -0800 Date: 06 Jan 97 15:18:34 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: E-Quest Message-ID: <970106201833_72240.1256_EHB154-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"D31QA1.0.2s6.3wLqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3147 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Gudmund Rapp writes: Has anybody challenged Russ George on his claims? . . . Jed and Chris et al must have something to say about E-quest!? I have challenged him repeatedly to substantiate them, to publish a scientific paper, and to allow proper third-party verification. He has not done so yet as far as I know. His talks at conferences have been most unsatisfactory. He presents sloppy, hand-drawn graphs with no labels on the coordinates and no scale. I find these performances excruciatingly embarrassing to watch. Russ told me on three occasions that he would publish a paper in the conference proceedings, but he never has. He even told me that he handed EPRI sponsor Tom Passell a copy of the paper after ICCF4, but Tom denied that. I conclude that Russ has not written any paper, and that he is not capable of presenting an organized, coherent description of his work. Furthermore, he keeps announcing that all of his previous work should be disregarded because he has moved to yet-another-high-tech gadget. If these high-tech spectrograph gadgets are as unreliable and difficult to use as he, others here, and Dick Blue have claimed, then I think we should abandon them forthwith and stick to calorimetry. Nobody has ever seriously challenged the excess heat results. As Chris says, transmutation is a distraction. It is unimportant. (To be fair, I should say that Russ is not the only person who gives embarrassing, unprofessional, discombobulated talks at cold fusion conferences. Oriani, Coors and others were disgusted by Preparata's talk at ICCF6. He mixed in too many overdone rhetorical flourishes; he presented the facts in no particular order; and like most scientists he wandered around the point and then crammed all the interesting details into the last three minutes of the lecture.) I thought E-Quest's revised web page introduced last week was a big improvement, but I am still not satisfied. I would like to see more quantitative information, particularly about the calorimetry. By private e-mail, Russ told me that the long-awaited joint E-Quest - EPRI publication will soon appear. That's good news if it pans out, but he has been saying that for years, so I no longer believe it. Russ claimed that Tom Passell was going to talk about the work at ICCF6, but Tom did not mention a word about it, and when Gene repeatedly asked Russ why he did not, Russ refused to answer. Tom told me something might be in the works, but the nature and date of publication were vague. It is a case of crying wolf too often. Russ's claims are like the magic motor or the thermal transmutation claims. We wait years and years, but we get no evidence, no independent verification, no hard data. So I dismiss them. I have decided I will ignore all such claims from now on. On the other hand, if Russ or one of the magic motor people shows up at my door with real data and offers to let other people test their machines, I would be delighted. If the tests show the gadgets work, I might believe in them. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 12:49:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA28026; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:20:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:20:19 -0800 Date: 06 Jan 97 15:18:47 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Dithering Message-ID: <970106201847_72240.1256_EHB154-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"TWnvk3.0.kr6.0wLqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3146 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex John Logajan and Mike Shaffer describe a technique known as "dithering" wherein: "Noise makes the reading oscillate about its real value, sometimes as one digital value, sometimes the other. But since the real value is often closer to one digital quanta than the other, and since noise over many samples is fairly evenly distributed, you tend to get more readings of one quanta than the other, and upon averaging as a floating point number, get a good approximation of the real value . . ." With a modest cough I would like say that I pointed this out in 1993, regarding manual readings from a Radio Shack thermistor: The precision of the instruments appears to exceed 0.1 C. Indications are that the probe itself is stable and sensitive enough to reach temperatures uniform throughout the probe metal in about 0.02 C increments. This was determined by selecting the same power levels on different days, under stable conditions, although at different ambient air temperatures. Several Delta T temperature readings were taken. The averages from different days usually agreed to within 0.02 C . . . The display apparently fluctuates around the "actual" reading in a seemingly random fashion, which on average turns out to be predictable. It mystified me. I am glad to hear it wasn't my imagination after all. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 12:54:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA28168; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:21:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:21:06 -0800 From: Xkan aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:20:16 -0500 Message-ID: <970106151318_271776592 emout20.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"WD4D13.0.zt6.mwLqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3148 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: <> You are saying that all energy responds to gravitational pull of stars and planets. This is only a assumption. A big assumption indeed. We don't even know if electrons, which is gross matter, responds to gravity. Does anybody know a experiment that measured the acceleration of electrons due to gravity? So your arguments is hypothetical, but may point to a difference between subtle (aether) energy and gross (matter) energy (i.e. atoms, dusts, rocks, life forms, etc.). Our scientific instruments today are not equiped to settle the issue either since they are not sensitive to aether. I remember heard some talks about detecting these subtle energies, but the only thing I remember now is Kirlian photograph. It showed peculiar energy radiation patterns around rocks and and living forms. This discussion on aether is music to my ears. Keep up the good work. Xiaobo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 13:15:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA03870; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:57:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:57:11 -0800 Date: 06 Jan 97 15:54:41 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Magnetic Field and Sound Message-ID: <970106205441_100433.1541_BHG161-3 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Uhg57.0.Ny.aSMqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3149 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hank, > A sine wave of amplitude A has an energy half that of a square > wave of the same amplitude. The other half of the energy is in the > harmonics. I thought it was (sqrt2)/2 of the energy of a square wave of equal amplitude? Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 14:22:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA16336; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:55:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:55:27 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:46:33 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: David Jonsson cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, Tom <100405.617@compuserve.com> Subject: Electricity in the Atmosphere... In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970104200816.006db604 bahnhof.se> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"5wFuz3.0.9_3.DJNqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3150 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: 1) Yes, I treasure the Feynman lectures on elecrticity in the atmosphere. I plan to add more about it in my web pages. The elecrtogravity theory supports it exactly. In fact, my recent calculations indicate a 12.5 kV/m electrogravity E-field at the surface of the Earth - positive pole at the surface, negative pole away from Earth. This will draw negative particles towards the Earth and repel positive particles, which will cause the electrostatic (NOT electrogravity) E-field that we experience and that causes lightning storms. In the mean time, see my mention of it on: http://www.best.com/~rognerud/html/physics.html 2) Do not know enough about the ZPE theories to comment. -Nils On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, David Jonsson wrote: > I suppose you have read The Feynman Lectures on Physics vol. 2 sect. 9 > Electricity in the Atmosphere? What do you say about that? Does it supports > your ideas of an electromagnetic gravitation? > > Have you ever wondered about the length of coherency of your field? Can it > be cubically distributed like in ZPE theory? > > David > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 14:28:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA20734; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:17:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:17:31 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "Schaffer gav.gat.com" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:16:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"0VZWH2.0.u35.vdNqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3151 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mike I tried an instrumentation amp, and had trouble with oscillation, and inability to drive the capacitance of the cable to my A/D, which is mounted in the PC. For me, an op amp subtraction circuit worked better. -Hank Scudder ---------- From: Schaffer gav.gat.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Date: Monday, January 06, 1997 9:21AM >Any ideas on how to make this resolution a lot better? > To improve your resolution you could use an opamp with a gain of 20(say) and subtract a 2.5v bias from the input.... Better than an op amp is an insturmentation amplifier, which has a differential input with excellent common mode rejection and low drift. An IA really simplifies circuit design. Burr Brown makes a good integrated IA in an 8-pin DIP package that is very simple to use (just one gain setting resistor and nothing more) and is cheap (about $7.00 retail in small quantities). I don't have a catalog here with me, but I think the number is MPI 118. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 14:38:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA21283; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:21:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:21:10 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:20:08 -0500 Message-ID: <970106162050_1415204330 emout15.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: aether Resent-Message-ID: <"TZ6s01.0.NC5.LhNqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3152 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You are saying that all energy responds to gravitational pull of stars and planets. This is only a assumption. A big assumption indeed. .............................................................................. ........................... Its no assumption. If we throw out the Principle of the Equivalence and the principle of the Conservation of Momentum we may as well start talking about how many angles fit on the head of a pin. Gravitational light bending has be measured by noting the position of starts next to the sun during an eclipse. The sun pulled on the light altering its momentum. We agree..I hope dearly...that mometum is conserved. The light must have altered the momentum of the sun by an equivalent amount....The light then pulled back on the sun. Light (and all energy) has gravity it must..it has momentum energy/c Are you rejecting Einstein's principle of Equivalence...If you do we can reject all the experimental evidence and start to discuss the angel on the pin problem..that's were this aether discussion is heading. ...Now what are you trying to tell me? There is an aether, it is real, it has no weight, it has no energy, its undetectable and yet it effects everything. I do not reject this aether stuff and state that all is right with current theory. There still exist a quantum information problem. How does an electron, for example, know how much to weigh? I think that the answer lies in the elastic limit of free space. The elesticity of free space is equivalent to capacitance in an electrical circuit. The stray capacitance of the circuit is effected by everything around the circuit, likewise, the elasticity of free space is effected by everything in the universe. Elasticity = 1/Capacitance This elasticity sets the Compton wavelengths. An elastic limit produces reflections confining the energy of matter within the matter. The rate of change of the elastic limit with the expension of space produces a vortex effect..the Bohr Magnetron. A better answer..no extra massless strange energy...the proper information..(the Compton wavelength and Bohr Magnetron) are exchanged. Forces are produced at the surface of matter resulting in the gravitational an inertial mass of matter. Beleive me I started out on the same track that you are on but I rejected it because the evidence does not support the conclusion. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 14:47:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA23411; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:31:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:31:31 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com>, Vortex-L Subject: Re: Magnetic Field and Sound Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:30:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yue_m2.0.cj5.1rNqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3153 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris The sqrt(2) is for RMS amplitudes usually, such as voltage measured with an RMS Voltmeter. . The two sqrt(2)'s multiplied together give the 1/2 I used. RMS voltage = sqrt(2)/2* peak voltage for a sinewave. The energy is = RMSV^2/R*T . -Hank Scudder ---------- From: Chris Tinsley To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Magnetic Field and Sound Date: Monday, January 06, 1997 12:54PM Hank, > A sine wave of amplitude A has an energy half that of a square > wave of the same amplitude. The other half of the energy is in the > harmonics. I thought it was (sqrt2)/2 of the energy of a square wave of equal amplitude? Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 15:28:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA01848; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:18:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:18:25 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:17:33 -0500 Message-ID: <970106170102_271794364 emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L eskimo.com, Puthoff@aol.com Subject: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"uSyyE.0.jS.-WOqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3154 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If those ZPE estimates are right, then there's a very large equivalent mass in every cc of space. But it's mostly "virtual", meaning it's hardly reacting to things in this universe at any given moment. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI .............................................................................. ........................................ Finally something I agree with. Energy tries to come out of the vacuum but it cannot because it is inhibited by the Conservatation of Energy. This virtual energy has no weight and doesn't upset the universe with additional gravitational mass, "it didn't quite make it". Thow in the fact that gravity has negative energy and it becomes apparent that if the virtual did "make it" into "the real" the total energy the new substance would contribute to the universe is zero. +energy + neg grav potential = zero It appears that the conservatation of energy does not lock the virtual into the fringe of existance or prohibit the creation of new energy. Then what does??..or in scientific terms what is not conserved by the process. HuMMM... gravity spin 2 + photon spin 1 is not equal to zero....that's it!!! Spin is not conserved..that's what I have said in my two publications. Add angular momentum through a device that exists within zero point systems..a phonon and we made new gravity. I've been saying this for years...Tempere proves it possible..What else is possible?? Humm new energy must follow the new gravity...Unlimited free energy!!! Take the virtual and make it real by adding h amount of angular momentum. How nice..how easy..how much fun....how is it that I am only one who can see this? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 15:49:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA06330; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:35:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:35:55 -0800 X-Sender: protech mail.frii.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:25:24 -0700 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: protech frii.com (R. Wormus) Subject: Longitudinal EM field compenent,B3 Resent-Message-ID: <"UZVpZ.0.jY1.MnOqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3155 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians, An interesting essay on recent developments in EM field theory can be found at: http://www.europa.com/~rsc/physics/B3/evans/essay1.txt ____Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 15:49:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA07595; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:39:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:39:45 -0800 Message-ID: <32D18D4D.5CC3 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 18:39:57 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether References: <970106151318_271776592 emout20.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"k-mx91.0.Zs1._qOqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3156 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Xkan aol.com wrote: > (snip) > You are saying that all energy responds to gravitational pull of stars and > planets. This is only a assumption. A big assumption indeed. We don't even > know if electrons, which is gross matter, responds to gravity. Does anybody > know a experiment that measured the acceleration of electrons due to gravity? Gee, Xiaobo, you really know how to hurt a precision balance maker! Nope, I don't know of the actual weighing of a bucket of electrons. But, some guys named Tolman and Steward did experiments to show the INERTIAL effects of the free electrons in metals. In one of the better experiments, Tolman wound a coil of wire and mounted it on a shaft through its axis. The coil was set up to be spun at high speed, and then braked to a sudden stop. He connected a ballistic galvanometer to the ends of the coil with special brushes. When he spun the coil and stopped it - sure enough, the voltage surge of the free electrons "slamming" toward one end of the long wire agreed to about 10% to the e/m ratio determined by other methods. I WANT to believe that this means that a bucket of electrons of mass "m" weighs the same as a bucket of Xiaobo (or Frank) of mass "m"! I know this does not prove that W = mg - I'll leave that to Einstein's ghost - but I thought this was one of the neatest experiments I had ever heard of! Now, a variation of the above experiment: 1. Find a massive, electromagnetically dead planet with a synchronous orbit characteristic like the earth. 2. Hang a magic metal wire from a synchronous satellite (plus counterweight!) to the surface of the planet. 3. Assuming that the electrons do have weight (give me a break, Xiaobo), how do we measure the fraction of a microvolt potential difference between the ends of the, say, 30,000 mi wire, taking the measurement from the planet's surface? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 16:09:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA12473; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:58:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:58:14 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701061754.ZM5831 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:54:40 -0600 In-Reply-To: FZNIDARSIC aol.com "Aether" (Jan 6, 9:53am) References: <970106105310_1123477345 emout05.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Aether Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"1NsF62.0.I23.I6Pqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3157 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mr. Tessien, Nice to see you in the trenches. I've been trying to follow your theory on aether for a little while now and it's simplicity is seductive. What, besides hair splitting logic, can be offered to substantiate any of it? I have read many of your papers, and I must say I am impressed with the completeness of your ideas, but your conclusions seem to be built on faith premises just as current theories are. Understandably, you have to start somewhere, but where are you going with this? Are you recruiting, investigating, or simply postulating? -john PS: The idea that matter is nothing more than evaporating condensed energy resonance is disturbing to me for some reason, but for the record, I think your view point is just as valid as any other. -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 16:38:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA20020; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:23:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:23:52 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:24:46 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott Little's graphs Resent-Message-ID: <"F44e53.0.iu4.KUPqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3159 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Burr Brown makes a good integrated instrumented amplifier >in an 8-pin DIP package that is very simple to use (just one gain >setting resistor and nothing more) and is cheap (about $7.00 retail in >small quantities). I don't have a catalog here with me, but I think the >number is MPI 118. CORRECTION: The Burr Brown number is ---> INA 114. It has gain gandwidth product = 1 MHz. >Mike > I tried an instrumentation amp, and had trouble with >oscillation, and inability to drive the capacitance of the cable >to my A/D, which is mounted in the PC. For me, an op amp >subtraction circuit worked better. > -Hank Scudder The INA 114 is pretty stable. I haven't had any problems with it, but I don't know what the load capacitance limit is. INA 114 needs no external frequency compensation. Compared with op amps in subtraction, an integrated IA usually has lower DC offset and drift. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 16:39:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA17791; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:16:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:16:11 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:15:56 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miles letter to Britz In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"D9LFW1.0.qL4.8NPqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3158 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dieter Britz wrote: > > I am sort of hanging around here against my better judgement. This morning I > was faced with 44 emails, most of them from vortex-l; even just deleting and > moving on takes a lot of my time. The list used to be about vortex water > heaters, and/or maybe about "cold fusion" - remember those days? > Hi Dieter, you need a better email program that will allow you to view and delete stuff quickly. Check out "pine". It's a University supported public domain program available for all flavours of Unix and even PC's. On the Web see http://www.washington.edu/pine Available via anonymous ftp from ftp.cac.washington.edu. With it I can dispose of vortex-l traffic in about 15 minutes by just reading the good stuff. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 18:41:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA15323; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:32:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:32:03 -0800 Message-Id: <199701070231.SAA26493 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:33:06 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Jed Roswell on E-Quest Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"EmgZr1.0.Cl3.XMRqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3161 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Now you seem to have your knickers in a knot again. Hmmm. Hypothesis: Jed is a jerk? Chronology of events constituting the experiment and results. I send Jed a note on the weekend informing him of a change of address to my web site and that his web site has the old http address. Jed changes the link address but asks that I make a link to his site. I say No I do not wish to do so. Jed says do so. I say no. Jed starts taking pot shots the next day on the public Vortex group at me and my work including all kinds of false statements. Conclusion: Hypothesis appears to be correct! Ces't la vie From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 19:20:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA22741; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:07:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:07:06 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701070259.SAA01822 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Longitudinal EM field compenent,B3 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:59:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: from "R. Wormus" at Jan 6, 97 05:25:24 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"roNK91.0.AZ5.OtRqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3162 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ron Wormus writes: > An interesting essay on recent developments in EM field theory can > be found at: > > http://www.europa.com/~rsc/physics/B3/evans/essay1.txt A most interesting site -- mind bending stuff about the longitudinal structure of the EM field. I've been searching the net for months for info about scalar EM, longitudinal EM fields, and non-linear optics. This is a new site, apparently put up in late December 1996. The site is operated by Roger S. Cathey (~rsc), and as you might recognize could be a bit fringe -- not that that is likely to bother anyone much around here. The physics presented is unusually high level. The URL mentioned above is one of about 30 articles at the site. For a full directory of articles use: http://www.europa.com/^rsc/physics/B3/evans Those interested in the possible political aspects of the possibly forbidden subject of scalar EM, might also want to take a look at the folder named "grievances". Copied below is a sample of information from the file named evans26.txt. Regards, Robert Stirniman ======================================================== Independent Corroborations of Longitudinal Structure. 1) The Ranada / Afanasiev / Stepanovsky theory, as just described. 2) Lehnert theory of the vacuum charge / current. 3) Oppenheimer / Ahluwalia / Ernst theory of acausal solutions of Maxwell. 4) Recami / Majorana theory. 5) Munera / Guzman theory. 6) Chubykalo / Smirnov-Rueda theory. 7) Dvoeglazov theory from equations for any spin. 8) Sachs unified field theory. 9) Israelit unified field theory. 10) Meszaros / Molnar thermodynamics and radiation theory. 11) Roscoe theory in relativity and cosmology. 12) Wigner theory for particles (1939). 13) Moles / Vigier theory of photon mass. 14) Bass / Schrodinger theory of photon mass. 15) Kalb / Ramond theory of the j = 0 field. 16) Pashkov theory. 17) Dirac's remarks on the Coulomb field in q.e.d. 18) Shnerb / Horwitz gauge theory. 19) Roy theory of the relict field. 20) Draganescu theory of the optical Aharonov Bohm effect. 21) Staruszkiewicz theory. This is a list of essentially independent confirmations of longitudinal structure in electrodynamics in vacuo. Other indications are available that go back to Oppenheimer, and back into the work of Weber in the nineteenth century. There may well be other confirming work available. --------------------------- Key References by other Authors. 1) P. A. M. Dirac, in H. Hora and J. R. Shepanski (eds.), "Directions in Physics." (Wiley, New York, 1978). 2) D. V Ahluwalia and D. J. Ernst, Mod. Phys. Lett., 7A, 1967 (1992). 3) E. Majorana, Nuovo Cim., 14, 171 (1937); English translation by D. A. Sinclair, Tech. Trans. TT 542, NRCC, Canada. 4) V. Bargmann and E. P. Wigner, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 34, 211 (1948). 5) E. Inonu and E. P. Wigner, ibid., 39, 510 (1953). 6) S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev., 134B, 882 (1964); 138B, 988 (1965). 7) M. Sachs, recent volumes and for example, Lett. Nuovo Cim., 34, 81 (1964); ibid., 107A, 1709 (1994). 8) F. J. Belinfante and W. Pauli, Physica, 7, 177 (1940). 9) V. V. Dvoeglazov, in M. W. Evans et al., (eds.), "The Enigmatic Photon, Vol. Four" (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1997). 10) A. Staruszkiewicz, Acta Phys. Polon., 13B, 617 (1982); 14, 63, 67, 903 (1983); 15, 225 (1984), 23, 591 (1992). 11) E. Gianetto, Lett. Nuovo Cim., 44, 140 (1985). 12) Y. S. Kim., Prov. Fourth Wigner Symposium, Guadalajara, Aug. 7-11, 1995 (World Scientific, 1996), page 1. 13) M. Kalb and P. Ramond, Phys. Rev., D, 9, 2273 (1974). 14) E. Recami and M. W. Evans; M. Meszaros; A. Chubykalo and R. Smirnov Rueda; B. Lehnert, in ref. (9). 15) A. O. Barut and G. Ziino, Mod. Phys. Lett., 8, 1011 (1993). 16) A. F. Ranada, J. Phys. A, 25, 1621 (1992); Eur. J. Phys., 13, 70 (1992). 17) L. Bass and E. Schrodinger, Proc. R. Soc., 232A, 1 (1955). 18) A. Proca, Comptes Rendues, 190, 1477 (1930). 19) L. de Broglie, Library of Congress Listings, The National Union Catalogue, Pre 1956 Listings, Vol. 77 (Mansell Information Publ. Co., Ltd., London, 1970), pp. 434-9. 20) P. S. Pershan, Phys. Rev., 130, 919 (1963). 21) J. P. van der Ziel, P. S. Pershan and L. D. Malmstrom, Phys. Rev. Lett., 15, 190 (1965); Phys. Rev., 143, 574 (1966). 22) J. Deschamps, M. Fitaire and M. Lagoutte, Phys. Rev. Lett., 25, 1330 (1970). 23) D. Bohm and J.-P. Vigier, Phys. Rev., 109, 1882 (1958). 24) L. de Broglie and J.-P. Vigier, Phys. Rev. Lett., 28, 1001 (1972). 25) E. Noether, Nachr. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen, 171 (1918); reviewed by J. G. Fletcher, Rev. Mod. Phys., 32, 65 (1960). 26) E. P. Wigner, Ann. Math., 40, 149 (1939). 27) W. S. Warren, S. Mayr, D. Goswami and A. P. West., Science, 255, 1683 (1992); 259, 836 (1993). Other key papers, including Oppenheimer's paper on the acausal solution, to be added. Suggestions welcome. ==================================================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 19:23:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA24358; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:13:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:13:59 -0800 Message-ID: <32D1CE47.61F9 gorge.net> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 20:17:11 -0800 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) Reply-To: tom gorge.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether References: <970106105310_1123477345 emout05.mail.aol.com> <9701061754.ZM5831@me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tmLpy3.0.Ry5.qzRqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3163 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: > The idea that matter is nothing more than evaporating condensed > energy resonance is disturbing to me for some reason, but for the > record, I think your view point is just as valid as any other. An MIT site: http://amo.mit.edu/dallin/nat.html About Bose-Einstein condensates (really really COLD fusion!) says that Quantum Mechanics means all matter is made up of EM vibrations. It would seem that the major difference is whether the vibrations are in "space," or "aether." Which is right, of course, has major ramifications. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 19:45:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA26335; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:21:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:21:59 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Name calling To: vortex-l eskimo.com (vortex-l) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:21:33 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UQcUs2.0.BR6.E5Sqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3164 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Without identifying the author(s) I think it safe to say that some of the messages posted here in the last several hours go over the decorum limits we prefer, as far as name calling and the like. These sorts of things tend to build into an ongoing feud in which no one can really remember who was initially at fault. So it is best to put a stop to it early lest both sides feel themselves to be the aggrieved party. I'm not trying to minimize the pain one or both parties may feel they have suffered, but merely pointing out that continuing the exchange is unlikely to resolve to a satisfactory conclusion. Besides, you might get bounced by the list moderator. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 20:41:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA07986; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:29:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:29:11 -0800 Message-Id: <199701070429.UAA20253 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:30:19 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Name calling Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"lK-wH1.0.iy1.M4Tqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3166 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John is trying to make a good point but I think we are amongst friend here. Anyone who can't endure a little healthy squabbling probably doesn't have a very thick skin. However even elephants swat at pesky mosquitoes some of the time. One would think a good southernor would harken to the words of Mark Twain. "There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such trifling investment of fact." Russ George Oh god here it comes again where's my fly swatter. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 20:59:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA10111; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:36:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:36:50 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:36:41 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: Vortex Mail List Subject: Re: Magnetic field and Sound In-Reply-To: <32CFF045.5E64 compassnet.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_LnBH2.0.uT2.WBTqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3167 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Ronald Stiffler wrote: > The coil is excited with a sine wave of 10 milliwatts in the audio range > of from 500-4000 hertz and a 20 db sound (matching the applied signal) > is generated in the center hole of each magnet. Your setup resembles some of the infamous "scalar" circuits rumored to exhibit strange phenomena. However, I think there is a conventional explanation. > > Placing a 10 cm copper (circle) plate over either magnet on its N end > over the hole will cause the sound to drop below audible levels. But > placing the copper plate inside of the opposing S fields will only > redirect the sound as if you were placing a sound deflector in the path > of the sound. The sound can not be dropped by placement of the copper > sheet over the center holes on the S side (facing each other. A copper mass held near a magnet will be electromagnetically coupled to the magnet. Copper will act to damp out vibrations in the magnet, since relative motion induces currents in the copper, and the bulk resistance of the copper creates heat. The overall result is e/m braking, like a sort of friction or "gooeyness" which stops vibrations in the magnet and heats the copper. This damping effect should be maximum at lower frequencies. At higher freq, the skin effect causes the copper to act more like a magnetic shield than like a damper. However, if you hold the copper in your hand, your flesh will damp the copper vibration, and indirectly damp the magnet vibration. Hold the copper lightly by the edges, then firmly over an area of copper, and see if the sound is less when the copper is held firmly. If so, it points to e/m braking effects occurring. > The coil is secure as is the frame (made from glued PVC) so sound is not > coming from these area's. Because the copper plate on the N ends will > stop the sound this is also a good indication that it is not a structure > area creating the sound. But the coil, the magnets, and/or the frame may be acting as sounding boards and coupling their vibration to the air. A quick way to test for vibration is to bite a plastic rod between teeth, plug ears with fingers, then push the rod against various points upon the object and listen for bone-conduction sounds. (If it were me, I'd do this in front of observers in order to maintain my reputation for strange behavior. ) Another way to test for vibration is to damp it mechanically. For example, press your hands against the coil, against magnet surfaces, etc. If the perceived amplitude drops significantly, then you have identified the source of vibration. I would predict that the ceramic magnets have several resonance frequencies, as do the heads of drums. Give your magnets a whack with a pencil or plastic rod, and listen for ringing. If they ring, and if you drive them at that same ringing frequency, will you get large audio output even though there is no "speaker cone." The vibration of the ceramic material becomes large at resonance. Remember, a church bell needs no speaker cone, even though the bell is composed of massive thick metal. On square waves: signal generators often use a different output circuit for square wave versus sine wave, and this may mess up any resonance effects. To eliminate this, place a buffer amp (such as an audio amplifier) between the signal generator and the coil. That way any changes to the signal generator impedance won't impact the coil/magnet physics. Last bit: as you said, the copper plate does not damp the sound if held between the poles of the disk magnets. This is expected if e/m braking is occurring, since the coupling to the copper is zero at the plane between the disks. To cause e/m damping, there must be net flux through the copper. In the perpendicular plane between two repelling "S" poles there is zero flux, and there should be minimal damping effect from inserted copper plate. If you reverse one disk so the disks attract, then any insertion of the copper plate between the disks should cause large damping effects (if e/m damping is significant here.) .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 21:24:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA18469; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:14:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:14:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:14:43 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether In-Reply-To: <32D18D4D.5CC3 interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FrWKI.0.QW4.ElTqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3168 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > In one of the better experiments, Tolman wound a coil of wire and > mounted it on a shaft through its axis. The coil was set up to be spun > at high speed, and then braked to a sudden stop. He connected a > ballistic galvanometer to the ends of the coil with special brushes. > When he spun the coil and stopped it - sure enough, the voltage surge > of the free electrons "slamming" toward one end of the long wire agreed > to about 10% to the e/m ratio determined by other methods. Tolman is one of my heroes too. I can only imagine what the "sudden braking" must have been like. He probably couldn't repeat a second performance with the same equipment! I think he later settled on vibrating-conductor devices for higher precision. Imagine, a generator with no magnets, which creates current purely mechanically. Who says Franklin's "electric fluid" is not really a fluid? I've often wondered if the electron-inertia effects produce significant radial voltage in in homopolar generators. And, if we spin an electron- metal disk on the same shaft as a hole-metal disk (bismuth), and connect center to center and rim to rim, do we obtain current and do work in heating the disks? And if so, where is the stator against which reaction forces appear? Or do holes have negative mass, and therefor hole-carrier materials act the same as electron-carrier stuff as far as Tolman-style spinning/shaking experiments are concerned? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 21:41:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA21524; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:32:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:32:39 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:32:17 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Jed Rothwell on E-Quest In-Reply-To: <970107035358_72240.1256_EHB90-2 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"RAQH2.0.EG5.s_Tqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3169 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 6 Jan 1997, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > This is completely incorrect. I have been taking pot shots at E-Quest for > nearly a year now, ever since it became apparent to me that they refuse to > publish data to back up their claims, and they refuse to allow independent > verification. > I don't think this is true. Their new web-page, which is very interesting reading, has a whole section on a collaboration with SRI. I'd very much like details of how they calibrate their set up. One big problem pointed out by Tom Droege ages ago is how do you know how much accoustic energy is input into the system? Maybe it's on the web page. I'm still digesting all the material Russ has put up on his site. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 23:06:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA03809; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:57:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:57:48 -0800 Message-ID: <32D1F0C3.3D68 worldnet.att.net> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 20:44:28 -1000 From: Rick Monteverde X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vCWsx2.0.Dx.gFVqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3170 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: [snip] > Imagine, a generator with no magnets, which creates current > purely mechanically. Who says Franklin's "electric fluid" > is not really a fluid? > I've often wondered if the electron-inertia effects produce > significant radial voltage in in homopolar generators. [snip] So why not commute the shaft of a magnet-less "homopolar generator" to ground, spin it up, and look for voltage on the rim? Earth's magnetic field might provide some interference though. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 00:10:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA17448; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:46:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:46:26 -0800 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970107074753.00a0e09c mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 23:47:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"HBAo.0.UG4.HzVqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3171 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:14 PM 1/6/97 -0800: >forces appear? Or do holes have negative mass, and therefor hole-carrier >materials act the same as electron-carrier stuff as far as Tolman-style >spinning/shaking experiments are concerned? > Have long considered Bismuth a possible key in antigravity. In the Finnish superconductor experiment, the superconductor was rotating. Does that throw the electrons to the rim, leaving a lot of holes in the middle of the superconductor? Couldn't be a lot, or the positive charges would surely break the material apart. If a high voltage DC power supply is used to suck electrons out of a spinning piece of metal, would a chunk of glass above it lose weight? Cryptic comment: If so, I think you would find that glass, under that influence, to also have a higher melting point than normal, based on the reason for the loss of weight. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------------ Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA ------------------------------------------------------------------ Western Union internal memo, 1876: "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 07:12:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA29656; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:58:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:58:07 -0800 Date: 07 Jan 97 09:54:38 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Jed Rothwell on E-Quest Message-ID: <970107145438_72240.1256_EHB139-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"NyUs_3.0.HF7.zHcqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3173 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Martin Sevior writes: [E-Quest's] new web-page, which is very interesting reading, has a whole section on a collaboration with SRI. As I said, I think the new web page is a big improvement. But so far, all we have heard about that collaboration is rumors. If the collaboration turns out to be real, and SRI really does publish results, nobody will be happier than me. I wish E-Quest had published long ago, after they worked at Los Alamos. I'd very much like details of how they calibrate their set up. So would I! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 08:42:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA16936; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:28:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:28:01 -0800 Message-Id: <199701071627.IAA16695 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:29:03 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Jed Rothwell on E-Quest Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"9Q5O53.0.T84.Fcdqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3174 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Well Jed rumours are your only stock and trade aren't they. Since you don't do anything yourself but sit in your armchair and type missives. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 08:42:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA17903; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:31:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:31:49 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701071624.IAA00220 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Newton on Aether To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:24:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <970106162050_1415204330 emout15.mail.aol.com> from "FZNIDARSIC@aol.com" at Jan 6, 97 05:20:08 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HrixP3.0.eN4.nfdqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3175 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "To suppose that one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of anything else, ... is to me so great an absurdity, that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty for thinking, can ever fall into." -- Sir Isaac Newton From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 09:09:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA22953; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:53:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:53:23 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <32CD8FB1.237C228A math.ucla.edu> References: from "Larry Wharton" at Jan 2, 97 06:25:32 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:53:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry Resent-Message-ID: <"xXQkm1.0.Wc5.1-dqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3176 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In reference to Barry Merman's question >(1) if your theory is correct, why did neither >I, nor Scott Little, nor any of the other groups that replicated >the CETI cell see the effect? Both yourself and Scott Little did not replicate the excess heat, therefore you could not have observed any chemical potential shift which is part of the excess heat effect. >(2) chemical energy alone would not account for the energy output >of demos such as that at powergen. Thus, you must ascribe these >to some other cause. In my theory the energy output equals the energy input and there is no need for external chemical energy input. You are equating the energy output to the heat output but the energy is equal to the heat plus the chemical potential or the sum of kinetic energy plus potential energy. >You certainly have some obligation to explain why your >predicted effect is not observed in many chemically and >mechanically equivalent versions of the CETI type apparatus. > >Based on my experience, I did not find any major flaws in the >calorimetry technique (minor ones, yes, but none that would >mislead one at the level of watts of output for many minutes) >for practical work. Nor did I see any sign of chemical potential >effects. Since your experiment did not work then of course you would not see any of the associated effects. As for the reason your experiment did not work I would suggest the use of glass instead of plastic beads. The higher dialectic constant of plastic as well as its ability to lock in a permanent polarization (an electret) could be significant. >If the CETI device did work through some bizarre mechanism for >altering chemical potential, I would think they would just as well >be trumpeting that. I doesn't have to be bizarre. I have some chemistry text books that describe the effect of high electric fields on chemical equilibrium along with experimental data and there is nothing bizarre about it. The bizarre thing is that there are chemists who know nothing about this effect and knowing nothing about it think that it doesn't exist. The CETI cell certainly has something interesting and useful going on but there must be much better ways of doing it. I am planning to try out some different techniques. This brings to mind some comments I made to Joe Newman. After examining his machine I concluded it was useless as an energy producer but that he had actually found a way to rejuvenate batteries. It appeared that sending a short back EMF spike through dead non-rechargable batteries restored some available energy. I thought that this could be useful but that one should use a simple electric circuit instead of the big, expensive, clunky, and unreliable Newman Energy Machine. Joe was outraged at this suggestion but look at what has happened now. Joe has still never produced any energy but the battery rejuvenators are now commercially available, produced by someone else. They are not too popular because they did not work very well but now there are new alkaline batteries that are designed to work better with these devices so they will have a second chance. This is a variant of Jed Rothwell's inventor disease. An inventor develops a device that does something useful but insists on a bogus theory that blinds him to the actual reality of the true process. Then someone else figures out how to do the process better and he gets all the benefit. Joe Newman's gyroscopic particles flying around to power his machine are just as far fetched as the supposed nuclear reactions going on in the CETI cell. There is something useful going on there, the true nature of which must awate investigation by more levelheaded and reasonable scientests like perhaps myself or Barry Merman. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 10:08:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA03745; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:51:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:51:16 -0800 Message-ID: <32D28D1F.623A interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 12:51:27 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: Re: Aether] Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"j6Sbh3.0.Pw.Iqeqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3177 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: X-POP3-Rcpt: fstenger netra Return-Path: Received: from skylink.skylink.net by netra.interlaced.net with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0vhS9V-000HCCC; Mon, 6 Jan 97 22:24 EST Received: from shell.skylink.net (robert shell.skylink.net [206.25.34.5]) by skylink.skylink.net (4.1.4/4.1.4) with ESMTP id TAA01639 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:26:06 -0800 (PST) Received: (from robert localhost) by shell.skylink.net (4.1.4/4.1.4) id TAA01853 for fstenger@interlaced.net; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:17:12 -0800 (PST) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701070317.TAA01853 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Aether To: fstenger interlaced.net Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:17:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <32D18D4D.5CC3 interlaced.net> from "Francis J. Stenger" at Jan 6, 97 06:39:57 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Frank Stenger writes: > In one of the better experiments, Tolman wound a coil of wire and > mounted it on a shaft through its axis. The coil was set up to be spun > at high speed, and then braked to a sudden stop. He connected a > ballistic galvanometer to the ends of the coil with special brushes. > When he spun the coil and stopped it - sure enough, the voltage surge > of the free electrons "slamming" toward one end of the long wire agreed > to about 10% to the e/m ratio determined by other methods. Yes. A great experiment done in 1916. An EM effect still not explainable solely via Maxwell's equations, and demonstration of a coupling between inertia and electromagnetics. The current pulse in Tolman's experiment occurs because electrons are more "free" to move, and upon sudden stoppage continue to "slide" through the ionic lattice. Without a closed loop, something different would happen. For example ramming a copper bar to a stop, I think might give an opposite polarity in the effect. (more discussion below about Frank's planetary experiment). > Now, a variation of the above experiment: > 1. Find a massive, electromagnetically dead planet with a > synchronous orbit characteristic like the earth. > 2. Hang a magic metal wire from a synchronous satellite (plus > counterweight!) to the surface of the planet. > 3. Assuming that the electrons do have weight (give me a break, > Xiaobo), how do we measure the fraction of a microvolt > potential difference between the ends of the, say, 30,000 mi > wire, taking the measurement from the planet's surface? Yes, you gotta love a practical experiment like this. We also need a perfectly circular orbit, else libration will break the wire, but that should be no more a problem than the rest of it. Anyhow, I believe this experiment would result in the opposite polarity than expected. You can do something similar to this by spinning a copper disk and measuring a potential from the center to the rim. The rim becomes slightly positive relative to the center. The experiment has been done -- there's a paper somewhere, not handy. There is also an "explanation" in an article by Edward Teller about the couplings between graviation and electromagnetics. Teller states something to the effect that the positive charge ionic lattice is compressed outward, and that due to degeneracy effects in the electron gas, the electrons are not about able to fully compensate. This experiment, and the propsed planetary experiment, are different from Tolman's experiment, because there is inertial pressure but NO flow. Something similar may happen in the Hooper/Edwards effect, in that the self-Hall effect (pinch effect) may be limited by degeneracy, and not fully able to compensate for electric fields from relatvistic effects (charge in motion effects). Hence an electric field may exist in and external to a current carrying conductor. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 13:05:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA14190; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 12:54:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 12:54:15 -0800 Message-ID: <32D2B7FE.3B61 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 15:54:22 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Inertial Electron Pump Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4wLES1.0.aT3.sVhqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3178 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: For those interested in rotating metal disks as inertial electron pumps (no magnetic fields involved except that due to the polarization of the disk!), I thought I would note the equation for same from my reference; Electromagnetic Fields and Interactions by Richard Becker (Dover reprint, 1982) Setup: A rotating metal disk generates an emf, V volts, from its axis to its rim because of the free electrons in the metal being "centrifuged" outward by the rotatation. The basic equation for the voltage: V = 1/2 * (m/e) * [ R * (RPM * Pi/30)]^2 volts. with: V in volts m/e mass-to-charge ratio for electron, kilogram/coulomb R radius of disk, meters RPM is the speed of rotation in rev./min (old mechanical engr. units!) The group (RPM * Pi/30) is the angular velocity in radians/second. The group [ R * (RPM * Pi/30)] is the tangential velocity of the disk edge, which tends to be limited to a maximum value by the strength of rotating bodies. (600 meters per second? Scott L. should know a good number for this!) K. F. Nichols did the experiment with a 0.1 meter radius disk rotating at 100 radians per second. His calculated output: V = 1/2 * (5.68 x 10^-12 k/c) * [ 0.1 m * 100 rad/sec]^2 = 2.84 x 10^-10 volts If I use 600 meters/second for the bracket value, I get: V = 1.02 x 10^-6 volt, about one microvolt! Anyone want to compute the homopolar voltage of the disk if we had the axis parallel to the earth's magnetic field? Now, how about rotating ionic conductors - electrolytes? If we have a liquid electrolyte with a great difference in mass between the + and - ions, can we centrifuge the charges apart by rotating the stuff? Can we get inertial polarization? How big can it be? What can we do with it? Why are we here -----------------?????????????? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 6 20:05:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01832; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:56:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:56:27 -0800 Date: 06 Jan 97 22:53:59 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: Jed Rothwell on E-Quest Message-ID: <970107035358_72240.1256_EHB90-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"yl51a2.0.XS.fbSqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3165 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:rgeorge hooked.net Russ George writes: Chronology of events constituting the experiment and results. . . . I send Jed a note on the weekend . . . Jed changes the link address but asks that I make a link to his site. . . I say No I do not wish to do so. Jed says do so. . . . I say no. Jed starts taking pot shots the next day on the public Vortex group at me and my work including all kinds of false statements. This is completely incorrect. I have been taking pot shots at E-Quest for nearly a year now, ever since it became apparent to me that they refuse to publish data to back up their claims, and they refuse to allow independent verification. The record here at Vortex is clear: I did not start today. I will not stop until E-Quest ends this tragic, self-destructive, irrational behavior. Although I promise not to clutter up the bandwidth here! Russ accuses me of making "false statements." Most of my comments were opinions, which cannot be false. I said that lectures with hand-drawn graphs make me cringe with embarrassment, because they are so unprofessional. I would never present anything like that. (But then, people like me write out every word of a presentation a week ahead of time. We are called "programmers.") No doubt other people, including Russ and Preparata, find hand-drawn graphs acceptable. I said Russ gives poor lectures. No doubt other people will say that his lectures are brilliant. Regarding matters of fact I said he has published nothing. What did I miss? Did you, Russ, actually publish a paper? If so, please post the title and mail me a copy and I will retract instantly, with an apology. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 14:21:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA00144; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:09:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:09:08 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:08:56 -0800 Message-Id: <199701072208.OAA08105 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: aether Resent-Message-ID: <"7z-BH.0.92.2ciqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3179 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Beleive me I started out on the same track that you are on but I rejected it >because the evidence does not support the conclusion. Did you ever make the supposition, "There exist in nature, no attractive forces"? If not, then you never worked with a fluid dynamic ocean of aether like what I am working on. And, you use in your notions things like gravity that act at a distance and impose a force, but you give no mechanical reason for that force or any other force to exist. You need 7 forces to make your system work, counting electric, nuclear weak and nuclear strong as 2 each since they are supposed to both pull and push. In an aether, you are only allowed just one force mechanism and all other actions must be derived as interactions that result from the phase and frequency timings of wave energy as it moves through the ocean from one standing wave to another. As such, you get just one force and you note where phase relationships experience a marked increase in efficiency due to the deformation of the local spacetime nodal structures. Sorry for the nebulous nature, but to explain all details quickly blows up into a book, which I am writing. But I have posted all of my thoughts on the net if you are interested. And, I will try to respond to the bunch of postings here as long as there is interest. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 14:22:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA00219; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:09:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:09:28 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:08:55 -0800 Message-Id: <199701072208.OAA08103 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"qrSiO.0.s2.Aciqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3181 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Frank Znidarsic wrote: > >> An ocean of what? If it has substance it has energy. If it has energy it >> has inertial mass. If it has inertial mass it has gravitational mass. > >[snip] > >If those ZPE estimates are right, then there's a very large equivalent >mass in every cc of space. But it's mostly "virtual", meaning it's >hardly reacting to things in this universe at any given moment. Rick, this is probably incorrect. To "interact" means to impose action, and I think that all of the mass of the aether is imposing action all the time. We call the observation of that motion, energy, and we relate it to our notion of mass through the notion of equivalency. In other words, if you have a large interaction, but it is equal, statistically, from all sides, then it will be as though there is no interaction. But, no interaction and no net interaction are two very different concepts and behaviors. Virtual, is a meaningless word we use to simply point out that there are motions that do not remain permanently stable in our universe. A virtual particle, for example, is simply a standing wave that formed due to some random convergence of acoustic wave energy in the ocean of aether but which did not have enough momentum to remain in motion and so it dispersed. But keep in mind that just because Brownian motion of a particle of dust leads to no net progress through the water, statistically, it does not mean it is not being acted upon by that fluid. Likewise with aether, only in this instance we note the action via other processes like energy exchange and call these net thrusts, "forces". Later, Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 14:26:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA00186; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:09:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:09:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:08:58 -0800 Message-Id: <199701072208.OAA08107 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"2s-pq1.0.l2.9ciqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3180 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Mr. Tessien, > >Nice to see you in the trenches. I've been trying to follow your >theory on aether for a little while now and it's simplicity is >seductive. What, besides hair splitting logic, can be offered to >substantiate any of it? I have read many of your papers, and I must >say I am impressed with the completeness of your ideas, but your >conclusions seem to be built on faith premises just as current >theories are. Understandably, you have to start somewhere, but where >are you going with this? Are you recruiting, investigating, or >simply postulating? Thanks for the comments. A lot of people have been following my postings and I get a lot of letters like yours here. I haven't posted to vortex for quite a while since this is not really up the alley of the push in this forum. However, the work you guys are doing would really benefit from understanding the true nature of space, time, and matter. Currently, we have all these properties and principles and we have found a bunch of clever ways to work with them for a useful end. I am writing a book about my ideas. I am trying to meet with some physicists who are working with string theory and quantum gravitation. And I am posting the heck out of the newsgroups. I also flew a graduate physicist out here to work on my ideas, and he has derived the equations of QED and QM from GR equations by using the notion of conservation of aether in all interactions. Thus, you get conservation of momentum, angular momentum, and mass of aether in all behaviors in the universe. And these lead to tremendous observations of behaviors in our real universe. So many in fact that I have to laugh at how obvious it is that my ideas are correct. It is just that we are not used to working with resonant things and inducing translation via wave energy communication. And yet we see it work all the time on the beach as driftwood with a certain bobbing frequency is thrust toward shore even in the absence of wind due to interference with incident wave energy. And we see spin 1/2 motions in oscillons reported in Sci Am a few months back and Science News as well. But we see none of these things for what they are because we have the notion of "attraction" so pounded into our brains that we fail to even question let alone challenge the thought. We have no idea about "Why" any of the notions are working. We have no notion of what the differences and similarities of space, time, and matter are let alone how forces are communicated. Can you honestly tell me that anyone believes that each proton in a rock, on a planet, near a star, in orbit about the Andromeda galaxy has some ability to count the number of protons in my pinky finger, measure the distance from itself to me, account for the speed of light (or not as some believe), and then adjust how hard it pulls accordingly? Can the matter in that rock possibly be able to know that we launched a space probe about the solar system and adjust how hard it is pulling on that probe every instant of the day from so far away? To believe that gravitation is an attractive force is ludicrous. And if gravitation cannot be an attraction mechanism, then how can you possibly get two objects to move toward one another? And worse, if gravitation cannot be attractive, then how could any action be attractive? How do you throw something at something else and get a recoil opposite to the momentum? You might say, "Throw some negative energy at it". But I ask you then, what is energy, let alone negative energy? And you will be silent. You see, we know all about how things work. But we haven't answered a single question in all of physics about "WHY" things work the way they do. And by why what I mean is, why does matter have the property of mass. Why is any force communicated and how is that communication accomplished. What, why, and how is the notion of "spin" manifest in the motions of sub atomic matter and the quantum vacuum? These questions get at the heart of things, and they are all said to be "Unanswerable". But then how could one expect an answer to such a basic question from a set of theories which espouse the notion of Uncertainty and which elevate that notion to the level of a "principle"? You probably read Newtons comment on the idiocy of believing in action at a distance. But again, if you cannot reach out and pull on anything, then how can you get two things to move toward one another? Well, the answer is so simple it is laughable. If you have a fluid dynamic system, then you can listen to the advice of Le Sage who noticed in Newtons day that the mathematics of Newtons gravitation were exactly equivalent to a shielding mechanism. But you cannot stop there because we are aware of more than Le Sage when it comes to the nature of matter and energy and conservation thereof. You must notice that you cannot accumulate any flux of aether in the earth or any other body or else the mass would be climbing. So, you must have the same amount of action headed in as is headed out. Now that would sound at first glance as though you would be able to get no net thrust. And if matter existed as "pea like particles", then I would agree with you. but that is not the nature of matter as we already know. Matter is wavelike in some of our experiments. but it seems really dumb to me to think that matter or nature behave a certain way when we are looking through one eyepiece and a different manner when we look through a different eyepiece. So if this is correct, then matter is wavelike and particle like, all the time. We just happen to know of things in our physics that are indeed both wavelike and particle like. But only a few people who study them in fluid dynamics really get into the nature of them. They are called solitons. And they come in a lot of versions including the recent oscillons, smoke ring vortices, huge mountains of water out on the open ocean (off the coast of Africa they are frequent and likened to a hole in the ocean with a mountain around it. These sink ships fairly regularly and are huge, and are stable for long periods of time). We also happen to understand that these waveforms are resonances in a fluid. They are underdamped oscillations. And as such, they tend to couple to one another efficiently. Hugyens noticed this from his hospital bed as he noticed that two clocks side by side had frequency locked their oscillations together, but when placed away from each other did not couple and instead kept their own individual beats. We have used this property of coupled oscillators in building precision frequency references by using superconductive Josephson Junctions in series. The devices will lock their frequencies together into a single harmonious beat if their respective natural frequencies are close enough together. So, how do you thrust something out there in such a manner that it is induced to come over here? Well, simple. If both you and the thing out there are immersed in a huge expanse of acoustic energy in an ocean of aether, then there is wave energy arriving at both of your locations from far away from each of you. So, you will tend to resonate to the beat of all of that energy. That is what an underdamped standing wave is all about. Sonoluminescence is a good process to think about and study if you want to learn. And the work of Maxwell, Thomson, and Bjerknes in the 1870's and thereabouts on pulsating spheres in an ideal fluid are some theoretical notions you can study to learn more. But the beauty is what comes next if you have those pulsating standing waves. They are in the same fluid just like the pendulums of Huygens, and so they will not be able to avoid becoming phase and frequency synchronized with one another just like the JJ's. And once you get a bunch of standing waves to synchronize with one another (during the big bang originally), then it finally becomes obvious what the notion of force is all about. Especially, attractive forces. You see, the two pendulums synchronize together because they **do not repulse one another when they are in synch.**. In other words, if you have a resonant object and it is coupled to another similar resonant object, then that fluidic coupling will tend to force them into synchronization. In this manner, they each let the wave energy from the other pass through their location with very little interaction. But allowing wave energy from nearby oscillators easily pass through comes at a price. It comes at the expense of interference with wave energy coming from further away. And that wave energy will thrust the two particles toward one another because it is more energetic around the two than it is in between the two. And between the two that region of the fluid is filled to a greater percentage with the wave energy of the two standing waves. You wind up with the simplest notion for charge possible. Phase angle. Two waves of like phase angle, ie 0 or 180 degrees, will tend to repulse and two resonances with opposite phase angles will tend to attract due to the outside space thrusting them toward one another. So we find that if you have a phase angle mismatch, you can get certain kinds of thrust. And if you have a frequency mismatch (due to the Hubble flow and the red shifting of energy coming from far away), you get a thrust imposed on all matter that is nearby other matter and we call it gravitation. And if you wind up with a couple of standing waves that couple very tightly and distort the shape of the local nodal strcture of spacetime, then you get a couple of resonances that are perfectly phase and frequency coherent in their oscillations. As such the effeciency of communication of their wave fronts are extremely good. So we call this force of greater amplitude the nuclear strong force. And if you shed phase angle information in a composite set of standing waves, you can get a resonance to shift from 0 to 90 to 180 to 270 degrees if you damp out that energy via absorption or emission of some wave energy at those frequencies. Thus, in a composite particle such as a proton or a neutron or a quark (yes, I think quarks are composed of a set of three muon cores, but that is another story and leads to protons and neutrons being composed of 9 such cores), you can shed some energy at a certain phase angle and thus emit or absorb "particles" like electrons and positrons. We call this special force the weak force. But the current QM derivation of the weak force violates energy conservation in assuming a super massive particle as the exchange particle. If instead you assume the proper mass, but resonating at a 90 or 270 degree phase angle, then you will find that such a particle will behave as though it were very massive. That is because a resonance that is 90 degrees away from another resonance will have no net thrust interaction. So you wind up with all sorts of new possibilities. As far as observations in our universe to support my ideas, I think they are too numerous to mention. But I will list a few of them and how I came to find them. All you need to do is to look around and ask yourself, what behaviors that have been discovered, **surprised** the physicists responsible? Then, set out a graph showing location or energy or whatever field you wish to study along the horizontal axis. Then put at each location on the x axis, an arrow up or down indicating that the surprise was because there was too much of something, or too little of something based on their expectations. If you can find a pattern of ups and down arrows that fits into some scheme of things you have dreamt up, then you might be on to something. This is sort of like dimensional analysis if you are familiar with that process. What I did was to look at accelerations of matter, beginning from the center of a star like our sun, and then progressing way out into deep space. When you study this, you find that the surprises go something like this; 1) The pitch of the acoustic energy in the sun is varying on an 11 year cycle, whereas it is supposed to take 170,000 years for thermal information to communicate to the surface. So, for some reason, there is an ability to communicate energy of some form from the center to the surface in much less time than thermal energy. But, if not thermal, then what? The arrow here is up then down then up in a cycle, tied to the solar cycle. No great revelation except that something a bit strange is going on. 2) Coronal Mass Ejections (CME) are extremely violent events that eject huge amounts of ions out into space in a matter of hours. It used to be thought that these were just the result of flare action because we could only see them during a total eclipse for a minute or so. But now with SOHO in orbit, we are watching them 24 hours a day. What has been learned is to me some of the most to the point information there is. The ions experience a shock front, ie, an acceleration. It is directed outward from the sun. Solar flare are supposed to be EM, ie magnetically induced. They are also supposed to originate from the convective motions near the surface of the sun. But, CME's have been observed to be global events, though researchers still cringe to even suggest this. But if you were to look at the images, you would wonder why they have any doubt whatever. It is simple, plain, and obvious that these events are global in nature, with the point of origin at the center of the sun. But we run into that 170,000 year communication problem for coherent emissions again. Worse, CME shock fronts accelerate across the magnetic field lines. But when we measure the ions that come away from those CME's we find that they do not cross the magnetic field lines. Now I hope you read that carefully because if you stop to wonder, you should ask yourself, if the ions were not propogating the shock front across the magnetic field lines, then what was? In other words, if ion to ion collisions and scattering have truly been proven not to be what is causing the expansion of CME bubbles, then precisely what is it that is expanding and shocking the ions that are tied to the magnetic field lines? This gets worse when you see huge CME jets extending out 5 or more solar radii from opposite sides of the sun timed, oriented, everything beautifully symetrical to the sun. There is only one origin for that kind of event, the center of the sun. But now you must ask, how can that be? ions cannot just zip right on up and out of the sun. This is an arrow of anamolous acceleration pointing away from the sun. 3) The solar wind accelerates out of our solar system. Now, how many of you took thermodynamics? The last time I studied that, I seem to recall that if you have a gas that is heated, and then you allow that gas to expand, and worse, you allow that gas to gain in gravitational potential, then that gas should cool down due to both effects. This is why in our atmosphere the temperature drops about 3 degrees per thousand feet elevation gain. It works like a charm, but not everywhere in the universe! It fails to work outside of our sun! Our solar wind, far from decelerating and cooling, is actually accelerating out of our solar system to beyond 40 AU and most likely to beyond 60 AU as measured by particle monitors on board Voyager and Pioneer and Ulysees spacecraft. Rather than the 1/R^(5/2) adiabatic expansion, the solar wind follows a 1/R^0.7 acceleration profile out of our solar system. Now, what is heating the gas way out here? It isn't photons from the sun and it makes no sense for any normal mechanism. Of course, faced with such a problem the physicists involved have come up with a solution. They believe that the solar wind is expanding into a shock and that the expansion of that shock is accelerating the particles. I have tried, but this makes no intuitive sense to me. I simply fail to see why the ions emitted wouldn't have all piled up into whatever stable density profile throughout the Milky Way near our sun and to simply have settled into a steady state flow by now. All those billions of years seem to me to be enough to establish an equilibrium within our stellar neighborhood where other stars are only a couple of light years away. So, this is another arrow headed out of our solar system for anamolous accelerations. 4) In elliptical galaxies, globular clusters, and the central bulges of spiral galaxies, you have almost no gas found. It is like it is all blown out and away. The stars could not have swept up that gas because they are all emitting it in their respective solar winds. So where is it going and why? Another arrow out of solar systems for anamolous accelerations since if gravity and photons were all that were at play, they would form into some sort of fog bank somewhere as they accumulated. But instead the stuff is blown away and we find no clouds in those objects. 5) When we see two galaxies colliding, we see that despite the increase in gravity of the combined masses, the gases out and around the galaxies (neutral, cold, slow moving hydrogen), is blown away from them rather than being pulled in toward them. Another arrow outward. 6) When we see the gases outside of a single galaxy, we find that they are orbiting with far too great a circular velocity. And they are orbiting with a velocity profile as a function of the radius that simply does not match the Keplerian profile we expect. Thus, we suppose that there exists a bunch of dark matter in and around our galaxies. I could go on, but I think you get the point on the dark matter issue. There are several facts that lead to the requirement (based on current theories being valid), that there is about 90 percent of individual galaxies that is made up of matter we cannot see. It could be rocks, or a variety of objects, but not just anything as for example, if it were gas we would see absorption lines. So it can only be in certain forms. What is really odd here is that near our solar system, about 99 percent of the mass of our system is in our sun. The balance of matter is trivial. So, if we don't have a bunch of huge planets near our sun where we could see them, then why should we expect to find them outside of the galaxy on their own? Now this is an acceleration arrow that is pointing back inward toward the center of the galaxy. And, it will be difficult for you to understand why all the above arrows are exactly compatible, especially the thrust of gases outward by colliding galaxies when viewed next to gases seemingly accelerated inward to too large a degree. ********************************************************************** Here is what I am confident is going on. Space is an aether and it is a super fluidic, massive, substance. Matter is made up of resonances in that ocean of a universe. As such, the combinations of those resonances leads to a reduction in their view factor to deep space from where the acoustic energy that is forcing them to oscillate is coming from. This means that they will not be able to build up to as great a convergence, ie, the standing waves will resonantly confine less aether in the case of fusion reactions. And so in essence, you have aether being shot out of the standing waves at the acoustic velocity of the medium, c. But this leads to a huge problem. It means that you are emitting from the standing wave convergences, during exothermic reactions, aether, the substance of the ocean we call a universe. And so in essence, you are emitting "space". But if this is so, then we should see some kind of anamolous accelerations being imposed on other standing waves in and around objects that are inducing large amounts of these exothermic reactions. So we should look to our sun and see if there are any observations we have made where there are accelerations headed away from the sun. And as I showed above, there clearly are. These should be inertial accelerations, and while we think of some of the phenomena today as being EM in origin, we have found that there is a lot of reason to believe they are inertial. For example, SOHO has observed that O and H ions both have the same velocity dispersion in the solar corona. And only inertial acceleration mechanisms, and pure chance, can account for such an observation. But the only inertial mechanism we know of today is that of gravitation which cannot explain the 100 M kelvin of the O ions, so physicists have decided that the answer is "EM energy and chance cutoff levels". Of course, you understand I disagree and believe that space is expanding out of the sun just as "earth" expands out from where our tectonic plates are separating. So, you ask me what I am doing with these ideas, and I answer, trying to share them with others. You ask me if I have any evidence other than simple circumstantial evidence, and I say yes and you may or may not agree. But I didn't even go into phenomena like tunneling or the onset of chaos or all manner of other behaviors we observe, so I cannot begin to show you all of the evidence for my ideas. I guess I would just step back and claim dark matter and the inertial accelerations of ions in the solar corona, and the accelerations of shock fronts across magnetic field lines in CME's as a few of the best pieces of evidence in favor of a fluid dynamic universe. But I could equally claim to tug on your sensibility. It all comes down to this one simple question. "How could you ever induce an acceleration on one object, from another object, that leads to their accelerating toward one another?" Now I know that you all think, simple, you have an attractive force and I'll give you four of them, nuclear strong, weak, EM, and gravitation. And when you say that you think you have proven something. But then I ask you, precisely how is it that the forces you mention are transmitted from one object to another. And you will either make up some action of attractive photons, or gravitons or you will be silent. And when I ask you, how is it that any gravitational energy could possibly escape from a black hole in order to induce a pull inward? Think about that nonesense. What could a black hole possibly throw out at you to get your spacecraft to decide to fly into that hole? You just don't throw energy outward and have negative recoils. So you will say negative energy. But then what is that energy, again silence from any first principle. Now I can show you a whole host of beautiful images of quasars and million light year jets streaming out of what I will tell you are black holes that breached confinement from the flow of aether headed into them at greater than c inside of the Swarzchild radius. But you will likely still not get it. It is an ocean out there, a huge ocean. And the notions of caloric were correct. And it is not matter that is quantum mechanical, it is the ocean those particles are in that is turbulent. Brown saw this with his eyes, and we now see it with out telescopes. Later, Ross Tessien >PS: >The idea that matter is nothing more than evaporating condensed >energy resonance is disturbing to me for some reason, but for the >record, I think your view point is just as valid as any other. Yes, it leads to the arrow of time and to entropy. It also leads to the nodal structure of spacetime due to the sum of acoustic standing waves filling the univesre. And that leads to the evaporation and expansion of spacetime out of stars. But you needn't be disturbed. It also means that we are comfortably a part of a very much larger body of aether which I call a Megaverse. A huge number of expanding and contracting universes that are all fluid mechanically bound. It leads to a notion of infinity that is far greater than that of our universe, and which extends to small as well as to large scales. While this notion is a bit unsettling, it becomes less so if you just think of yourself as being on a raft on an ocean enjoying the waves. You see, that is what we are all doing. We are afloat in a huge expanse of aether and buzzing all the while. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 14:48:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA05569; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:25:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:25:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 97 14:25:21 PST From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <9701072225.AA17488 joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pons uses static calorimetry Resent-Message-ID: <"tsBIi3.0.sM1.Oriqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3182 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In response to Wharton's response to my comments: I agree that technically my nonworking version of the CETI experiment could not test your theory, since it didn't produce any apparent excess heat. Still, in my mind that tends to cast doubt (though by no means disproves)s) on the potential-shift theory of operation. Perhaps plastic cores are the key---but then what of the ceramic cores CTI has supposedly been working with? Disinformation ? :-) As for the powergen demo, using the 400 W output at a liter/min flow rate (a demo apparently witnessed by several observers, including Jed), that mean you a shifting the chemcial potential of a liter of solution by 400 W x 1 min = 24,000 J = 6000 cal. Considering that the soltion is around 0.1 M, that means it has 0.1 moles of solute in it, and if it is this (not the water) that is having its potential shifted, that amounts to a 60,000 cal/mole potential shift. That is not physically impossible, but it is pretty hefty---about the same as a nice heat of formation of some other substance. Ok, but then we have assumed that all solute passing through the cell is shifted, and this seems unlikely due to limited reaction surface available in the cell and the high flow rate. If only 10% of the solute could be shifted, that cranks it up to 600,000 cal/mole, which is beyond the range of a chemical reaction. This is why I consider your explanation on the marginal side as an explanation of the powergen demo. In my mind, there are two clear and nonexclusive (i.e. some combination of the two could occur) physical effects that need to be rigorously eliminated from the CETI device perfomance: (well, really three: the 0th is initial stored chemical energy, i.e. the initial ingredients as chemical fuel, but I think most CETI demos would run long enough to overcome this): these are the chemical potential shift, and the heat pump. One thing is certainly true: CETI and their operatives have not presented any experimental results that directly test and control for these effects. Yes, I know Jed has said he didn't feel a cold spot along the line (as should be for a heat pump), but that hardly counts as a controlled experiment. Indeed, CETI has done a poor job of defending the science of their device, and this is undoubtedly part of the problems they are having making an impact in the energy field. All we pretty much have at this point is assurance that cravens is a careful experimenter, that Miley was personally satisfied with the devices thermsal output, and that the engineering professor at U of Miss that tested it found that it seemed to work. Thats great foundation for a folk legend, but I hasten to remind folks that none of that constitutes scientific valid evidence. Detailed published results, plus independent replication, are the things needed for that, and they are both absent for the CETI device. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 17:07:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA00803; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:40:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:40:42 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:18:45 -0500 Message-ID: <970107155440_171724520 emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Subject: aether Resent-Message-ID: <"xGWD21.0.TC.9qkqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3186 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: 1. Find a massive, electromagnetically dead planet with a > synchronous orbit characteristic like the earth. > 2. Hang a magic metal wire from a synchronous satellite (plus > counterweight!) to the surface of the planet. .............................................................................. ...... No need..we know electrons have inertial mass..or they would only travel at light speed. If electrons had inertial but no gravitational mass they would be flung to the earth on the side opposite the sun. Huge currents would then flow at places like cannals and in utility ground wires. This current could be harnessed. The fact that it is not, once again demonstrates the vaility of Einstein's Principle of Equivalance. Frank Znidarsic 481 Boyer St. Johnstown, Pa. 15906 fznidarsic aol.com http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Auto links: Znidarsic's home page PICK_ME Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 17:36:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA09112; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:04:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:04:02 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:02:59 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Floyd Sweet device: construction details Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"J1jrH.0.IE2.0Alqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3189 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At the 1993 ISNE conference a man by the name of Michael Watson (from the UK) held a talk on how to build the Sweet device, with full construction plans. Has anyone built it, or know of anyone who has? -Nils Rognerud From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 18:13:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA19162; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:39:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:39:50 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32D2FA88.41C67EA6 math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 17:38:16 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Graneau's theory References: <199701072334.RAA01415 natashya.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"el3XH2.0.Gh4.ahlqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3192 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > In the very latest issue of IE (vol 2 no 10), on page 59, there is a paper > by Peter Graneau. > I know we've discussed this before but seeing it in print has gotten me > going again. Any comments on this theory? > > Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Well, surely you don't need anyone to tell you these things, but I'll be glad to provide a kneejerk, dogmatic scientific response :-) >In the introduction he says: > > Water is a liquid because the H2O molecules attract each other. Check. Batting 1.000 at this point. > The energy associated with the > attracting molecules is potential energy. Check---but the potential energy "associated" is a decrease in potential energy, not an addition of potential energy! >It was acquired from water vapor > molecules when they first condensed to rain drops. here we start to go truly astray---what is "acquired" is a reduction in potential energy of the system; what was potential went into some other form (kinetic, as in thermal motion). > The vapor molecule is > stopped when it strikes the liquid surface of a drop. Ok by me, although "stopped" is a little severe. > In the process the > kinetic energy of the vapor molecule is converted to binding > energy in the drop. This is a major error in language and/or reasoning: the kinetic energy of the incoming molecule is distributed to the atoms in the droplet as thermal energy. The binding energy of the accreted molecule also shows up also as heat in the droplet, just as when you drop a stone into a well its "binding energy" (decrease in potential---gravitational in this analogy) shows up in the motion of the well water. > Vapor molecules are accelerated by atmospheric heat from solar > radiation. True enough, i.e. the atmospheric heat energy is what lifts them out of the potential well they are in. > In this way solar energy is concentrated and stored in ordinary > water. Say what? AS the previous sentence suggests, solar energy is stored in the latent heat of vaporization; if you get the vaop to condense, you get it back as heat. So? It is not news to anyone that you get heat by condensing vaoprs, or other phase changes. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 19:05:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA03442; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:40:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:40:48 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:39:35 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970107184544_1044167239 emout07.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: the year in review Resent-Message-ID: <"3oBN4.0.ir.kamqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3193 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I started 1997 just having returned from Power Gen 95 and witnessing CETI's 1000 watt reactor. I met Hal Fox at Power Gen, He told me that this technology would replace fossel fuels within 12 years. Jed was remarking that large reactors could be built, the only item that was needed was more beads. Gene Mallove remarked that the utility giants are a "dinosaurs". Jim Reding told me at Powergen that the first commersial prototypes would appear within a year and that in two years they would start to have a commercial impact. Miley told me that the beads are easy to make and he has developed a new sputtering technique that makes them in mass. Yury was coming to the US and was going to fix the error of the past. .......................................................................... Now one year later. CETI cannot make any more good beads. The conferences are showing cells that produce less than a watt some of the time. No 10 Kw cell anywhere to be seen...In fact, now more 1 KW cells to be seen. I still trying to get the Yusmar to work. Did I get caught in a time warp and did I land back in 1991? Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 19:26:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA07305; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:00:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:00:53 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32D30DAF.167EB0E7 math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 18:59:59 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the year in review References: <970107184544_1044167239 emout07.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"q7ykB3.0.zn1.Ytmqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3194 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > > I started 1997 just having returned from Power Gen 95 > ...Jim Reding told me...commersial prototypes would > appear within a year... > Now one year later. CETI cannot make any more good beads. > The conferences are showing cells that produce less than a watt > ... no more 1 KW cells to be seen...I still > trying to get the Yusmar to work. > > Did I get caught in a time warp and did I land back in 1991? > Nope, you just dropped back into reality. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 20:29:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA24650; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:04:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:04:38 -0800 From: Xkan aol.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:02:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970107222238_1459171449 emout19.mail.aol.com> To: fstenger interlaced.net cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"uupBS.0.016.Jpnqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3199 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Stenger wrote: <> You are right. In the heat of the moment, I said something stupid about electrons which I later regretted. In fact, I have never dreamed a weightless electron, except in a charged hollow sphere(Remember the Aladin's lamp I was refering to?). My formal apologies to the electrons (kowtowing). Thanks for the information on Tolman's experiments and Ross's aether theory. It's very educational. Xiaobo The renegade physicist From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 21:33:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA10576; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:10:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:10:54 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:08:06 -0700 (MST) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether In-Reply-To: <199701072208.OAA08103 li.oro.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FEkTY2.0.8b2.Rnoqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3201 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > From: Ross Tessien >>We call the """observation""" of that motion, energy, ....... ....... > In other words, if you have a large interaction, but it is equal, > statistically, from all sides, then it will be as though there is no > interaction...... ...... >>A virtual particle, for example, is simply a standing wave that > formed due to some random convergence of acoustic wave energy """in the ocean""" > of aether but which did not have enough momentum to remain in motion and so > it dispersed..... ..... >> and call these net thrusts, "forces". Ross, I'm 'trying :)' to throw out all 7 (taught Laws).. opening my mind to your 'singular logical aether' (which by the way: I love to do, this is more fun(!) to think about since 'chess!').. You seem to be preserving E=mc^2 and earlier foundations of spin (albiet 1/2's) .. CAN I ASK you a 'personal' question about when you sit back and think about this(?).. you mentioned before bouy's floating on the waves surface(1) and then the entire concept being an Ocean(2) of Aether.. DO YOU SEE THIS AS (a)UNDER the ocean (as a fish say?) looking at your surroundings? or AS (b)OVER the Ocean (as a gull say??) watching the universe below?? OR IF BOTH points of observations are needed, (probably my short coming) then isn't that two points of 'reference / view / Aether?).. Sorry to bother you with this, but it IS a Brain Tickler (& I LOVE IT).. Want to make sure I can follow your future thoughts when presented! c-u-later, steve ekwall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 21:50:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA21203; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:35:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:35:35 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "tessien oro.net" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: aether Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:34:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"66Y2M2.0.CB5.5tjqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3185 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Russ Interesting theory. I have always thought that standing waves are fixed in space, resulting from constructive interference between an incident wave and a reflected wave. The simplest example is a rope tied to a wall and shaken by a child at the other end. When the child moves his arm at the correct frequency, the wave traveling down the rope is met by one returning from the wall, and nodes and maxima are produced. Changing the frequency, he can produce more or less nodes, etc. Where are the walls in the aether? -Hank Scudder PS: Did you ever do your experiment on the rotating top? What were your results? From vortex-l-request ESKIMO.COM Tue Jan 7 22:18:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA21038; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:34:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:34:20 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:34:01 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701072334.RAA01415 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l ESKIMO.COM From: Scott Little Subject: Graneau's theory Resent-Message-ID: <"6oCco2.0.a85.xrjqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l ESKIMO.COM Reply-To: vortex-l ESKIMO.COM X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3184 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request ESKIMO.COM Status: RO X-Status: In the very latest issue of IE (vol 2 no 10), on page 59, there is a paper by Peter Graneau. In the introduction he says: Water is a liquid because the H2O molecules attract each other. This attraction is the basis of liquid cohesion. The energy associated with the attracting molecules is potential energy. It was acquired from water vapor molecules when they first condensed to rain drops. The vapor molecule is stopped when it strikes the liquid surface of a drop. In the process the kinetic energy of the vapor molecule is converted to binding energy in the drop. Vapor molecules are accelerated by atmospheric heat from solar radiation. In this way solar energy is concentrated and stored in ordinary water. I know we've discussed this before but seeing it in print has gotten me going again. Any comments on this theory? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 7 23:54:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA13496; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:32:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:32:47 -0800 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:32:35 -0800 Message-Id: <199701080732.XAA24592 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"BiYyr2.0.iI3.Rsqqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3205 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> From: Ross Tessien >>>We call the """observation""" of that motion, energy, ....... ....... >> In other words, if you have a large interaction, but it is equal, >> statistically, from all sides, then it will be as though there is no >> interaction...... ...... >>>A virtual particle, for example, is simply a standing wave that >> formed due to some random convergence of acoustic wave energy """in the >ocean""" >> of aether but which did not have enough momentum to remain in motion and so >> it dispersed..... ..... >>> and call these net thrusts, "forces". > >Ross, > I'm 'trying :)' to throw out all 7 (taught Laws).. opening my mind to >your 'singular logical aether' (which by the way: I love to do, this is >more fun(!) to think about since 'chess!').. You seem to be preserving >E=mc^2 and earlier foundations of spin (albiet 1/2's) .. If you want to see spin 1/2 motion in a one dimensional quasi fluid consisting of beads, then check out the Sci Am article on oscillons about two months ago now. These are little peaks on a shaker table that moves up and down with a bunch of beads on it. The up down motions are analogous to the acoustic compression waves permeating the universe of aether, and which we call spacetime. The oscillons, are one dimensional "vortices" in those beads. To convert over to aether, you need the shaker table compression waves to be coming in from all directions at once, through 3D and not just the one vertical axis of motion. Then you wind up with essentially the vortex sponge studied by Maxwell, Thomson and others, and from which Maxwells equations were derived. To get the oscillon, you need a 3D standing wave in that ocean of aether vapor called a universe. The oscillon is just a vertical motion of the beads, but you will see what they are in that article. For a matter standing wave, the Feb 95 issue of Sci Am which discusses sonoluminescence would be a better model. If you look at the profile of the bubble diameter following the initial collapse, you will see that the bubble bounces after first collapse and SL flash (forget about the process sonoluminescence and just focus on the bubble motions). That bubble bounces following the initial collapse, and if you measure the time on the graph you will find it has about a 1 Mhz natural frequency. If you measure the amount of decrease per cycle in the damped sinusoidal motions, then you will find that the bubble is an underdamped oscillator with an amplification factor of about 3 or 4. Meaning that given a source of energy at its natural frequency, it would oscillate at a larger amplitude than the amount of amplitude it would otherwise attain from a single input of energy. This is just like a kid on a swing that will rise to a height that is greater if you continue to tap the kid in phase and frequency match with their natural pendulum resonance on the swing. We do this naturally and don't give it a thought, but kids on swings are underdamped oscillators too. So, with that, you have the motions of spacetime and of matter. Couple the spacetime motions to a matter standing wave and you have a powered oscillator called matter. And it has "energy" according to E=mc^2 because it is aether in motion. Cyclic, pulsating motion, just as studied by Bjerknes and Thomson (Kelvin) in about the 1870's. You know what they found? They found that pulsations that are 180 out of phase match tend to "attract", and those which were in phase match tend to repulse. And guess what they found with the oscillons? You got it, the same thing. > CAN I ASK you a 'personal' question about when you sit back and think >about this(?).. you mentioned before bouy's floating on the waves >surface(1) >and then the entire concept being an Ocean(2) of Aether.. DO YOU SEE THIS >AS (a)UNDER the ocean (as a fish say?) looking at your surroundings? or >AS (b)OVER the Ocean (as a gull say??) watching the universe below?? We are fish! But what is more, just like the fish that is almost entirely made of water, we are made of aether. There is nothing anywhere that is not aether, or aether in motion. To think of it properly, you must think in terms of the universe being an ocean of vapor like water vapor. This is not the same as our atmosphere because our atmosphere is not on the verge of condensation, whereas the aether is. So think more like an atmosphere of steam, water vapor, and thats all. Then, into that ocean add a bunch of acoustic energy running in all directions through all locations. Now, if you have too much energy running through a given location, accidentally, what will happen? Well, too much convergence of the acoustic wave energy and you will get a condensation to happen spontaneously. And we call these virtual particles. For matter, think in terms of droplets of fog if that helps. But the droplets are surrounded by a standing wave of the vapor which has the form sort of like the SL bubbles following collapse wher they take on a sort of bunch of onion skins of layers of acoustic energy. That is just the standing wave plain and simple. The condensation droplets are at the Planck scale which is where things go whacko in QM. Condensation is why. As far as other places condensation occur, that is only in black holes. This time, though, it is due to a kinetic flow of aether into a small compact region. The convergence leads to a 1/R^4 energy density amplification. And so you wind up with a huge build up in either the KE or the PE of the fluid that is convergently flowing (induced to do so originally by the collapse of a star). The difference as I said is in the nature of a black hole. It is extremely pressurized. I calculated that aether condenses at E111 eV/m^3 energy density inside of matter standing waves. But with a flow into the hole, you are condensing a huge core of liquid aether that is at extreme pressure. So, if you ever fail to converge enough of the vapor into that tiny region to maintain confinement of that core, it will explode outward again and become space. If that happens to an entire core all at once, then you will get this huge spherical expansion and boiling of that aether condensate. We call this the big bang. And the droplets that have not yet vaporized we call matter. The process of vaporization, we call exothermy, ie fusion and fission and chemical reactions which all release some of the aether confined in their standing waves to buoy the dropping pressure of the ocean of aether we call a universe. The boiling of that core is what led to some of the droplets being trapped in the acoustic nodes, and their being trapped is what led to the locations and phase and frequency of the timings of their oscillations being all synchronized. And that is what formed "spacetime". But inside our universe today, we still can have smaller black holes. In fact, I think it may well be possible that some survived the shock front of the big bang as our universe exploded into existence bashing the galaxies that had not yet flowed into a monstrous black hole that swallowed an entire universe like ours, but one which was converging rather than diverging (Hubble flow). Inside our universe, we see the evidence of the emissions of that aether out of the easiest to form breach of confinement, namely the vortices that form above and below the acretian disk. When those tornado like vortices of aether flowing into the bh penetrate into the highly pressurized core of condensed aether far enough, then that core will breach confinement. That will let go of a huge jet of vaporizing aether in the form of the emission of new spacetime (following the translation of the acoustic structures of our universe into that newly released aether). Hubble recently found a suspected bh core that was 20 light years away from center of the host galaxy. And, several quasars are found with just one jet. It is not clear if there is really only just one jet, or if the images can only detect one jet. But if the jets are emitted space, in essence, then it is not surprising that they might be difficult to detect. But I really like the bh that is 20 light years off center. What could have caused that I wonder? Well, if you want to see a bunch of black holes that breached confinement, then check out this web site; http://www.nrao.edu/~gtaylor/gallery.html http://www.cv.nrao.edu/~abridle/radiogal.htm#3C31 And for stuff on coronal mass ejections, and the solar wind, check out a search for Donald Reames. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 01:17:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA06335; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 00:56:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 00:56:01 -0800 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 09:56:01 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Graneau's theory In-Reply-To: <199701072334.RAA01415 natashya.eden.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"f7bE72.0.tY1.V4sqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3207 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Scott Little wrote: > In the very latest issue of IE (vol 2 no 10), on page 59, there is a paper > by Peter Graneau. In the introduction he says: > > Water is a liquid because the H2O molecules attract each other. This > attraction is the basis of liquid cohesion. The energy associated with the > attracting molecules is potential energy. It was acquired from water vapor > molecules when they first condensed to rain drops. The vapor molecule is > stopped when it strikes the liquid surface of a drop. In the process the > kinetic energy of the vapor molecule is converted to binding energy in the > drop. Vapor molecules are accelerated by atmospheric heat from solar > radiation. In this way solar energy is concentrated and stored in ordinary > water. > > I know we've discussed this before but seeing it in print has gotten me > going again. Any comments on this theory? Yes: He's got it the wrong way around. Potential energy comes about when you do work to separate two water molecules; you can get it back when you let them get together again. When a speeding water vapour molecule - having been heated by the sun - hits liquid water, it is in a state of high potential energy with respect to its state in liquid water. When it joins the other liquid molecules, some heat is released due to the bond being formed and the heat it had is also given to the water. When steam condenses into water, heat is given off; when water evaporates, the water is cooled. So condensation into water is a way of storing the Sun's heat ONLY in the sense that the heat picked up by the vapour is given to the liquid and heat transport from a liquid is slower than from a vapour, so the liquid acts as a temporary store or, if you like, a slow heat leak. The bonding between the water molecules is unfavourable in this context, it is NOT a store of heat but the reverse. If I remember it rightly, the bonding is electrostatic, water being polarised slightly. There is some short-range order, sort of crystalline, but its extent is limited by the jiggling of the molecules because of their heat. The less they jiggle, the better they can join up, and when you get to the freezing point, they can do it right through the body. Graneau should have read some books on water structure before writing the piece. Whether his error impinges on the rest of his piece, I can't of course say. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | | http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~britz | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 06:21:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA17623; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 05:59:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 05:59:28 -0800 Date: 08 Jan 97 08:57:37 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: the year in review Message-ID: <970108135736_72240.1256_EHB78-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"iRuUG.0.9J4.tWwqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3211 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Frank Znidarsic writes: Now one year later. CETI cannot make any more good beads. That is incorrect. They can make as many as they want. They choose not to, because of their business strategy. That is what they have told me several times. I think it is probably true. After all, fabricating the beads is not all that difficult, and Miley's scaled-down bead packs produce more output per watt of input than Patterson's original beads, particularly at low power. Heat generation performance and reliability have been improving, but they say they do not want to draw attention to that fact. Their strategy is now (and always has been) to keep this field quiet and to pursue the research on their own with as little competition and outside help as they can manage. That's what they say. That is also what people at IMRA tell me. I suspect that is the strategy at E-Quest, Hydrocatalysis and Arata's lab too, but nobody from those places has told me so. It is precisely the same strategy that the Wrights and Charles Flint devised between 1903 and 1908, as you can see from their correspondence. It failed then and it will fail now, for the same reason: the technology is not advanced enough to be developed by small, isolated groups. The conferences are showing cells that produce less than a watt some of the time. No 10 Kw cell anywhere to be seen... That is correct, but it is not because of technical limitations. Several people could make a 10 Kw reactor, but those who have the money do not want to, and those who want to don't have the money. Progress in this field is being held up by politics and misguided, self-destructive greed. (A shot of self-serving, wisely focused greed would be good medicine.) The problem is that these scientists know little about technology, nothing about business, and less-than-nothing about history. I still trying to get the Yusmar to work. I do not think the Yusmar can work. I recommend you abandon it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 08:31:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA15641; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:21:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:21:24 -0800 Date: 08 Jan 97 11:18:24 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Aether Message-ID: <970108161824_76016.2701_JHC108-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"DIpNA3.0.Mp3.-byqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3212 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: >> When those tornado like vortices of aether flowing into the bh penetrate into the highly pressurized core of condensed aether far enough, then that core will breach confinement.<< Fascinating theories, Ross! It seems that the exploding of huge localized bh's could explain the non-homogeneous distribution of matter in the universe, i.e. the recently discovered "great walls" and "galaxy bubbles". When will your book be published? Have you selected a title? Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 08:58:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA22866; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:47:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:47:04 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:46:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970108111057_1123816767 emout18.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: aether and standing waves Resent-Message-ID: <"WcCFH2.0.Cb5.6-yqo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3213 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Russ Interesting theory. I have always thought that standing waves are fixed in space, resulting from constructive interference between an incident wave and a reflected wave. The simplest example is a rope tied to a wall and shaken by a child at the other end. When the child moves his arm at the correct frequency, the wave traveling down the rope is met by one returning from the wall, and nodes and maxima are produced. Changing the frequency, he can produce more or .............................................................................. ........................ I've worked out another idea with this concept (with H. Heffner's help). This ideas is that the DeBroglie wavelength of matter is a beat note formed by the Compton wavelength and its doppler shifted reflection. On my "Book on a Disk" a have an animation that shows this. I have placed the animation (temp.exe) on my Web site for your viewing. Download it execute it and you will see how beat notes are formed in real time. ftp://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/temp.exe Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 10:29:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA03024; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:19:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:19:42 -0800 From: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr Message-Id: <199701091805.TAA17329 mccir3.crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Subject: E-Quest To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 9 Jan 97 19:05:21 MET Cc: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr () X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Resent-Message-ID: <"M9JJF1.0.kj.SK-qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3214 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Attention all Vortexians I have read with great interest the critics made regarding Russ George work. I consider myself as a scientist having done material sciences and surface science for 28 years, in Marseilles, Paris, Grenoble and Berkeley at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory for several years. I have 45 scientific papers in the field of experimental su rface science, catalysis, chemisorption and physisorption. In addition I have the privilege of having worked in four different aspects of cold fusion. I have performed my own experiments with solid state electrolytes in Berkeley, then in Grenoble with Lon champt, I have participated in experiments with palladium and heavy water electrolysis similar to the original P&F experiment, and I have worked on Patterson type beads and light water with Lonchampt. Finally for more than three month in 1995, I have work ed with Russ George and Roger Stringham with the Mark II cavitation device. This is a long introduction, but I think that it is necessary to explain that this is not just a one day visit. So my conclusions are based on a direct on hand experience. First of all Russ and Roger did not hide anything to me. We worked in a very open and friendly atmosphere. For those who don't know, E-Quest is located in a garage style laboratory. For non US vortexians, this is a plus in the US....However it was during the Californian summer, and the Silicon Valley becomes very hot at times, and the room temperature fluctuates a lot. So making good calorimetry in these circumstances is not an easy job. As a comparison Pons has a thermostated room, and Lonchampt utilizes a small thermostated cabinet where the cells are located. When I arrived there, I helped them set up a protocol for calorimetry and calibration. The Mark II system has two compratments: The bottom one is filled with light water, and this is where the ultrasound is prodced. The top section is filled with heavy wa ter, and this is where the palladium foil is located, and where things happen. As it is impossible to separate the heat generated by the ultra sound itself in the bottom compartment from the heat generated in the top compartment, we decided to add the two numbers, and to measure the total heat produced in the system. We had two circulation loops, one for each compartment, going into an exchange reservoir filled with 15 liters (if I remember correctly) of water. This water being in equilibrium with the room temperature. Because of the room temperature variations we use d as a means of measurement the delta T between the water tank and the room. This method limited our work to steady states only. For a given heat produced in the reactor corresponds a value of delta T at steady state. Calibration From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 10:33:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA05810; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:23:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:23:34 -0800 Date: 08 Jan 97 13:19:08 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Open letter to NHE sent Message-ID: <970108181908_72240.1256_EHB122-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"WWZt9.0.fP1.MO-qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3215 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I.E. #10 includes my Open Letter to the NHE. I am sending copies of the magazine with the attached cover letter to various people. On the advice of Ed Storms, Tadahiko Mizuno and several people here I toned down the Letter considerably. Also, as I translated it into Japanese I just couldn't bring myself to be so confrontational. When I finished I went back and adjusted the English version to match. Apparently my personality changes in Japanese. There has been no response from the NHE except for the comments here by Elliot Kennel. Frankly, I do not expect any response, or any changes in the program. But you never know! Maybe they will listen. After all, I list 17 references to leading scientists in this field who have shown fundamental mistakes in the NHE experimental technique. They have no reason to listen to me, but they ought to pay some attention to papers by Ikegami, Fleischmann, Storms, Bockris, McKubre, etc. I hope they do. Thanks again to everyone for your assistance and corrections. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - January 7, 1997 Dr. Naoto Asami The Institute of Applied Energy New Hydrogen Energy Laboratory 2-3-5 Techno Park, Shimonopporo Atsubetsuku, Sapporo Hokkaido 004 Japan Dear Dr. Asami, Enclosed please find issue #10 of our magazine. On pages 28 - 31 is an Open Letter to the NHE Directorate, in English and Japanese. If you would like to respond or write a rebuttal, we would be happy to publish your comments in the next issue. Please feel free to write in English or Japanese. I am mailing copies of the magazine to: Dr. Hideo Ikegami Dr. Elliot Kennel Dr. Kazuaki Matsui Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno Dr. Tadayoshi Ohmori Dr. Makoto Okamoto Dr. Edmund Storms Asahi Shimbun Mainichi Shimbum Nippon Keizai Shimbun Oyou Butsuri Yomiuri Shimbun Please let me know if you would like additional copies. Sincerely, Jed Rothwell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 10:43:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA11824; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:33:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:33:42 -0800 From: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr Message-Id: <199701091826.TAA17363 mccir3.crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Subject: E-Quest part 2 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 9 Jan 97 19:26:24 MET Cc: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr () X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Resent-Message-ID: <"qNM182.0.fu2.4Y-qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3216 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sorry my message got stopped, here is what comes next: Calibration. This is the difficult part of the work. I forgot to mention that we had a resistive heater in the top compartment near the target for calibration purposes, and also to change the temperature of the reactor at a given input power in order to check the impo rtance of temperature on thereaction rate. We have plotted delta T versus the input resistive power at steady state, and this became our calibration curve. Then we used the cavitation system, without target, or with stainless steel to determine the efficiency factor of the cavitation generator. We knew the power input from the wall, and determine the heat produced with the calibration curve. As far as I remember this number was around 0.5. Then we ran the experiments with various targets. Results Systematically all experimental results with the target were above the calibration curve, indicating that there was more heat produced than introduced. We measured numbers up to may be 30% of exces heat with respect to the cavitation energy introduced. Ho wever you must be aware that a lot of this energy is used to heat up the bottom compartment, not to produce bubbles. Therefore the actual excess is is much higher. Conclusion During my stay at E-Quest I can conclude that there is certainly a phenomenon going on. It is hard to give hard numbers because of the design of the Mark II and also because of the "lab" conditions. I was going to loose weight in this sauna, but thnks to great burritos, I managed to keep my weight... I believe the mark III, and the new reacors now under construction are easier to operate, and the calorimetry will be most likley better. I had a great time there, with two good friends, and the burritos. However I do not miss the high frequency noise coming from the reactor that gives you the feeling of being seatted on a dentist chair all day long. Our photographer neighbourg at a very ba d time. Jean-Paul Biberian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 11:47:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA30352; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:38:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:38:19 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701081334.ZM18162 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:34:39 -0600 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Tessien Aether Hypothesis Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"7Bj532.0.AQ7.fU_qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3217 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Possible experiment to substantiate: Create a spherical array of acoustic emitters inside an air tight sphere pointing inward and focused on the theoretical center. Attach an addition volume reservoir to the sphere. Evacuate all the air and replace with pressurized helium. Set each emitter to a different or infinitely random changing but never similar frequency. Maintain identical amplitude for all. The converging resonances should push a density pocket of helium to the center of the sphere relative to the amplitude of the emitters. This creation of this density should show up as a pressure drop in the reservoir tank as the closed system will seek to equalize the now reduced(ing) volume in the sphere. This drop in pressure would allow remote measurement of the localized effect without disturbing it. Using the TAH (sorry if you have a cooler acronym Ross!) this should happen because the helium atoms will be naturally resonating at the same frequency, cancel each other's resonance fronts, and subsequently be pushed together by the converging, out of phase, emitter resonance fronts bombarding the helium toward the center of the sphere. Simple and crude, but would it parallel the aether theory Ross maintains about convergent resonant energy and matter? Sphere size, number/pattern of emitters, frequency, amplitude, presure required all being theoretical values for now, can this system roughly illustrate the point? If it works, It would not necessarily be proof, just reproducible supporting evidence of the validity of the concept. To some degree, such a system may already exist. I seem to recall reading about new refrigerant condenser that operates acoustically, not mechanically. I want to say the article was in PopSci in the last 1-2 years, so not really sure if it is real or not. Can't remember details. Could still be lost in the mire of R&D. Does PopSci have an article search engine on their page? Any thoughts? -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 11:48:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA30448; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:38:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:38:44 -0800 Date: 08 Jan 97 14:37:19 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Bravo Jean-Paul! Message-ID: <970108193719_72240.1256_EHB144-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"CXJN-1.0.cR7.2V_qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3218 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex AT LAST, we have the beginning of a comprehensive description of E-Quest's calorimetry, from Jean-Paul Biberian. Thank you so much Jean-Paul. We now understand there is a resistive heater; null runs with stainless steel targets; that ambient air temperature fluctuations are a big problem, and so on. This kind of detail can give the research credibility. I cannot understand -- I will NEVER understand -- why this experiment was not written up at this level of detail years ago, and published with appropriate calibration curves, graphs, schematics, estimates of errors and so on. At last someone has made a coherent case for taking this work seriously. Please let us please hear more. In my previous message I wrote that to the best of my knowledge, E-Quest has not allowed any independent, outside evaluation of their device. Now we hear from Jean-Paul with the news that they let him in and cooperated fully. He is certainly a well-qualified outside observer. I am delighted to hear of this cooperation. But why on earth has it been kept secret?!? When I wrote that, why did Russ George get upset? He should posted a message immediately saying: "that's incorrect, Jean-Paul Biberian worked here for 3 months in 1995, and he can be reached at such-and-such a number." Give us the facts: names, dates, telephone numbers, publications. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 12:20:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA05801; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:09:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:09:43 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr" , Vortex-L Subject: RE: E-Quest part 2 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:08:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"R5rI1.0.JQ1.1y_qo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3219 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jean-Paul I work in Non Destructive Testing, and we use ultrasound to image welds and such in our rocket engines. Can you describe the transducer you used for these experiments? What frequency do you drive the water, what type of crystal you drive it with, what voltage, continuous sine wave, or pulsed, or whatever. Am I going to cause CF in the welds I am inspecting? It would not be non-destructive anymore, would it? -Hank Scudder ---------- From: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr Subject: E-Quest part 2 Date: Thursday, January 09, 1997 11:26AM Sorry my message got stopped, here is what comes next: Calibration. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 13:04:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA19698; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:55:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:55:00 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701082047.MAA00904 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Inertial Electron Pump To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:47:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <199701080000.BAA02352 atom.bbtt.com> from "Stefan Hartmann" at Jan 8, 97 01:00:55 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lFyo32.0.Zp4.Tc0ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3220 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Stenger writes: > Setup: A rotating metal disk generates an emf, V volts, from its axis > to its rim because of the free electrons in the metal being > "centrifuged" outward by the rotatation. This seems intuitively right, but it may be wrong. Electrons are free to move along a conductor which forms a closed loop, but are much less "free" to move in a conductor which does not form a closed loop. Due to quantum exclusion effects, electrons must avoid piling up on themselves. There is a discussion about this in the following references. Edward Teller, "Electromagnetism and Gravitation", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 74 (1977) L.I. Schiff and M.V. Barnhill, Phys. Rev. 151, Page 1067 (1966) Teller speaks thusly about it. "Electric potentials due to centrifugal forces do occur in rotating metals. The idea that the free electrons are crowded toward toward bigger radii is naive. The main effect of the centrifugal forces is exercised on the positive ions. The density will be lower near the axis of rotation than at bigger radii. The electrons will neutralize the positive ions. However, when the degeneracy of the electron gas is taken into account the electrons are squeezed out of the denser regions. Thus, a small positive charge will appear near the surface of the rotating body." It is possible that a similar thing may contribute to the Hooper/Edwards effect (an electric field external to a current carrying conductor). The electric field from the self-Hall effect, also know as pinch effect, may be limited by electron degeneracy and unable to balance, and fully compensate for the electric field developed due to relativistic effects (charges in motion). Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 14:41:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA07348; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:06:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:06:09 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:05:48 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Inertial Electron Pump Resent-Message-ID: <"iTOSB.0.fo1.Df1ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3221 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To answer Frank Stenger's question: >Now, how about rotating ionic conductors - electrolytes? If we have >a liquid electrolyte with a great difference in mass between the + and >- ions, can we centrifuge the charges apart by rotating the stuff? >Can we get inertial polarization? How big can it be? What can we do >with it? Why are we here -----------------?????????????? Yes this inertial polarization should exist. It should be the same as the gravitational polarization that exists in the Earth's ionosphere and has been measured. There the gravitational force difference is between electrons and ions, mostly O(16)+ . The same would be true for the rotating fluid with (mass+ - mass-) * v*v/r = e E where e is the charge of the electron and E is the induced polarization electric field. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 14:43:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA08012; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:08:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:08:07 -0800 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:07:04 -0800 (PST) From: Nils Rognerud To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Online Magnet Design Guide... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"oe0E33.0.-y1.4h1ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3222 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FYI. http://www.netdirect.net/magnetix/design_guide.html#materials -Nils Rognerud From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 14:55:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA12393; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:22:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:22:50 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970108142307.00972ebc mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 14:23:11 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Epitaxy Subject: Re: Lenz's Law..PM configuration... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"0ql9X.0.V13.tu1ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3224 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Appears correct to me although I don't think Greg Watson will like it. Comments anybody ? At 01:04 PM 1/8/97 +0100, you wrote: > >Well, that 2 S-S PMs would attract the iron plate better than >2 N-S alligned PMs is pretty clear ! >With the S-S configuration allmost all flux is coming out of the gap, >cause the poles repell each other, so this flux "grabbs" all material >it can attract ! >With the N-S configuration, only some stray-flux is coming out of the gap, >thus less flux to "grabb" any iron material is there at a distance ! >Pretty easy to visualize and understand ! > >Regards, Stefan. >-- >Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann >Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany >NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 >email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de >Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de >Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de >My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 15:34:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA28799; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:23:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:23:48 -0800 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:23:17 -0800 Message-Id: <199701082323.PAA10629 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis Resent-Message-ID: <"ZXgaJ1.0.W17.xn2ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3229 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Possible experiment to substantiate: > >Create a spherical array of acoustic emitters inside an air tight >sphere pointing inward and focused on the theoretical center. Attach >an addition volume reservoir to the sphere. Evacuate all the air and >replace with pressurized helium. Set each emitter to a different or >infinitely random changing but never similar frequency. Maintain >identical amplitude for all. I have thought a lot about this and came up with a less difficult and more dramatic device you might build if you have the electronic talent. Instead of helium, which most people don't have access to, use water steam. Evacuate the air as you said, and fill the chamber with steam at just below the saturation value, which is analogous to the aether of the universe which winds up condensing at the Planck scale of the convergent resonances we call electron muon and tau. Use some ultrasonic drivers that are opperating at a frequency that **does not** excite the internal molecular resonances of the H2O molecule. I think I calculate that a freq. of about 100 Khz to 1 Mhz ought to work. Basically, what I would do is to calculate the velocity of sound in the steam, and then select a physical size that corresponds to the size of droplets of water in fog. Then, place a bunch of those speakers around the enclosure like you say. But you don't need a sphere, though you could create a large convergence if you did. The reason is because you will induce a structure of standing waves throughout the volume of that enclosure even if it is a cubic or rectangular sort of a room. And at each of the nodes of that acoustic energy, you will either increase the density or decrease the density of the vapor. But if you are near the saturation pressure and properties of the vapor, then when you increase the density a bit, you will induce in those nodal locations, condensation. This way, you will easily know that you have succeeded because you will be able to look through a window into the enclosure, heck you could line all the walls with glass as that is a pretty good acoustic reflector anyway (you want to maximize internal reflections to maintain as much acoustic energy in there as possible and to lose as little as possible due to attenuation at the surfaces and you don't want to heat the vapor any more than necessary either since that will drive up the pressure to which you must get the vapor to induce droplet formation.) Basically, this would be like a cloud chamber. OK, so why would you bother? Well, here is a technological freebie. If you build this initial device, then it should become clear that by adjusting the frequencies and the phase angles of the speakers, all of the constructive nodes will move in position. The motion is not easy to grasp if you haven't worked with phased array radars and or with MRI scanners or with ultrasound scanner technologies. But basically, this is the reverse of those processes. You are putting in energy nodes where you want then as opposed to the MRI scanners that listen to where the resonant energy is arriving from and then then construct a 3D profile of the tissue in the brain or whatever. The essence of what I am saying here is that this device would be able to "materialize" a 3D pattern of water droplets in mid air suspended in a manner a lot like the atom traps that use laser light as the acoustic energy (of course it is em energy if you don't believe in aether or standing waves). So, if anyone wants to build this device then you will have the ability to go on and to form 3D televisions and computer monitors which would have a tremendous amount of application potential as you may have heard of the crystals and lasers doing the same thing. This device would be cheap and large, and I don't think I need to tell you the market value of those properties. This device would in a sense, be a sort of cloud chamber! In fact, here is a little widget that could sell as next years Christmas presents. The executive rain maker. Use a small, say 6 inch sphere. Then emit acoustic energy into that sphere with a frequency that sets up a standing wave in the inside, and other energy that is focused on the center. You can use a lot of frequencies, but you need to get a good focus at the center, and you could use just one frequency if it managed to converge on center. By filling that sphere with water vapor, and then the acoustic energy, you should be able to induce a droplet to form in mid air. If you select an acoustic frequency that has a wavelength that is too long to support that droplet, ie the droplet is say 1/8 inch in diameter when fully formed, then gravity will cause it to fall from the convergent node. So, by forming the vapor inside, and then by inputting the acoustic energy, you should be able to make little rain drops fall continuously from the center of the sphere! I think it would sell, but then I like dumb widgets like this one. It would be sort of like the spark lightening generators. The difference between this and the device you outlined is that the materials are a lot easier to come by. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 15:35:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA28900; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:24:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:24:05 -0800 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:23:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199701082323.PAA10623 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aether Resent-Message-ID: <"Y4MkR1.0.v27.4o2ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3230 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Ross Tessien wrote: > >>> When those tornado like vortices of >aether flowing into the bh penetrate into the highly pressurized core of >condensed aether far enough, then that core will breach confinement.<< > >Fascinating theories, Ross! It seems that the exploding of huge localized bh's >could explain the non-homogeneous distribution of matter in the universe, i.e. >the recently discovered "great walls" and "galaxy bubbles". When will your book >be published? Have you selected a title? To grasp the walls, it works better if you read up on the Harmonics theory of Ray Tomes. I fully agree that the behaviors he mentions ought to exist in the universe because the universe is an ocean not a vacuum. When you deal with resonances, he notices that if you combine factors, that leads to the numbers of waveforms that are coincident at a particular scale distance. And that leads to the accumulation of aether, and aether standing waves (aka matter) at those scales. Thus, you wind up with sort of bubbles at all scales, with certain scales being more important. You can read up on his stuff by doing a web search or look for his name in any of the physics newsgroups. Regarding a title, I think, "Megaverse" is going to be it. The reason is due to something I haven't mentioned in this group. You see, if you have no attraction mechanisms pulling anything anywhere, then you can still get all of the behaviors we see if you have resonances. Thus, the interference of wave energy that is or is not in phase with a given oscillation will lead to constructive or destructive interference of that oscillation. And that leads to accelerations. I hope you took the time to look at the quasar images as they are truly spectacular. Keep in mind you are looking at radio energy and not light energy. That is the turbulence of the outflow of brand new spacetime, as it mixes with our universe of aether and the acoustic vibrations in our aether which we call spacetime. Now if you think about a huge black hole that breached all at once, rather than out through some minor breaches in confinement at the poles as in quasars, then you will note that the expansion will run away and expand spherically out into the surrounding region. And you will also notice that if you had to confine the black hole core with an in flow of aether in the first place, then there had to have been aether out there that was flowing into that hole. What I am trying to show you in a very succinct manner is that the notion that there exist no attraction force leads innevitably to the realization that our universe cannot be the only one that exists. There had to have been a flow of a universe into a black hole core in order for that core to have breached and then expanded with a huge shock front. And that shock front had to have blasted any matter and galaxies in its way, to oblivion. But what if you were a ways out from the origin of the breach of confinement. Say you were a billion light years from the origin, and the shock front had been reduced in amplitude. What would happen to black holes and stars and galaxies that had existed way out there? Well, if you see why I am forced to expect there are lots of universes all in resonance, then you will see why I am forced to look out in deep space for some sort of evidence that there were objects that managed to penetrate in through our expanding shock front of our big bang following the weakening of that shock front. And so what sorts of things might you look for? Well, tattered galaxies at large redshift. Black holes that survived but breached confinement at large redshift. And galaxies that have high metalicities and are seemingly mature at large redshifts where we ought to expect only infant first generation stars to exist with low metalicities. Well, we find all of these things out there. So, Megaverse I think may be the banner of the title. A secondary heading might deal with "There exist in nature, no attractive forces" or "Aether, standing waves and the nature of nature" or some other such descriptor. I haven't really picked the secondary notions yet but they will relay the feeling that we live in an ocean and not a vacuum. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 17:19:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA11055; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:08:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:08:01 -0800 Message-Id: <199701090108.RAA25805 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:09:02 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: E-Quest Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"wgHBc3.0.Vi2.iJ4ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3234 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jean Paul doesn't mention that he not only became a very good friend to myself and Roger but he did so at considerable expense to himself. He drove daily through almost 50 miles of perhaps one of the most intense commuter traffic in the world crossing through the center of the San Francisco Bay chaos. It is more than an hour each way and can easily blow into two hours or more if luck is against you. He sweated with us tirelessly and made many very helpful and inciteful improvements to our methods and efforts and in understanding the fundamental physics at work in the phenomenon. Prior to this he helped by do our first work on dynamic SIMS instruments at Lawrence Berkely Labs where we were able to use instruments available through the National Center for Electron Microscopy. He used his influence with people there to helps and befriend us and some of those continue to be very helpful colleagues. He has continued to be our very good friend and colleague and has used his influence in other places to help us a with other forms of analysis. As for calorimetry using our equipment he rightly describes some of the difficulties. The key to all good calorimetry however is really very easy to grasp. It is good controls with Joule heating and the ability to define zero excess heat where energy in is equal to energy out. Our presented data plot shown on my web site clearly shows we can experimentally produce a good calibration line. The data also shows we can even run experiments which we think ought to work which instead sit sqaurely on that calibrated zero. Those are our foundations, the interesting experiments are those which sit some scores and hundreds of watts above that line. What ever the calorimetric method whether it be our form of steady state Newtons Law of cooling calorimetry or the much more simple mass flow calorimetry one has to be certain one can find zero in a variety of ways only then can one be certain one can see other data of interest. Russ George E-Quest Sciences From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 17:21:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA09682; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:04:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:04:43 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970109010440.0066815c sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 10:04:40 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Subject: RE: Open letter to NHE sent Resent-Message-ID: <"eN0j71.0.uM2.XG4ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3233 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote: >> I list 17 references to leading scientists in this field who have shown fundamental mistakes in the NHE experimental technique. They have no reason to listen to me, but they ought to pay some attention to papers by Ikegami, Fleischmann, Storms, Bockris, McKubre, etc. << Of course, we are in communication with McKubre and Celani on a constant basis as we sponsored part of their work; Ikegami is part of our advisory committee; Storms of course is my mentor in this field. Bockris I don't know personally, but I'm familiar with his work. BTW, one point in particular needs to be challenged. NHE Lab tried for two years to duplicate higher temperature protocols (including the PF cells with their protocols) at a variety of temperatures up to boiling with ambiguous results. Since boiling experiments in particular use static calorimetery to measure dynamic results, there are a lot of questionable assumptions that are used. Using our best assumptions, we believe that we obtained no excess heat. We have not disproven anybody's claims, but neither have we given them additional support either. I think Martin and others would have preferred us to stick to the high temperature mode for another year, but we decided to go back and try to understand and maximize deuterium loading rather than to continue to blindly follow protocols that were not working (or at least not definitively so). Today, the general explanation from the advocates is that the quality of Pd has declined due to unknown factors and that excess heat is not as easy to obtain as it was three to five years ago. So I think your basic belief that excess heat could be reliably generated simply by fixing flaws in our protocols is not correct. Virtually everything you suggest we have already tried hundreds of times, but doesn't seem to work with today's best palladium, though the final verdict is not yet in. Several researchers have experiments that only work in calorimeters of questionable quality, or under conditions which are kept secret. Yet if anybody had a reproducible non-secret protocol that would work in a flow calorimeter with water working fluid, we would (nearly instanteously!) agree to duplicate it. And in fact there are a few experimenters who claim to be able to do that, and with their assistance we are going to try to duplicate those experiments in our lab this year. >>Frankly, I do not expect any response, or any changes in the program. But you never know! Maybe they will listen.<< You are probably not being realistic to assume that you are influential enough to tell the Japanese government how to conduct research. Nor are you the first person to criticize New Hydrogen Energy, so this is not really news either. I'm sure that Huizenga, Morrison et al will appreciate your efforts on their behalf. On the other hand, based on the best results of our colleagues, there are several new experiments which are going to be tried this year (unless of course you succeed in having us all fired). My conference report on John Logajan's Web page describes some of what we thought were the best new approaches. Best regards, Elliot Kennel Sapporo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 18:12:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA22465; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:38:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:38:35 -0800 Message-Id: <199701090135.RAA02612 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:36:49 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Jed on E-Quest Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"--vM1.0.wU5.Mm4ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3235 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oh shut the hell up Jed. This level of reporting on our methods at E-Quest have been public for years and you know it. Scores of people around the world who have asked us have recieved it and personal follow-up. Are you resorting to the same level of inanity as the super skeptics who claim to only recognize a few of their favorite peer reviewed journals. Publication isn't always so easy as it seems. Our paper delivered at the ICCF conference in Hawaii was submitted to the editorial group as appropriate and somehow was not included in the printed compendium. NOT our choice and a matter of record but we did not create a fuss over it - such accidents happen. Our paper from the ICCF meeting in Monaco was unfortunately delayed in reaching the editors of the conference by an accident I was involved in from which I woke up in a hospital CAT scanner with critical injuries. No there wasn't a lot of interest by me or my colleagues to cover my bases including the paper submission. Too bad. You are for very obvious reasons on our freeze out list and we do what we can to keep information on our work out of your hands and hence free from your immature and amateur proclamations. What a royal pain in the ass you are. Russ George From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 18:16:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA00420; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 18:06:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 18:06:04 -0800 Message-ID: <32D4526A.2617 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 21:05:30 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Inertial Electron Pump References: <199701082047.MAA00904 shell.skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IMQpY1.0.I6.0A5ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3237 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > > Frank Stenger writes: > > Setup: A rotating metal disk generates an emf, V volts, from its axis > > to its rim because of the free electrons in the metal being > > "centrifuged" outward by the rotatation. > > This seems intuitively right, but it may be wrong. Robert, you may be right. In my reference, Becker indicates that the Nichols experiment with a rotating disk was inconclusive. However, Becker also discussed R. C. Tolman's experiment with a rotating wire coil (brought to a sudden stop with a brake) which was reported to give e/m ratios for electrons within 10% of accepted values. Certainly the electrons do not "pile up" on each other - I would guess it's more a slight change in their concentration. Larry Wharton says he thinks inertial polarization would occur in an electrolyte which was spun about an axis. But, I just realized that any inertial concentration gradient that existed would be countered by a reverse diffusion of the electrolyte ions - I think. Any such concentration polarization probably swamps out the inertial effect. I don't have the background to put numbers on these effects. In other words, does a tall plastic pipe full of, say, HCl, develop a measureable gravitational polarization from top to bottom? - I don't know! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 19:33:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA20804; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:19:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:19:45 -0800 Message-Id: <32D463E1.3AF0 loc100.tandem.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 19:21:20 -0800 From: Bob Horst Reply-To: bhorst loc100.tandem.com Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis References: <199701082323.PAA10629 oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"oq4hp1.0.w15.HE6ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3240 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: These have been very interesting discussions. I am also looking forward to the book. Here is a different kind of test of part of Ross's theory (unless I am completely misunderstanding it). If gravity is due to aether flux rather than a pulling force, then the gravity from two bodies near each other should not be a simple superposition of the gravity of each individually. Consider these two cases: A) s m1 m2 B) s m1 m2 Think of two masses, m1 and m2 which are orbiting each other, with another satellite s orbiting the pair. With current theory, m1 and m2 could be replaced with a single body m' which is located at the center of mass of m1 and m2 with a mass of m1+m2. S could be in circular orbit around m' and its orbit would not be affected by m1 orbiting m2 (assuming the distance from s to m' is >> the distance from m1 to m2). Now with Ross's theory, it would seem that there would be sigificantly more blocking of the aether flux in case B than in case A. In case A, m1 is in the wake of m2 and would not block as much flux as in case B. If s starts in a circular orbit around m', it would find itself farther from m' at A than at B, giving a wobbly non-eliptical orbit modulated by the rotation rate of m1 around m2. Obviously, the orbit would not have to be circular in order to show differences. Both theories could be used to predict the paths of motion for other similar situations. This could be translated this into a thinking in terms of waves instead of particles, but I think the result would be the same. Think of a barge blocking waves in the ocean, but slowly rotating about its center. There would be more blocking when it is broadside to the waves than when it is facing them head-on. If there were equal waves on both sides of you without the barge, introducing a rotating barge would cause you to move more toward it when you are facing it broadside than when you are facing it head-on. I would think this effect should be rather large. Ross, can you mathematically predict the amount that the orbit should be perturbed? If the perturbation is large, it would seem unlikely to have been overlooked in calculating the paths of spacecraft, or in astronomical observations. If the perturbation is small, but would be marginally observable, it may be possible to find evidence in observations or data already collected. If the effect is predicted to be tiny, why? -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 19:51:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA20661; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:19:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:19:31 -0800 Date: 08 Jan 97 22:14:08 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Open letter to NHE sent Message-ID: <970109031407_72240.1256_EHB123-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"oB-qH1.0.p15.GE6ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3239 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Elliot Kennel writes: Since boiling experiments in particular use static calorimetry to measure dynamic results, there are a lot of questionable assumptions that are used. I disagree. I think Pons and Fleischmann have completely wrung out that system. But, in any case, Pons now has cells that remain in boiling condition at a steady temperature for months, so it is moot point. Obviously the dynamic results must have been real too, since the same effect is seen in the steady state. Today, the general explanation from the advocates is that the quality of Pd has declined due to unknown factors and that excess heat is not as easy to obtain as it was three to five years ago. Many people say so, but I disagree. Cravens and Storms have published protocols describing how to measure and improve the Pd quality. They have achieved about 50% success rate, which is much better than the success rates 3 to 5 years ago. Pons and Fleischmann have been using special Pd from Johnson Matthey which works very well indeed, nearly 100% of the time. Ohmori has a collection of more than 50 used Au cathodes -- every one of them produced excess heat. Ragland reports that 4 out of his last 4 Pd cathodes worked. I think reproducibility and metal quality have improved tremendously, but I think the NHE lab, and many others, are not paying enough attention to the new protocols and materials. So I think your basic belief that excess heat could be reliably generated simply by fixing flaws in our protocols is not correct. That is not only *my* basic belief. That is also what Fleischmann, Cravens, Storms, Ohmori, Pons, Bockris and the others I cited say. That is what McKubre said in his closing remarks at ICCF6. (See the transcription in I.E. issue 10.) Virtually everything you suggest we have already tried hundreds of times . . . Not according to Fleischmann, Cravens, Storms et al. They tell me you have not followed their suggestions. That's why I wrote the Letter. (I see no reports indicating you have followed these suggestions, but I am sure you do not have time to report everything you do, so that proves nothing.) Several researchers have experiments that only work in calorimeters of questionable quality . . . Who do you have in mind? . . . or under conditions which are kept secret. Yes. Sigh . . . Yet if anybody had a reproducible non-secret protocol that would work in a flow calorimeter with water working fluid, we would (nearly instanteously!) agree to duplicate it. Then why have you failed to test Storms' methodologies? What about Mizuno, or Ohmori? Why don't you use J-M's special stock of Pd? Now that CETI is selling cells, why not hop on the bandwagon with them? (Well, I suppose there might be contractual difficulties.) And why on earth do you insist on using this particular type of calorimeter? Clearly, the instrument itself is interfering with the experiment. That was the point of McKubre's remarks. And in fact there are a few experimenters who claim to be able to do that, and with their assistance we are going to try to duplicate those experiments in our lab this year. Great! Splendid news! Best of luck. You are probably not being realistic to assume that you are influential enough to tell the Japanese government how to conduct research. Don't be silly. I would never, in a million years, assume that I am influential enough to do that. No, my hope was that the authors of the 17 papers I cited might be influential enough to sway some opinions. Nor are you the first person to criticize New Hydrogen Energy, so this is not really news either. I'm sure that Huizenga, Morrison et al will appreciate your efforts on their behalf. Ha, ha! Very funny. Seriously, nothing I could say or do could possibly cause as much harm to the field as the failure of the NHE program. Huizenga and Morrison could never hurt us that much. If cold fusion dies it will be because of the mistakes made by scientists on our side. The biggest mistakes are the continued refusal to *learn from the literature, and from other scientists.* Of course there are lots of other grievous mistakes, like keeping secrets for no reason. The NHE is innocent on that score, thank goodness. On the other hand, based on the best results of our colleagues, there are several new experiments which are going to be tried this year (unless of course you succeed in having us all fired). I have absolutely no power to fire you or prevent you from being fired. Everyone knows I am trying to *prevent* that fiasco. As I wrote to Peter Hagelstein: Nothing we can say or do will hurt [the NHE researchers]. MITI, on the other hand, is fed up with them. It plans to kick them in the butt, cut their funding to zero, and shut down the program. That is what the MITI people and the NHE project leaders at the conference told me. They said they barely got funded this year, and next year the program will probably be terminated. The reason is obvious to everyone: the NHE developed a program plan years ago that called for step-by-step progress in replication and verification of the cold fusion effect. They spent millions of dollars to fulfill that plan. As of today, *not a single program milestone has been met.* Not one! I don't like to be harsh, but you do not seem to appreciate this point. This program was not intended to be an open-ended scientific research project. It was supposed to be a goal-oriented, scheduled, engineering-style project. As such, it has failed completely . . . Some people say that such a goal-oriented engineering project was premature, and that MITI set impossible goals. I disagree. At the same time the MITI program was starting up, the French Atomic Energy Commission began a similar engineering-style, results-oriented program to replicate the Pons-Fleischmann boil off experiment. That goal was not quite as ambitious as the NHE's but it was close. As you know, the French succeeded magnificently . . . I am only the messenger. Don't blame me because I tell the researchers at the NHE that their days are numbered and they are making large blunders. I am doing them a favor. They don't appreciate it, they do not like me, and I do not think there is a chance in the world they will listen, but I have done the best I can to help them. If they drown it will not be my fault. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 21:56:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA25826; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:43:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:43:20 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Graneau's theory To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 23:42:22 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <32D2FA88.41C67EA6 math.ucla.edu> from "Barry Merriman" at Jan 7, 97 05:38:16 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mFGFw3.0.HJ6.gL8ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3241 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > the potential energy "associated" is a decrease in potential energy, > not an addition of potential energy! I presume this to be the case, but it is at least theoretically possible for some chemical processes to be endothermic rather than exothermic. An unrelated oddity in water is that it expands upon freezing, which is counter-intuitive. So an empirical result would over-rule an intuitive or even theoretical expectation. However, I'd be rather surprised that no one until now has noticed the endothermic nature of water condensation. In fact, it is my general understanding that the evidence suggests the contrary. (i.e. evaporation seems to be endothermic.) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 8 21:59:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA27397; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:47:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:47:50 -0800 From: hjscudde pacbell.net Message-ID: <32D4887E.3115 pacbell.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 21:56:14 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-PBXE (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: aether Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"n5Vbv.0.sh6.0Q8ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3242 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Xiaobo I don't know about electrons, but when I took statistical mechanics at Cornell back in 1955, the class was taught by Prof. Phillip Morrison, who was a grad student of Oppenheims. He told us that while he was in grad school, he worked on the first atomic reactor which was designed to generate a beam of neutrons. One of the first experiments they did was to setup the reactor at one end of a long hallway, and put a detector at the other end, and determined whether or not neutrons were subject to the pull of gravity. It was a fairly rough experiment, but their conclusion was that neutrons were effected by gravity, the same as everything else is, within experimental error. I don't know whether the experiment was written up, but I doubt it. He didn't say it was. -Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 00:36:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA00057; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:14:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:14:03 -0800 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:14:04 +0100 (MET) From: Dieter Britz To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Miles rebuttal Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9AmlA2.0.p.9ZAro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3246 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Well, I got my finger out and have now put the Case of the Missing Miles Rebuttal on my web page. Look there for any further developments, I will not be posting them here, as I am now signing off from vortex-l again. To save you looking for (non-)developments, the latest is that Steve Jones tells me that he has not been sent the rebuttal text. Some would say, why should he expect to be? It does happen, though, that there is a rebuttal-rebuttal, I guess it's up to the Editor. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Dieter Britz alias britz kemi.aau.dk | | Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. | | Telephone: +45-89423874 (8:30-17:00 weekdays); fax: +45-86196199 | | http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~britz | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 00:46:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA01692; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:23:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:23:17 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dithering From: Hoyt Stearns Reply-To: hoyt isus.wierius.com Sender: hoyt isus.wierius.com Originator: hoyt isus.wierius.com Transport-Options: /delivery Content-Type: text Date: Wed, 8 Jan 97 21:07:00 GMT Message-ID: <9701090118.aa10306 wierius.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"EYDK9.0.LQ.phAro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3247 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote: John Logajan and Mike Shaffer describe a technique known as "dithering" wherein: "Noise makes the reading oscillate about its real value, sometimes as one digital value, sometimes the other. But since the real value is often closer to one digital quanta than the other, and since noise over many samples is fairly evenly distributed, you tend to get more readings of one quanta than the other, and upon averaging as a floating point number, get a good approximation of the real value . . ." That is true, and often called "stochastic resonance" I believe. Dithering is also a term used for a techinque to help measurements when non linearities are involved (stick_tion, hysteresis, dead band), and is the equivalent of "tapping the guage" as is done with pressure guages, altimeters, etc. Best Regards, -- Hoyt A. Stearns jr., President, International Society of Unified Science| 4131 E. Cannon Dr. Phoenix AZ 85028 Advancing Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal | hoyt isus.wierius.com fax 996 9088 System- a unified physical theory | voice *82 602 996-1717 http://infox.eunet.cz/interpres/sr/ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "You can observe a lot just by watching." -- Yogi Berra ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the facts do not conform to your theory, they must be disposed of. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Churchill's Commentary on Man: Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 01:59:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA13807; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 01:37:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 01:37:44 -0800 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 01:36:59 -0800 Message-Id: <199701090936.BAA01512 dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: Open letter to NHE sent To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: 72240.1256 compuserve.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Cc: 76570.2270 compuserve.com Resent-Message-ID: <"otxb_3.0.WN3.cnBro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3248 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 10, 1997 Jed, Got the IE #10 on the 9th. A very good Japanese translation of your English text Open Letter to NHE. One can wonder which came first, the English or the Japanese version. I notice that you list seven individual addressees, aside from the media, for your open letter as posted on the Vortex. Of the seven, how many are the seventeen that you give reference to? And also do you plan to send copies of your letter to all seventeen? Or do they read about it in the IE magazine, if they are subscribers? One addressee not listed, and perhaps just as well. MITI, which funds NHE. But since it is an open letter anyway with the media included, maybe one should be sent so they won't feel left out. Perhaps the end result of your concern may be the shift in funding from MITI to the department which funds the current on-going hot fusion program. I would think this would result in an unwelcome fight for a budget and "restructuring". So I do not know if the letter is going to serve its intended purpose of being constructive. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 05:51:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA11873; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 05:41:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 05:41:53 -0800 Date: 09 Jan 97 08:39:34 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Open letter to NHE sent Message-ID: <970109133933_72240.1256_EHB125-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"WPMUv1.0.Rv2.VMFro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3249 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Akira Kawasaki writes: One can wonder which came first, the English or the Japanese version. Both! I went back and forth, as suggestions and corrections arrived in both languages. I hope I remembered to incorporate all changes in both. I notice that you list seven individual addressees, aside from the media, for your open letter as posted on the Vortex. Of the seven, how many are the seventeen that you give reference to? I circulated the document to everyone except Lonchampt (I think). When people sent in corrections I sent them updated versions. I hope everyone got a chance to see it and comment. I invited the NHE people to publish a response side-by-side, but they never answered. Honestly, I wasn't expecting any answer. They have been ignoring the same advice from other people for years. One addressee not listed, and perhaps just as well. MITI, which funds NHE. But since it is an open letter anyway with the media included, maybe one should be sent so they won't feel left out. Well, I do not see any MITI addresses here in the ICCF6 list . . . If you come up with any other addresses I would be happy to send it to them. Perhaps the end result of your concern may be the shift in funding from MITI to the department which funds the current on-going hot fusion program. Let's hope not! I would think this would result in an unwelcome fight for a budget and "restructuring". That fight has been underway all along. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 07:54:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06037; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:44:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:44:42 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701091537.HAA00215 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Inertial Electron Pump To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:37:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970108181601.009577d0 mail.localaccess.com> from "Epitaxy" at Jan 8, 97 06:16:02 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"jWzMl3.0.EU1.a9Hro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3250 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Stenger writes: > Robert, you may be right. In my reference, Becker indicates that the > Nichols experiment with a rotating disk was inconclusive. However, > Becker also discussed R. C. Tolman's experiment with a rotating wire > coil (brought to a sudden stop with a brake) which was reported to > give e/m ratios for electrons within 10% of accepted values. > > Certainly the electrons do not "pile up" on each other - I would guess > it's more a slight change in their concentration. In the Tolman experiment, it is a whole loop of copper which is rotated and quickly stopped. The electrons do not "pile up" because they have a continuous loop to flow around. > Larry Wharton says he thinks inertial polarization would occur in an > electrolyte which was spun about an axis. But, I just realized that > any inertial concentration gradient that existed would be countered > by a reverse diffusion of the electrolyte ions - I think. Any such > concentration polarization probably swamps out the inertial effect. > I don't have the background to put numbers on these effects. > In other words, does a tall plastic pipe full of, say, HCl, develop > a measureable gravitational polarization from top to bottom? Teller also discusses inertial/gravitational effects in an ionic crystal -- which I think may have a similar effect, probably more profound, in an electrolyte. Gravitation should produce an electric field in an electrolyte, if it consists of a substance which has a substantially different relative mass between positive and negative ions. Teller tells the tale thusly: (comparing a rotating ionic crystal with a rotating conductor). "A much bigger effect can be expected in ionic crystals in which the positvie and negative ions, having different masses, will be subject to different centrifugal forces. The polarization of a rotating needle made of an alkali halide will actually be quite similar to the polarization caused by an electric field. The difference is that an electric field acts both on the electrons and the ions, whereas the centrifugal force acts practically only on the heavy ions. This obvious effect seems to have received little attention." Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 08:01:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06638; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:47:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:47:28 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Russ George , Vortex-L Subject: RE: E-Quest part 2 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:48:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"t3taI3.0.bd1.CCHro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3251 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Russ We use short pulses of 400V or less to excite our monolithic piezo-electric transducers. They produce a short sound pulse of a few cycles, with a center frequency between 1 and 25 Mhz, depending on the transducer. Nobody here seems to know the absolute pressure levels, or power transmitted or received. No evidence of any damage or cavitation effects have been noticed. It would be an interesting practical effect of CF if we could weld our rocket engine liners to their supports using sound waves instead of HIP(hot isostatic pressure, as we do now). -Hank Scudder ---------- From: Russ George To: Scudder,Henry J Subject: RE: E-Quest part 2 Date: Wednesday, January 08, 1997 9:25AM I'll jump in here if I may. Perhaps Jean Paul will answer you as well. We use typically 20khz sine wave in our work. A few hundred watts power to a 3 inch diameter titanium horn. I rather doubt your US weld inspection will induce CF in the metal. First the conditons are not correct and second US inspection of metals is a well established field and no anomalies have been reported. Russ George E-Quest Sciences From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 08:16:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA12554; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 08:03:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 08:03:15 -0800 From: Xkan aol.com Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 11:02:19 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970109110154_1592956818 emout16.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Graneau's theory Resent-Message-ID: <"cgslP.0.z33.yQHro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3252 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Logajan wrote: <> When we boil water, the water temperature rises from room T to 100 degree Celsius, then stops at that T until all water is boiled away. Why? Because the heat from the stove is at that point used entirely to vaporize the water(boiling). So liquid water has less bonding energy than water vapor. I agree with Barry Merriman on this point. Graneau has done a lot of good experiments. But this water bonding theory to explain excess energy in electrical arcs in water make no sense at all. Anwser lies in else where, which is probably aetheric energy. When reading Graneau's book Newtonian Electrodynamics, it reminds me of Farady, another exceptional experimentalist. Xiaobo Kan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 09:49:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA09762; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:36:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:36:44 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701091131.ZM23871 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 11:31:31 -0600 In-Reply-To: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) "Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis" (Jan 8, 5:23pm) References: <199701082323.PAA10629 oro.net> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"9SBiQ.0.kN2.XoIro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3253 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Experiments....... > I have thought a lot about this and came up with a less difficult and more > dramatic device you might build if you have the electronic talent. Instead > of helium, which most people don't have access to, use water steam. > Evacuate the air as you said, and fill the chamber with steam at just below > the saturation value, which is analogous to the aether of the universe which > winds up condensing at the Planck scale of the convergent resonances we call > electron muon and tau. > > Use some ultrasonic drivers that are opperating at a frequency that **does > not** excite the internal molecular resonances of the H2O molecule. I think > I calculate that a freq. of about 100 Khz to 1 Mhz ought to work. > Basically, what I would do is to calculate the velocity of sound in the > steam, and then select a physical size that corresponds to the size of > droplets of water in fog. > > Then, place a bunch of those speakers around the enclosure like you say. > But you don't need a sphere, though you could create a large convergence if > you did. > > The reason is because you will induce a structure of standing waves > throughout the volume of that enclosure even if it is a cubic or rectangular > sort of a room. And at each of the nodes of that acoustic energy, you will > either increase the density or decrease the density of the vapor. But if > you are near the saturation pressure and properties of the vapor, then when > you increase the density a bit, you will induce in those nodal locations, > condensation. > > This way, you will easily know that you have succeeded because you will be > able to look through a window into the enclosure, heck you could line all > the walls with glass as that is a pretty good acoustic reflector anyway (you > want to maximize internal reflections to maintain as much acoustic energy in > there as possible and to lose as little as possible due to attenuation at > the surfaces and you don't want to heat the vapor any more than necessary > either since that will drive up the pressure to which you must get the vapor > to induce droplet formation.) I chose helium as the medium to minimize/eliminate phase change anomalies with respect to temperature and pressure inside the sphere. Although a cloud chamber or similar gaget would be a more facinating to the general public, I was aiming more for a physics aparatus platform to explore/evauate the priciples. If the effect is produced, it would be interesting in testing other elements, changing the environmental conditions, magnitude of the aplitude or resonance source (electomagnetic, radiational, etc.) Maybe water vapor in an acrylic sphere after the critical elements are identified. If gravity becomes a hindering factor, shoot a package up on the next shuttle. Lots of fun to be had if you have the time and money! I wonder to what level you could condense an element with this process (IF it works). Could a very high compression using a very high energy resonace source induce a metered, self contained, fusion reaction? a black hole? Maybe worthwhile to explore. The implications are enormous. > The difference between this and the device you outlined is that the > materials are a lot easier to come by. Which materials? Helium is not that hard to come by. Most complicated device I can see is the frequency/amplitude controls for the emitters. -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 10:54:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA23975; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 10:35:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 10:35:52 -0800 Message-ID: <32D53A8E.2D14 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 13:35:58 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Inertial Electron Pump References: <199701091537.HAA00215 shell.skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JL2hz1.0.Rs5.4gJro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3254 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > > Teller tells the tale thusly: (comparing a rotating ionic crystal > with a rotating conductor). > > "A much bigger effect can be expected in ionic crystals in which > the positvie and negative ions, having different masses, will be > subject to different centrifugal forces. The polarization of a > rotating needle made of an alkali halide will actually be quite > similar to the polarization caused by an electric field. The > difference is that an electric field acts both on the electrons > and the ions, whereas the centrifugal force acts practically > only on the heavy ions. This obvious effect seems to have > received little attention." Robert, this sounds like it's getting mighty close to the technology for separating uranium isotopes using centrifuges - I think I'll quit before neat guys in suits start to hang out in front of my house! (Or, maybe not!) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 17:36:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23195 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:36 -0800 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:36 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Thu Jan 9 17:36:27 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA23119 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:24 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id RAA25431 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:23 -0800 Old-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:23 -0800 Message-Id: <199701100136.RAA25431 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Graneau's theory X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: >John Logajan wrote: > ><expectation. However, I'd be rather surprised that no one until now has >noticed the endothermic nature of water condensation. In fact, it is >my general understanding that the evidence suggests the contrary. (i.e. >evaporation seems to be endothermic.)>> > >When we boil water, the water temperature rises from room T to 100 degree >Celsius, then stops at that T until all water is boiled away. Why? Because >the heat from the stove is at that point used entirely to vaporize the >water(boiling). So liquid water has less bonding energy than water vapor. I >agree with Barry Merriman on this point. Graneau has done a lot of good >experiments. But this water bonding theory to explain excess energy in >electrical arcs in water make no sense at all. Anwser lies in else where, >which is probably aetheric energy. When reading Graneau's book Newtonian >Electrodynamics, it reminds me of Farady, another exceptional >experimentalist. I almost hate to say it, but this is a simple fact of the theory I am working on. The old notion of "caloric" was correct, but what the caloric was is simply the aether of which everything is made. The universe is expanding, and the vapor pressure of the aether that is our ocean we call a universe, is dropping. So, the tiny concentrations of aether trapped in standing waves which we call matter, are in essence, vaporizing to replenish the pressure of the universe. It is this process of vaporization that continues today and which leads to natures selecting certain processes to manifest and others to be inhibited. We call this property "entropy". So exothermic reactions are all very easy to understand based on a theory like mine. They are all aether emission reactions. So your water boiling is just the reverse, it is an aether gaining process. I am ignoring the exothermy in the gas that boiled the water, as the overall process is still going to follow the second law and is going to be an aether emission set of processes. But considering just the water molecules during that phase transition, what is going on? Well, as you vaporize the molecules they move further apart from one another. And so rather than fitting inside of each other and sort of slipping in around and all together like a bunch of worms in a can, the molecules are now out in free space with an excellent view factor to the energy arriving from space. So, if you have a standing wave which is an underdamped oscillator with a better view to that energy what will happen? Well, you are going to get a greater compression build up and thus you are going to harbour a greater amount of aether in that standing wave. Thus, the latent heat of fusion, is sort of like condensing more aether in that standing wave and so you are with that process reducing the pressure of the surrounding universe ocean of that very same aether. That is why that process is endothermic, it goes counter to the overall needs of the ocean of aether, which is to get the pressure up. And that is why fusion releases so much energy, it is a change in the mass, and ergo the amount of aether confined in, those standing waves. Just think in terms of conservation of aether and it will come clear in all cases. Each and every process, from a rock rolling down a hill to water boiling to fusion, are all exothermic if they are aether emissive. Graneau has some neat ideas, and some of them I think are on target. But he believes in instantaneous far action, which is to me nonesense. And it was so to Newton and Einstein and a lot of others. So on that account I am confident Graneau is incorrect in the manner he has formulated things from first principles. The only first principles that work are those where you eliminate all of the various forces particles and the like as being fundamental. As Einstein said, the only way to a valid theory is to formulate one without any mention of "particles". Particles and matter should be derived, and not a zoo of intrinsic fundamental gobbledygook. A theory should be a pure field theory, and that is precisely what I am working on. I do not put particles into my system. If you have too much wave energy converging into a given region, then you will excite a resonance in the aether in that region, and you will exite the aether to condense at the innermost regions of the convergence due to that single property of the aether. And for that reason, you will have a buzzing little standing wave that will behave like a particle sometimes, and like a wave in other experiments, and at all times it will be a soliton that is sort of both. It is just that our experiments are designed to expose this or that component of the nature of the the standing waves. And with such a system, you do not include any mention of forces as a fundamental behavior between particles. But you do mention the action reaction of the compressibility of the aether. That is it. From there it is very confusing at first to follow the wave energy through 3D and to watch spacetime unfold and matter standing waves unfold. But when you see it, and you begin to work with the properties that must exist, it is so clear it is amazing. You expect accelerations that baffle physicists today like those that induce the solar corona and the solar wind and the dark matter problem. And you expect things like tunneling in semiconductors and the critical way in which the onset of chaos occurs in fluids in a journal. All of these things are natural. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 17:36:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23184 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:35 -0800 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:35 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Thu Jan 9 17:36:25 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA23105 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:23 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id RAA25428 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:20 -0800 Old-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:36:20 -0800 Message-Id: <199701100136.RAA25428 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: >> The difference between this and the device you outlined is that the >> materials are a lot easier to come by. > >Which materials? Helium is not that hard to come by. Most complicated device >I can see is the frequency/amplitude controls for the emitters. First of all, with a transparent medium, it will be extremely difficult to detect that you induced an amplification of the density due to convergence. You would need to use some laser interferometry and detect the slowing of the signal through that region. With condensation, you can simply see that it occured. And as matter must have aether condensate at its core (Planck scale E-35 meters), it is really a lot more instructive to demonstrate the importance of the phase change due to constant temperature condensation in a region of enhanced pressure due to acoustic energy. This is really what matter is all about. The other fact is that the condensation process will induce a non linear refraction of the acoustic energy. It will sort of collapse into the droplet during the compression part of the cycle, and then explode radially outward during the low pressure part of the cycle. That leads to a radial motion of the vapor in and out of the droplet node that is more radial than the acoustic energy would otherwise induce. You will not get this behavior with helium. The reason this is so important is because it is at the heart of General Relativity. GR is a property of the curvature of light, aka acoustic solitons, moving through the spacetime nodal structure. The curvature is due to the change in velocity of propogation of the compression energy. And that is due to density gradients in the aether. Likewise, the acoustic energy in the chamber with a saturated vapor will be curved due to the density gradients. But the droplet allows a sort of slipping of mass flow into and out of the droplet due to the phase change. That adds to the curvature and the persistence of the node and thus the droplet. This is the same thing in all actuality, as the oscillons in the Sci Am article. In that case, the condensation is manifest in the form of the mass flow into and out of the peaks and valleys formed by the motion of the table. Those peaks and valleys are about the same thing as the water condensate. But what you will also be able to do with this chamber is that you should be able to send in a bunch of energy like an impulse. And when you do, you ought to be able to induce a bunch of droplets to condense in regions of greater than average density. And then after you are finished, some of them will remain stable and confined by the regular nodes of the chamber and others will vaporize back to vapor. This is the formation of virtual particles and the ones that survive are ones where you put in enough energy to form them and so they persist, confined by the nodal structure in the chamber. Heck, you should even wind up creating huge balls of droplets if you arrange the incident energy in a sufficiently uniform manner. In other words, you should be able to demonstrate "gravitation" of two balls of droplets. They already did some stuff sort of like this in the Space Shuttle last year. They used acoustic energy to confine balls of water and to cause them to oscillate in a variety of ways. But they were working with large droplets, ie 1 inch or so, and studying "surface tension", which of course is a misnomer as the droplets are compressed from all sides as the molecules are much better phase and frequency timed to one another than is the free space wave energy. So there only exist compressions in our universe. If you are pulling on a bar of steel, all you are doing is releiving some of the compression of that bar. If you are pulling on a rope, you are releiving some of the compression of the atoms that make up those fibers. And if you have a cup of liquid helium, it flows up and over the top and out onto the table because the vertical sides of the cup are shielding the liquid from wave energy coming from above, but the center of the fluid is exposed to that wave energy. So the fluid is compressed downward, that applies pressure laterally to the fluid, and then at the wall of the cup it is pushed up the sides vertically, and right over the top and out on the table. You can see that last behavior beginning with a cup of water and just look at the miniscus. And for mercury, the energy flowing through the cup interferes with the atomic structure and the mercury is better at blocking it and so it is pushed downward and the miniscus is upside down. Two magnets are pushed together because they channel the energy through in a sort of helix. And two magnets are pushed apart because both sides feed energy into the center and it is multiply reflected. I could go on for a year, and hopefully this summer will have completed the book. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 19:42:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA19854; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:17:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:17:12 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970110031731.0066815c sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:17:31 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Resent-Message-ID: <"GSJcP.0.4s4.qIRro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Unidentified subject! Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3261 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>Jed wrote: >>>> Elliot wrote: Yet if anybody had a reproducible non-secret protocol that would work in a flow calorimeter with water working fluid, we would (nearly instanteously!) agree to duplicate it.<<<< Then why have you failed to test Storms' methodologies? << First of all, Storms experiment has not worked in a flow calorimeter with water working fluid (yet). Second, Storms' protocol for testing the cell is not really special; what sets his work apart is his qualification process for palladium. And yes, third, rather than bash us in print, he sent us a nice letter offering to help us with that plus a few suggestions on how to measure open circuit voltage, and we're taking him up on it. >>What about Mizuno?<< Mizuno's experiments are some of the best in the field and provide very strong evidence in favor of a nuclear transmutation. We're on the best of terms with him, and I'm trying to help get additional verification of his results. But Mizuno does not have a reproducible protocol for excess thermal energy in a water flow mass calorimeter. Recall also that Mizuno's charter is basic research, meaning that he is trying to get first-of-a-kind results (and he's doing a very good job of it). His charter is different from ours. One could make the case that engineering development was attempted prematurely (and indeed NHE Lab is going back and doing things these days that seem more like basic research), but to suggest that Mizuno's very fine laboratory ought to be pressed into service as an engineering development facility is absurd. >>Why don't you use J-M's special stock of Pd?<< We do. We've tested several types of Pd, including J-M Puratronic grade Pd, the highest purity made. >>Ohmori has a collection of more than 50 used Au cathodes -- every one of them produced excess heat.<< That doesn't sound much like previous recipes for cold fusion, since deuterium is insoluble in gold. Moreover, Takahashi noted a difference in calibration between gold and Pd systems in ICCF-3, which he attributed to a difference in internal conditions in the cell. So, yes, it could be excess heat from some nuclear effect involving gold, but it could also point to the difficulty in callibrating that particular calorimeter. So I would like to give Ohmori some more time to think about his results. In the meantime I think the community is entitled to be skeptical about this. >>Now that CETI is selling cells, why not hop on the bandwagon with them? Well, I suppose there might be contractual difficulties.<< Recall that we have been one of the primary sponsors of SRI, which is one of the agencies studying the CETI cell. So I think we are very close to the scientific study of this unique device. Eventually we would like to bring a cell to Japan, but there is no reason to question SRI's competence in carrying out quality research on our behalf. For the moment there is no consensus (from SRI at least) one way or the other as to the existence of a nuclear anomaly, although that will presumably be resolved reasonably soon. >>And why on earth do you insist on using this particular type of calorimeter?<< Recall that we HAVE had positive results with other calorimeters!!! We feel that we are entitled to ask why experiments work in some calorimeters but not in others, before pronouncing complete confidence in our previous positive results. Moreover, some of these other calorimeters are subject to errors if the internal conditions of the cell changes. We would like to be sure that this has not happened. This requires additional research. >>Clearly, the instrument itself is interfering with the experiment. That was the point of McKubre's remarks.<< No, that is NOT clear. That is only one hypothesis. In any case, if the system requires temperature gradients or certain thermal response from the environment (or whatever), we ought to be able to build in the same factors in a flow calorimeter, possibly by installing a separate loop within the calorimeter. There is no obvious reason why one particular calorimeter should spell the death of excess heat. I think most of us are disturbed by that trend, and that is why we are looking for counterexamples. A case in point occurred this week, when one of the university profs came in. He had had some spectacular results in 1992 with an unstirred calorimeter. After switching to a stirred calorimeter the results were greatly diminished. Every time he improves the calorimetry, the amount of excess heat decreases and reproducibility is worse. Now it may be that the excess heat is real and stirring the working fluid interferes with the nuclear reaction in some way. But to simply assume this to be true and to ignore other possible explanations seems to me to be premature. >>I think the NHE lab, and many others, are not paying enough attention to the new protocols and materials.<< Then please carry out your own experiments and prove your point! Look, there are a lot of people that are frustrated that progress has not come much faster. There are a lot of people who believe that if they were given more money, they could get some more results. They may be right. But this true in any competitive field (not just cold fusion). Again, I'll reiterate that if there were an experiment which is non-secret, reproducible and uses water mass flow calorimetry to measure excess thermal energy, NHE Lab would probably just buy one. My feeling is that those who expected to soon buy cold fusion products at the local Wall-Mart are among the most disappointed. But on the other hand, for those (like me) who are interested in showing the existence of nuclear anomalies in metal deuterides, there is great cause for optimism. There are in fact a number of experiments which now seem to give reproducible evidence for coupling between the solid state and nuclear state. I am overall more optimistic now than I have been for the past seven years. However, as far as excess heat is concerned, the picture looks as muddled as ever. Best regards, Elliot Kennel Sapporo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 20:25:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA05070; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:01:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:01:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:02:21 +0800 Message-Id: <199701100402.MAA08999 earwax.pd.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter earwax.pd.uwa.edu.au Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: jwinter earwax.pd.uwa.edu.au (John Winterflood) Subject: Re: Lenz Law Harnessing --> NOBODY ... X-Mailer: Resent-Message-ID: <"gkUwA.0.1F1.-xRro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3264 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 John Schnurer wrote: >On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 warlord localaccess.com wrote: >> >> I am assuming that the event described as "...flux is cut by the coil..." is >> equivalent to the event "...change of flux perceived by the coil...". If >> this is what you meant then the flux perceived by the coil is changing all >> the time during the shield's approach into the gap. This happens because the >> coil first sees ALL of the flux from the PM and later sees NONE. > > A coil [shorted] of various Sc materials, within limits, will >store and maintain current, unless acted on by other forces ..... >presuming the material is below Bc1 and completely in the true Meissner >phase. A changing magnetic field is "being acted on by other forces .....". The current in the Sc loop will *change* to maintain the same flux through the loop. This is the Meissner effect. When all applied magnetic fields are removed, the previous current will be "maintained". It is lenses law in action. It is equivalent to an Eddy current which does not decay away. warlord is correct I believe. > According >> to the Lenz Law the coil will resist this change by circulating current >> through its windings (and producing a magnetic pole) in order to compensate >> for this change. At the point of the shield's journey, when the shield is >> inside the gap and is shielding all of the PM's flux, the coil will have >> certain amount of current flowing through its windings. This flowing >> current will cause the coil to become an electromagnet in such a way that >> the electromagnet will be generating THE SAME amount of flux that the coil >> lost from the PM as a result of the shielding effect. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 9 21:24:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA18574; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:01:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:01:26 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 00:00:43 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970110000041_844662388 emout07.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: what do you know? Resent-Message-ID: <"wzf8i1.0.8Y4.aqSro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3265 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dr. Noever is reading my stuff and wants more info. Noever is working on the Tempere experiments at the Marshall Space Flight Center. Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail --------------------- Forwarded message: From: noever webtv.net (David Noever) To: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: 97-01-09 21:38:49 EST thank you for your response. my address is dr. david noever mail code es76 nasa marshall space flight center huntsville, al 35812 i have windows, but would still appreciate any papers you might have. Best regards. Dr. David Noever noever webtv.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 02:59:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA16527; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 02:37:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 02:37:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:37:43 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Hope To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Jed on E-Quest In-Reply-To: <199701090135.RAA02612 mom.hooked.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"4Ze7m1.0.924.zlXro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3269 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Russ George wrote: > Oh shut the hell up Jed. > ... > > You are for very obvious reasons on our freeze out list and we do > what we can to keep information on our work out of your hands and > hence free from your immature and amateur proclamations. What > a royal pain in the ass you are. Is this wise? Keeping data from him will not stop him from criticizing your work. If anything, it will give him a valid point to attack. If you believe in your data and believe that his responses are "immature and amateur", it would make more sense to provide him with as much of your work as you can. Your work will stand on its own, and he will hang himself. In any case, this attitude seems petty, territorial, and counter-productive, and this is from the perspective of a neutral observer. > > Russ George > > Charles From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 03:57:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA26167; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 03:35:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 03:35:58 -0800 Date: 10 Jan 97 06:32:37 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! Message-ID: <970110113236_100433.1541_BHG113-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"TptgS.0.jO6.ScYro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3271 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Elliot, > Mizuno's very fine laboratory I've not visited that lab, so I may have got mixed up here - but isn't Mizuno's 'lab' the closet-sized one with the plastic sheet strung up for when it rains? On the CETI cell you write: > For the moment there is no consensus (from SRI at least) one way > or the other as to the existence of a nuclear anomaly, although > that will presumably be resolved reasonably soon. Is not the big question in that device the existence or otherwise of an ENERGY anomaly? > However, as far as excess heat is concerned, the picture looks as > muddled as ever. Oh, come on. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 05:41:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA05228; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:19:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:19:13 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:17:18 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Re: Lenz Law Harnessing --> NOBODY ... (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"dCxKM.0.ZH1.G7aro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3272 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:21:39 -0800 From: freenrg-l-request eskimo.com To: herman college.antioch.edu Subject: Re: Lenz Law Harnessing --> NOBODY ... Sorry, you cannot post to freenrg-L if you are not a subscriber. If you wish to subscribe, send mail to "freenrg-L-request" with the word "subscribe" in the SUBJECT: line of the message. (Note: this list has been recently ported to new software. The 'listproc' commands no longer work. Send the word "help" in the subject line of a message to freenrg-L-request eskimo.com to get an instruction sheet. ------------------- returned message follows ------------------- yy Dear Vo, Just one or two notes, in text below. On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 warlord localaccess.com wrote: > > THE REPLIES ARE BETWEEN THE PARAGRAPHS BELOW > > At 04:43 PM 1/9/97 +0000, you wrote: > >Epitaxy wrote: > > > > > >> 2) Do you agree that IF the coil is superconductive, according to the Lenz > >> law, it will produce an ALIKE magnetic pole of exactly the same intensity > >> and polarity as the permanent magnet, WHEN the plate completely shields the > >> coil from the PM (ie. upon reaching the middle of the gap). Assuming total > >> theoretical shielding ? If not - why not ? > > >If totally shielded, then no flux is cut by the coil, right? If no flux > >is cut, no voltage is induced, right? > > ...for the sake of simplicity we assume the coil doesn't have resistive losses. > > I am assuming that the event described as "...flux is cut by the coil..." is > equivalent to the event "...change of flux perceived by the coil...". If > this is what you meant then the flux perceived by the coil is changing all > the time during the shield's approach into the gap. This happens because the > coil first sees ALL of the flux from the PM and later sees NONE. A coil [shorted] of various Sc materials, within limits, will store and maintain current, unless acted on by other forces ..... presuming the material is below Bc1 and completely in the true Meissner phase. According > to the Lenz Law the coil will resist this change by circulating current > through its windings (and producing a magnetic pole) in order to compensate > for this change. At the point of the shield's journey, when the shield is > inside the gap and is shielding all of the PM's flux, the coil will have > certain amount of current flowing through its windings. This flowing > current will cause the coil to become an electromagnet in such a way that > the electromagnet will be generating THE SAME amount of flux that the coil > lost from the PM as a result of the shielding effect. > > >> 3) Do you agree that the iron plate will be attracted into the gap of the > >> coil and permanent magnet by both the PM and the coil, at the same time, > >> just like it was attracted into the gap between 2 opposing permanent > >> magnets (S-S) in the accelerating turntable experiment ? If not - why not ? > > > >See above questions. > > > >> Assume non conductive composite iron plate for the sake suppressing of > >> undesirable eddy currents in the plate. > > > >Again, please show me a material without marcoscopic or microscopic Eddy > >currents that also shields a magentic field. I know of no such > >material, and ferrite does not even come close to this 'perfect' shield. > > If you consider the electon motion as a microscopic eddy current, I do not > know of any material that doesn't have it. > > BUT BUT BUT: The microscopic eddy currents are NOT THE SAME same as the > macroscopic eddy currents. Namely microscopic eddy current are confined to > each atom and are perpetuall and most importantly do not waste any energy, > they do not combine into a large eddy current that causes a large eddy > braking effect. That is why powdered iron does not exhibit eddy braking effect. > > Did you try to see the difference in eddy braking effect between the > powdered iron disk and solid disk ? I did this experiment and there is an > enormous difference ? > There are eddy or, more formally Foucault currents in iron powder materials. In general the FC loss is less, but not zero. > During this experiment I also found out that the static powdered iron disk > shields magnetic field AS WELL as the static solid iron disk (but without > the eddy braking effect) > In general a powdered iron material will shield less well than a modern FeNi allow, particularly amorphous and thin tape wound or laminated materials. > >To stop the magentic field without any Eddy currents would seem to > >violate Lenz's law, would it not? You can provide a path of lesser > >resistance, and the majority of flux will follow this path, but not all > >of it, unless that alternate path had no resistance at all, as in a > >superconductor. > > >Sadly, Superconductors have huge Eddy currents, which is why they > >preclude magnetic fields in the first place. > Type I and type II Scs are profoundly different in magnetic effects, and none of it is simplistic. > >Are we going around in circles here yet? Would Mr. Hartmann care to > >point out any errors, or to reccomend a magnetic shielding material > >without any Eddy currents? > > >Better yet, build these devices, and provide real data! AMEN! Build!! All the > >calculations in the world prove nothing about real world performance. > > I absolutely agree. That is why I did the powdered iron disk experiments I > described above. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 05:50:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA06789; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:28:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:28:26 -0800 Date: 10 Jan 97 08:26:32 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Letter to ABC TV on "Junk Science" Message-ID: <970110132632_76570.2270_FHU40-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"I6jMs1.0.pf1.uFaro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3273 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher INFINITE ENERGY Magazine Cold Fusion Technology P.O. Box 2816 Concord, New Hampshire 03302-2816 Phone: 603-228-4516; Fax: 603-224-5975 January 10, 1997 Dr. Michael Guillen ABC Television, Science Dear Michael: I want to bring to your attention a matter of great concern: the airing on ABC television last night on John Stoessel's "Junk Science" program of a segment on cold fusion. This was junk journalism at its worst! It used footage from the highly balanced (or some would say pro-cold fusion) BBC/CBC TV documentary of 1994 and made nasty, negative assault on cold fusion and on Pons and Fleischmann directly. It made these scientists appear to be greedy crooks who had almost conned the US Congress into deluging them with money, and then they had gone on to con Toyota into supporting them in a lab on the French Riviera. There were no reports of replications or the growing body of peer-reviewed positive scientific findings in cold fusion and the on-going commercial developments in the field. We saw the outrageous, absurd comments of David Williams at the Harwell Laboratory (whose data has now been determined to have replicated Pons and Fleischmann), but where was Dr. McKubre of SRI International stating that the phenomenon is real (a segment that was also in Too Close to the Sun)? This travesty by ABC was even more unethically contrived, because a researcher for Stoessel, Frank Silverstein, had contacted ENECO of Salt Lake City and had received the necessary positive side of the cold fusion story. Hearing about this, I contacted ABC story researcher, Mr. Silverstein. He told me that he was working on a program of "suppression in science" such as the Galileo's situation, etc. That was hardly what the program turned out to be! I filled him in on my perspective on cold fusion, sent him all our magazine issues, and, I believe, Fire from Ice. I heard nothing from him after that. Faced with the amount of positive material in his hands, plus your past outstanding programs on Good Morning America and Nightline, how was this this pastiche of gross misinformation about cold fusion concocted? There are only two explanations: incompetence or extreme malevolence. I am sending this to you in the hope-and expectation- that you will transmit this directly, and perhaps personally to high officials at ABC. I would hope that equivalent rebuttal time would be given on some near-term segment on the ABC evening news, GMA, or Nightline, addressing this travesty of botched journalism in the matter of cold fusion. Long, long ago I offered the entire Too Close to the Sun program to ABC - through Hugh Downs, who is sympathetic to cold fusion. I suggested they broadcast it in full, perhaps with appended updated material. This was never done. Instead we got the Silverstein/Stoessel cut-up job. I can assure you that this letter and ABC's response to it will be published in Infinite Energy. Thousands of concerned technical people and average citizens are not going to be happy about this program. I demand an investigation of the facts of the production of this program. We will publish those facts in Infinite Energy. I want to know how this 100% biased program came about. After that, I expect an apology from ABC television executives. This was a totally uncalled-for assault on what may be one of the most important fields of scientific investigation and technological development in history. Fortunately, whatever ABC TV decides to do, progress in the field will eventually make Stoessel/Silverstein look very bad, indeed. They should be ashamed of themselves. However, they did get one point correctly when Stoessle said, in paraphrase here: "too often what the media presents as scientific fact is anything but." He conceded that some of what he said on this program may one day be proved wrong. The cold fusion segment was wrong, and he knew it was wrong based on the material available to him, right when he broadcast it. Sincerely, Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D. cc (minus your address): Fred Jaeger, ENECO Frank Silverstein, ABC TV Public electronic forums on cold fusion and new energy From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 06:14:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA10562; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:52:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:52:05 -0800 From: RMCarrell aol.com Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:51:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970110085128_100746400 emout12.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Palladium results & photographic film Resent-Message-ID: <"k7zWz1.0.sa2.3caro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3274 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just a footnote to the discussion about the variability of resuslts with palladium over the years. A number of years ago, as the story goes, Eastman Kodak was confronted with a sudden and drastic loss in the sensitivity of their photographic emulsions, which were formulated according to standard procedure. Fortunately, samples of everything were kept over the years, and the problem was traced to a change in the forage of the cattle from which the gelatin was derived. There was a trace element in the gelatin which was critical, but overlooked, until it became absent. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 07:44:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA29756; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 07:18:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 07:18:44 -0800 Date: 10 Jan 97 10:17:04 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: Response to Elliot Kennel Message-ID: <970110151704_72240.1256_EHB135-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"DM4TI.0.qG7.Htbro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3275 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:kennel nhelab.iae.or.jp [This is in response to the message that came out titled "Unidentified subject!" Kind of like a UFO.] Elliot wrote: First of all, Storms experiment has not worked in a flow calorimeter with water working fluid (yet). That is incorrect. He used a flow calorimeter at Los Alamos. See: E. Storms, "Measurements of Excess Heat from a Pons-Fleischmann-Type Electrolytic Cell Using Palladium Sheet," Fusion Technology, vol. 23, no. 2. If Storms is your mentor I suggest you read his papers. Second, Storms' protocol for testing the cell is not really special; what sets his work apart is his qualification process for palladium. Incorrect. He also describes methods of treating the palladium. I am not sure what you mean by "special," but these methods are, in any case, recommended by others including Cravens and Fleischmann. And yes, third, rather than bash us in print, he sent us a nice letter offering to help us with that plus a few suggestions on how to measure open circuit voltage, and we're taking him up on it. Good! But that step alone will not solve your problems. You must address the other problems with the cell, or it will not work. MITI will bash you, others may bash you, but in my ever-helpful, never-bashing style, I will enumerate your main problems as I see them. I compiled this list from my readings (see the references in the Open Letter), and from comments made at ICCF6 by Pons, Fleischmann, Celani, Li and McKubre: No pretesting or triage (see Storms) Improper surface preparation (Cravens, Storms) Not the recommended type of palladium (Fleischmann, see below) Wrong kind of calorimeter; interferes with reaction (McKubre, Fleischmann) Wrong method of measuring loading; interferes with reaction (Storms, Bockris, Fleischmann - the OCV will fix this problem) Temperature 50 degrees too low (Ikegami, Storms, Fleischmann, EVERYONE ELSE) Wrong cell wall material (Fleischmann, Bockris, Mizuno) No triggering procedure (Celani, Fleischmann, Cravens, many others) Incorrect geometry and anode to cathode ratio (me . . . others too - can't find 'em at the moment.) Insufficient cathode mass (Li) We're on the best of terms with him, and I'm trying to help get additional verification of his results. You personally may be on the best of terms with him. I am delighted to hear that. Maybe you should tell him that someday, he says he has never met you. But officially the NHE is uncooperative and even hostile towards him and towards other outside academic scientists, particularly unconventional ones. There have been no visits and no communication with them. That is what Mizuno and others say. Some of your lower-level colleagues at the NHE say they regret this policy. But Mizuno does not have a reproducible protocol for excess thermal energy in a water flow mass calorimeter. Of course he does! Both his Pd and proton conductors have been reproduced. Didn't you hear Oriani's ICCF6 presentation? It was one of the best. Any CF cell can be made to work in a properly designed mass flow calorimeter. I recommend the static type because they are simpler, easier, more precise and cheaper, but there are numerous examples of flow calorimeters in the literature. As Oriani showed, a thermoelectric envelope calorimeter is best for these high temperature ceramic CF devices, but you could kludge together a flow calorimeter for one of them too. You shouldn't though. Always use the best tool for the job. Recall also that Mizuno's charter is basic research, meaning that he is trying to get first-of-a-kind results . . . And what is your charter? Are you supposed to repeat the same experiment 50 times in a row over several years without results? . . . to suggest that Mizuno's very fine laboratory ought to be pressed into service as an engineering development facility is absurd. His what?!? Obviously you have never been there. His work is fine, but his "laboratory" is smaller than the broom closets in your lab. And, as Chris pointed out, the roof leaks. We've tested several types of Pd, including J-M Puratronic grade Pd, the highest purity made. I do not think that is the right kind. Martin Fleischmann told me the name and stock number for the Pd he uses -- unfortunately I did not get a chance to jot it down -- but I believe it was different. It is the type J-M uses in the Milton Roy filters. I recall it is not pure; it is alloyed to improve structural integrity. I get the impression that you people do not talk with Pons, Fleischmann, J-M and others often enough. Regarding Ohmori's gold cathodes, you write: That doesn't sound much like previous recipes for cold fusion . . . Exactly! It is new and innovative. Just what the field calls for. So, yes, it could be excess heat from some nuclear effect involving gold, but it could also point to the difficulty in calibrating that particular calorimeter. I do not think so. I see no problems with Ohmori's calibrations. And his transmutations cannot be caused by a calibration error. Others have observed excess heat in gold, including Swartz. So I would like to give Ohmori some more time to think about his results. You have given him two years already. He is 20 minutes away from your lab by taxi. For you to continue to ignore him in this fashion is outrageous and absurd. In the meantime I think the community is entitled to be skeptical about this. The community has not looked at this, so it is not entitled to have any opinion, skeptical or otherwise. You have no idea how he calibrates, so you should not speculate that he might be making an error in that phase of the experiment. Regarding CETI, you wrote: For the moment there is no consensus (from SRI at least) one way or the other as to the existence of a nuclear anomaly, although that will presumably be resolved reasonably soon. Well, I do not care about nuclear anomalies. How about the thermal anomalies? Is there is any consensus on that? Me: "And why on earth do you insist on using this particular type of calorimeter?" You: "Recall that we HAVE had positive results with other calorimeters!!!" My point exactly! Use the other kind. They work, your SRI style flow calorimeter will not work. It will keep the cathode too cold, and it will not allow a trigger mechanism. That is what McKubre said in his closing remarks at ICCF6. That is what Fleischmann and others say too. We feel that we are entitled to ask why experiments work in some calorimeters but not in others . . . Yes, you *should* ask. You should have asked that question before designing these calorimeters. Look in the literature: the answer is manifest. Look at what happened in SRI's calorimeter when it got accidentally plugged up with a piece of electrical tape. (See Open Letter ref #8). Moreover, some of these other calorimeters are subject to errors if the internal conditions of the cell changes. I would not call them serious errors. The machines become less accurate for a while. But so what? They work fine when the cell conditions remain stable, and -- as I pointed out regarding Pons -- many cells remain stable for weeks or months. We would like to be sure that this has not happened. This requires additional research. Don't bother. Just toss out the results from the times when the cell conditions are changing rapidly, and tabulate the data from when the excess heat is steady. Net excess energy from one of those periods will vastly exceed the limits of chemistry, in many cases. Me: "Clearly, the instrument itself is interfering with the experiment. That was the point of McKubre's remarks. You: "No, that is NOT clear. That is only one hypothesis." It is not a hypothesis. It is an observation. As McKubre pointed out, the track record for SRI style calorimeters is terrible. He said it is because these calorimeters are designed to maintain internal conditions in a highly stable level, and usually much too cold. Okay, that is his hypothesis, but the fact that they do not work is an observation. His hypothesis is shared Fleischmann, Cravens, Storms and every other leading expert I have discussed this matter with. In any case, if the system requires temperature gradients or certain thermal response from the environment (or whatever), we ought to be able to build in the same factors in a flow calorimeter, possibly by installing a separate loop within the calorimeter. Yes, indeed. It can be done. But you will end up making the instrument even more complicated and finicky than it already is. It seems to me it would be better to use Joule's original calorimeter design, but I suppose that is a matter of taste. There is no obvious reason why one particular calorimeter should spell the death of excess heat. There are MANY obvious reason why. (Okay, hypotheses, strictly speaking.) Read the literature! I think most of us are disturbed by that trend, and that is why we are looking for counterexamples. Don't be disturbed by the trend. Learn from it. A case in point occurred this week, when one of the university profs came in. He had had some spectacular results in 1992 with an unstirred calorimeter. After switching to a stirred calorimeter the results were greatly diminished. Every time he improves the calorimetry, the amount of excess heat decreases and reproducibility is worse. That sounds like an artifact to me. I have never heard that stirring will kill a reaction. Perhaps it puts cool water on the cathode and quenches the reaction? Who are you talking about, anyway? What were the power levels, input and output? What were the temperatures? Then please carry out your own experiments and prove your point! I do, as much as I can afford. Now why don't you please pay more attention to the literature? Listen to the leading people like McKubre. Look, there are a lot of people that are frustrated that progress has not come much faster. Yes, starting with your bosses in Tokyo. There are a lot of people who believe that if they were given more money, they could get some more results. They may be right. They *are* right. People like Mizuno and Storms work with 0.1% of your budget, and achieve far better results. Money is not the only issue. On the other hand, it would be nice if these people could afford to buy enough palladium. It is shame that Mizuno, a middle-class professor, has had to pay more than $50,000 out of his own pocket for equipment. But this true in any competitive field (not just cold fusion). If this was a competitive field, Mizuno would be funded and you people would be cut off. In competition, success is rewarded, failure is punished. Again, I'll reiterate that if there were an experiment which is non-secret, reproducible and uses water mass flow calorimetry to measure excess thermal energy, NHE Lab would probably just buy one. Don't be silly. There are numerous examples of flow calorimeters. Some are working right now, at this moment, in Japan, Italy, U. Illinois, and even in Ragland's lab in Mississippi. And any CF cell could be adopted to work in a properly designed flow calorimeters. But the static type is more convenient, cheaper, and more effective, so many people prefer it, especially Storms, Pons and Fleischmann. As it happens, Evan Ragland just told me he prefers mass flow calorimeters for his Pd experiments. He says it is easier to calibrate, and easier to increase the cooling capacity when the cell starts to boil when output climbs to 5 or 10 times input. "It is better than calling the Fire Department." My feeling is that those who expected to soon buy cold fusion products at the local Wall-Mart are among the most disappointed. No, the most disappointed people are your bosses in Tokyo, who spent millions on an engineering-oriented program with nothing to show for it. There are in fact a number of experiments which now seem to give reproducible evidence for coupling between the solid state and nuclear state. I am overall more optimistic now than I have been for the past seven years. However, as far as excess heat is concerned, the picture looks as muddled as ever. Oh, come now! The calorimetry is and always has been rock solid compared to the nuclear evidence. Yes, we see tritium, x-rays, helium and host-metal transmutation. Yes, that means a nuclear reaction is going on. But Hal Puthoff and others will tell you that does not rule out ZPE as the primary cause of the heat. Ikegami and others say the nuclear effects are millions of times smaller than the heat, compared to hot fusion. Of course I myself could not care less about nuclear effects, but I do think you have it upside down. "Heat is the primary signature of the reaction," said Fleischmann in 1989. It still is. People here argue at length about whether Miley's silver is contamination, but I have not seen anyone seriously question his 4 deg C Delta T! (Dick Blue said it is caused by thermal stratification of the air, which would require that the room be as hot as an oven.) I have never seen anyone challenge the flow calorimetry of McKubre, Storms, Arata, or the static calorimetry of Pons and Fleischmann, Storms (again), Bockris, Ohmori or any of the others. Morrison wrote a critique of calorimetry -- and Fleischmann shot it full of holes. (See Morrison's "Comments on Claims of Excess Enthalpy by Fleischmann and Pons Using Simple Cells Made to Boil," available in e-mail format from me.) That was the last we ever heard from the mainstream "skeptics" on calorimetry. Hoffman had the good sense to tiptoe around the subject, eliminating all references to papers about calorimetry, neatly cutting out 80% of the field in the bargain. Very neat! Taubes boldly declares that the heat is caused by laboratory power supplies, which deliver more electricity on weekends, and nobody measures cell input power. Most of the other skeptics explain away the results by abolishing thermodynamics, especially the Second Law. Nobody has ever challenged the excess heat. You would have to overthrow Joule and Thompson before you disprove it! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 09:48:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA28622; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:23:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:23:53 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:23:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970110122307_1392477383 emout17.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: antigravity Resent-Message-ID: <"QbVEf.0.0_6.aidro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3277 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Noever and I are exchanging info. I hope to get another paper published and find out some good stuff. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: noever webtv.net (David Noever) To: fznidarsic aol.com Date: 97-01-08 20:47:22 EST how can i get a copy of your book on zero point energy and antigravity. Do you have a reference on the oxford experiment you refer to with liquid helium Best regards. Dr. David Noever noever webtv.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 10:59:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA15836; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:46:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:46:43 -0800 Message-Id: <199701101833.LAA25919 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Request for assistance Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:44:47 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"P3DlC3.0.Gt3.Hwero" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3278 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: About a month ago, I mentioned that a 16 year old girl performed a thermal ignition experiment for a science fair in Dallas, Texas. This was a replication of the experiments conducted at Texas A&M in 1992. Due to the rules of the science fair, she cannot release her name until after the judges have reviewed her project. However, she is in need of additional support documentation. She has made a request for members of the scientific community to present questions to her in regards to this project. Of course, due to my closeness to the situation I am not a qualified candidate for such. My request from those who will assist, please submit logical questions that a straight "A" junior in high school can comprehend to "Student" in care of myself or Dan York at the following addresses: Joe Champion Dan York She will respond to each question and you be the judge of her alertness. To set the record straight, her desire to attempt a low energy nuclear transmutation project for her science fair was self determined. Of course, I now know who this girl is, but other than a telephone call I have never met her. However, I did receive communication from her father who was concerned about the safety of this experiment. Furthermore, the only picture that I have seen is in her samurai outfit (re: www.netzone.com/~discpub/student.html) so I wouldn't even recognize her in public, that is, unless she's wearing the same outfit! ___________________________ Joe Champion discpub netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 11:17:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA19657; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:03:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:03:48 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970109140716.00715414 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:02:52 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ipBXh3.0.3p4.HAfro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3279 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:31 AM 1/9/97 -0600, you wrote: >Experiments....... > > >Which materials? Helium is not that hard to come by. Most complicated device >I can see is the frequency/amplitude controls for the emitters. > >-john > >-- >John E. Steck >Motorola CSS > > For you guys who hate to shop, here is a tip: helium abounds in toy shops and novelty shops. it isn't very expensive either. all the plumbing and heating and temperature controls related to water vapor seems like a nightmare to me: this thread will end up sounding like the cold fusion calorimetry and potopav device threads, which I personally avoid like the plague (no offense, cause I do know they are important to those working on this issues, but if you arent, they sure are boring). as far as a name goes, Ross, Megaverse is okay but...sounds too tackily like "The Incredible Universe" by Tandy or the Megaboost Vitamins or the mega deal at my local car dealer - ie , the ad people have burned this one. Why not just: Aether Ocean or The Cosmic Ocean or Aether Cosmos or along those lines. nice and respectable and definitively in your face so the book store people know how to respond to queriess for "the new book about aether". if aether cosmology is what you are setting forth, name it what it is as far as visually observable effects go: remember me when you make money on this one, this is a really good one: the sphere is best because of the exquisite sculpting of geometry which can be undertaken through transducer placements and power/frequency controls. which can be integrated to a keyboard - multi-channel music synthesiser intoduce a suitable very fine powder, or perhaps even one of the noble gasses, or perhaps a mix of them the dynamics you are talking about should be able to suspend them AND differeniate them. no doubt will take "hunting" to find it you should eventually learn how to sculpt various geometric shapes, like maybe five pointed stars, sort of, with the suspended particles, or even the noble gases, which of course you cleverly exite through voltage of em transducers separate from the acoustic transducers. think of a glowing red neon three dimensional five pointed star thingy in your sphere, which should of course be all glass. (and the presense of the transducers and the pressure gauges WILL have an effect on the resonance universe you are creating, even if ever so slight,so sorry, no escape from that aspect of uncertainty). maybe the glowing neon cannot be differentiated enough,but I bet that if you really got it loaded and balanced on the thin edges of slight differentials you could show some interesting stuff. in any event, the suspension, relative concentration of particles, and their induced motion in the sphere should be pretty interstingly convincing to give people a lot of fascination the first one of these will end up in the Smithsonian. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 13:00:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA12546; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:34:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:34:25 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:30:30 -0700 (MST) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: "Francis J. Stenger" cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Inertial Electron Pump In-Reply-To: <32D53A8E.2D14 interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"LVceC1.0.r33.EVgro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3282 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > Robert Stirniman wrote: > > Teller tells the tale thusly: (comparing a rotating ionic crystal > > with a rotating conductor). > > > > "A much bigger effect can be expected in ionic crystals in which > > the positvie and negative ions, having different masses, will be > > subject to different centrifugal forces. The polarization of a > > rotating needle made of an alkali halide will actually be quite > > similar to the polarization caused by an electric field. The > > difference is that an electric field acts both on the electrons > > and the ions, whereas the centrifugal force acts practically > > only on the heavy ions. This obvious effect seems to have > > received little attention." > > Robert, this sounds like it's getting mighty close to the technology > for separating uranium isotopes using centrifuges - I think I'll quit > before neat guys in suits start to hang out in front of my house! > (Or, maybe not!) > > Frank Stenger > i know your looking for 'slinging "outwardly" fields', but besides the men in suits, wouldn't the next generation of super-high speed giga-hard drive manufactures want to 'see-you' also if it is indeed an anomaly? (thinner & faster.....:) -=se=- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 13:01:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA03139; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:57:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:57:07 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970110195941.002be83c atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:59:41 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Response to Elliot Kennel Resent-Message-ID: <"LX_Ew.0.vm.Gyfro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3280 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: [a complete debunking of Elliot Kennel's Party-line bullshit] It sounds to me like Jed is right. The NHE sounds like a counter-productive bureaucracy that should be shut down. Isn't the NHE controlled by the hot-fusion group in Japan? So don't they have a secret mandate to insist on experiments that don't work? How else can one explain the NHE insistence on following only those protocols that are guaranteed to fail? It sounds like Harwell all over again. Either Japan should shutter the NHE, or it should reconstitute it and leave out all the hot-fusion corrupted physicists. Because as the saying goes: pouring new wine into old skins doesn't work. Kurt Johmann -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 13:01:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA16268; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:49:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:49:54 -0800 Message-ID: <32D61ECB.5FA4 ro.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 02:49:47 -0800 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis References: <3.0.32.19970109140716.00715414 aa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2RX8p3.0.3-3.ljgro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3283 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: > > At 11:31 AM 1/9/97 -0600, you wrote: > >Experiments....... > > > > > >Which materials? Helium is not that hard to come by. Most complicated > device > >I can see is the frequency/amplitude controls for the emitters. > > > >-john > > > >-- > >John E. Steck > > as far as a name goes, Ross, Megaverse is okay but...sounds too tackily > like "The Incredible Universe" by Tandy or the Megaboost Vitamins or the > mega deal at my local car dealer - ie , the ad people have burned this one. > > Why not just: Aether Ocean or The Cosmic Ocean or Aether Cosmos or along > those lines. How About "Aether it is, Or it isn't!" Patrick Reavis -- The Double Naught Spy From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 13:07:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA09541; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:24:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:24:10 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:22:01 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701102022.OAA13801 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Joe Champion , Dan York , vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Student Resent-Message-ID: <"SrYq-1.0._K2.dLgro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3281 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: How did you determine that a nuclear transmutation occurred in your experiment? Please explain all the steps that you took in making this determination. Thank you Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 13:12:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA17318; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:52:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:52:37 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 11:53:18 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, discpub@netzone.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Science Fair Project Resent-Message-ID: <"Epy6l1.0.LE4.Fmgro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3284 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Student, Various metals are present in the can used for your burn. One would expect iron, zinc, copper and tin in or on the surface of the can. Various hydrocarbons and other compounds might be present in the can lining. The solder may include antimony, tin, lead, and possibly silver. Have you done any kind of control burn or taken other measures to assure the resulting detected metals are not contamination from the can? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 14:07:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA00910; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:36:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:36:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:36:01 -0700 (MST) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tessien Aether Hypothesis In-Reply-To: <32D61ECB.5FA4 ro.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CuJc93.0.8E.mPhro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3291 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > Why not just: Aether Ocean or The Cosmic Ocean or Aether Cosmos or along > > those lines. > > How About "Aether it is, Or it isn't!" > Patrick Reavis > i like "Aether 1!" (or "aether one") it/IT(aether) IS all inclusive. ps, it might even keep it at the 'top' of the list(s). -=se=- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 14:20:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04038; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:46:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:46:51 -0800 Message-Id: <199701102146.NAA00217 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: RGeorge hooked.net To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:46:44 +0000 Subject: quotes Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.30) Resent-Message-ID: <"rHQHg1.0.u-.8Zhro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3292 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Can someone remind me who made a great quote in scinece something to the effect that skeptics never accept new paradigms but they eventually die off and the resistance dies with them. Russ George From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 16:36:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA18580; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:21:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:21:41 -0800 Date: 10 Jan 97 19:19:12 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: quotes Message-ID: <970111001912_100433.1541_BHG53-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"78kkE1.0.8Y4.Gqjro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3295 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Russ asks: > Can someone remind me who made a great quote in scinece something > to the effect that skeptics never accept new paradigms but they > eventually die off and the resistance dies with them. You are thinking of Max Planck, who said that science progresses by funerals, and that his Other Constant was 20 years - the length of time it takes for the Establishment to get any new idea through its collective thick skull. Here are a couple of actual quotes: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - "A scientific autobiography" (1949) p.33 (translated by E Gaynor). "Science only progresses funeral by funeral." I used to try not to quote the illustrious dead, it seemed a bit cheap. But as my own dotage comes closer, these old boys seem funnier and funnier - while the seriousness with which so many in the present generation take themselves becomes increasingly amusing. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 17:10:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA18563; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:21:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:21:38 -0800 Date: 10 Jan 97 19:19:10 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Response to Elliot Kennel Message-ID: <970111001909_100433.1541_BHG53-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"WChjp3.0.vX4.Fqjro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3294 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kurt Johmann writes: > Isn't the NHE controlled by the hot-fusion group in Japan? So > don't they have a secret mandate to insist on experiments that > don't work? How else can one explain the NHE insistence on > following only those protocols that are guaranteed to fail? It > sounds like Harwell all over again. I very much doubt this. It reads far too much like conspiracy theories, and I've always followed the rule that if - ah - 'human imperfection' will serve as sufficient explanation, no conspiracy is required. And I find the comment unduly harsh, anyway. I agree in principle with Jed's line, and specifically that criticism from one's own side is always better than being closed down by one's funding agency. But ... that comment about "Mizuno's wonderful laboratory" did rather grate on my nerves. A researcher who largely funds his own work from his own limited pocket, and who does such fine work in a leaky rat-hole has my very considerable respect. I am reminded of Faraday, who - to judge by his notebooks - used a great deal of string, and, in real terms, probably spent less in his entire career than CERN spend in a day (on paperclips). Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 17:10:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA27740; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:51:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:51:03 -0800 Message-Id: <199701110050.QAA24657 weber.ucsd.edu> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Bart Simon" To: rgeorge hooked.net Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:52:11 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: quotes Reply-to: bssimon helix.ucsd.edu CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"Mg17T2.0.Dn6.nFkro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3298 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greetings, Russ George wrote: > Can someone remind me who made a great quote in scinece something to > the effect that skeptics never accept new paradigms but they > eventually die off and the resistance dies with them. Check out the 'paradigm-man' himself: Thomas Kuhn in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" (2nd edition) page 152 (there may be other references too). "conversions will occur a few at a time until, after the last holdouts have died, the whole profession will again be practising under a single, but now different, paradigm." Pulls at yer heart-strings doesn't it:-) Note that Kuhn suggested that the older scientists would furnish the strongest resistance to the new paradigm and that the younger scientists would usher it in. What would Kuhn say about such semi-retirees as Fleischmann and Bockris? cheers, Bart Simon (bssimon helix.ucsd.edu) ============================================ Bart Simon Dept. of Sociology/Science Studies-0533 University of California at San Diego (UCSD) 9500 Gilman Dr. La Jolla, CA, 92093-0533 phone: 619-534-0491/fax: 619-534-3388 =========================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 17:13:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA32220; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:02:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:02:03 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32D6E659.794BDF32 math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:01:13 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Response to Elliot Kennel References: <970111001909_100433.1541_BHG53-1 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8I_iG.0.ds7.zPkro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3299 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley wrote: > > A researcher who largely funds his own work from > his own limited pocket, and who does such fine work in a leaky rat-hole > has my very considerable respect. I am reminded of Faraday, who - to > judge by his notebooks - used a great deal of string, and, in real > terms, probably spent less in his entire career than CERN spend in a > day (on paperclips). > I don't think Faraday is a good example; he was one of the first modern career scientists, i.e. someone paid to do science as a profession. Faraday had a lab and a permanent full time hired assistant...fairly good even in todays terms. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 08:50:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA05502; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:02:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:02:38 -0800 Date: 10 Jan 97 10:59:12 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: Response to Elliot . . . spot welding? Message-ID: <970110155911_72240.1256_EHB96-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"0WSGP2.0.qL1.SWcro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3276 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:kennel nhelab.iae.or.jp In my previous message I listed some of the problems with the NHE experiments: No pretesting or triage (see Storms) Improper surface preparation (Cravens, Storms) . . . My notes from ICCF6 also say "Spot welding!" I am not sure if this applies to the NHE work or not. Anyway if you do you shouldn't. Spot weld, that is. Quoting Storms: "Although this method is effective, it can transfer copper metal from the spot-welded electodes to the weld. When this metal is redeposited on the cathode surface, heat production is reduced or prevented. This problem can be eliminated by using spot welding electrodes made of tungsten." I think Mallove's method is better: drill a hole in the cathode, put the lead wire through the hole, twist it, cover with Teflon. Hey, it works for the phone company. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 17:44:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA06181; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:22:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:22:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:20:29 -0800 Message-Id: <199701110120.RAA12340 dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: MITI address & misc To: 72240.1256 compuserve.com Cc: 76570.2270 compuserve.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"ht5Ej1.0.NW1.Bjkro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3300 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 11, 1997 Jed, and vortexians You wrote: > >Well, I do not see any MITI addresses here in the ICCF6 list . . . If >you come up with any other addresses I would be happy to send it to >them. Adress: Minister Sato Shinji Ministry of International Trade And Industry 3-1 Kasumigaseki, 1-Chome Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100 Japan Please write the Subject line so that it can be referred to the proper department(s). For example: Subject: The New Hydrogen Energy Program, Policy, Management, and Results as Seen by the World Scientific Community. Or some such thing to catch the eye. :-) Perhaps more than one copy should be supplied so all related departments can review your concerns at once. I think you want a dialogue to happen. Hideo Kozima made a report on the ICCF-6 (Cold Fusion #20). It seems the Agency of Natural Resources and Energy has been conducting CF experiments since 1993 but have not shown definitive success. This is aside from MITI's NHE efforts. The present program now is to try to detect tritium, helium, and gamma to determine if nuclear fusion was occuring. Kozima bemoaned the lack of news coverage of the ICCF-6. Well, ICCF-6 sure did not promote publicity --- they discouraged it. You might already know about it I but found JETRO (Japan External Trade Organization) websites for access to information on Japan business access, information, and such. Tokyo: http://www.jetro.go.jp/ Los Angeles: http://www.jetro.org Atlanta Geogia: http://www.jetro.org/atlanta Also for those desiring to read in Japanese without the hassle of getting a language language reader, a third year Canadian university student (smart!) has developed an on-line 'universal' Japanese code reader. Interesting fellow. To use, you access http://www.lfw.org/shoudoka/ As it says in the website, Try it out. You could access Yahoo! Japan and browse the Japanese websites (in Japanese), and read the Asahi, Mainich, and Yomiuri websites with their news and other contents in Japanese. Also there are three other links listed. Anyway, there is interesting information there. You can incorporate Japanese into your own website if you want. The Shoudoka site gets overloaded frequently. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 18:32:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA22022; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 18:22:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 18:22:55 -0800 Message-Id: <199701110209.TAA10867 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: Subject: Re: Response to Elliot Kennel Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:22:52 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qKwg82.0.0O5.-blro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3301 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Hey Barry, you said: > I don't think Faraday is a good example; he was one of the first > modern career scientists, i.e. someone paid to do science as a > profession. Faraday had a lab and a permanent full time hired > assistant...fairly good even in todays terms. Maybe I have been misinformed. I thought UCLA gave every researcher free rope and laboratory minoins to discover the turth. Damn politics, where is the bush, or where is Mr. Bush? ___________________________ Joe Champion discpub netzone.com http://www.netzone.com/~discpub From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 19:35:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA18428; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:19:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:19:45 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:17:44 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970110214927_814901414 emout02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L eskimo.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil Subject: Results expected soon Resent-Message-ID: <"pNXr_3.0.aV4.ARmro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: stay tuned. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: noever webtv.net (David Noever) To: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: 97-01-10 19:01:39 EST we are working on the tampere experiment. it should yield results by the middle to the end of this month.I haven't gotten any of your papers yet but look forward to seeing them. Best regards. Dr. David Noever noever webtv.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 03:32:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA10328; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 02:30:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 02:30:57 -0800 Message-ID: <32D767EB.37FE mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 20:44:03 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: How to look for free EM energy? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"c0o5y1.0.8X2.Slsro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3304 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > This is an attempt to move discussion up a level to a broader point of > view, and maybe open some discussion about superconductors. > > It seems to me that, if more than specific experiments are to be discussed, > the fundamental issue of discussion productivity boils down to a question > of choosing the best strategy for finding an energy producing device, > assuming that is possible. My main thrust. Lets get outside of the square and increase the overall understand and tools available to the group. > My view, as mentioned earlier, is: " ... no amount of application of > conventional accepted "laws" of electromagnetism, or any analysis based > upon them, will provide any "proof" or evidence whatsoever for any "over > unity" electromagnetic (EM) device working or even being worth building. > This is because conservation of energy is a premise built into the > conventional laws of physics. If you think you have designed a device > using conventional laws that is over unity then you have a mistake > somewhere." Still open on this point. We don't or can't know everythong. > This suggests that the efficient way to go about looking for the Holy Grail > of energy is to look where there is some real evidence that conventional > laws have been violated. This is not unreasonable to actually do because > if anything is certain at all it is that we do not know all there is to > know. Discoveries are made all the time. Making discoveries is mostly a > matter of looking in new places and examining the unexplained with a fresh > point of view. You have to know what you are looking for and then start > tinkering around. > Agree. In my belief I see three possible paths to follow. > It seems that basic electronic circuits, motors, motor/generators, > antennae, etc. have all been hashed to death and done dozens of different > ways. This route seems unfruitful, mostly for the reasons stated above. > Also, if you have to worry about fine tuning a precision clockwork type > device to get o-u behavior then you have a much bigger problem on your > hands - that is that the thing you are developing or envisioning or even > testing has little or no utility. If a gadget produces profuse amounts of > energy from nothing, then efficiency should be a relatively moot point. > Having to worry about fine tuning efficiency should be a big red flag that > something is fundamentally wrong. Sort of agree. I am currently working on an explanation of what happens in a Adam/Newman motor. Don't jump yet. Let me take the time to lay it out. > In regard to the opposed pole attraction motor, etc., there is actual data, > in the form of the Ide experiment, that indicates there is an anomaly, a > problem with conventional theory. Futhermore, in addition to > counterintuitive behavior, there have been reported anomalies in the area > of superconductors, and superconductors could play a significant role in > investigating the opposed pole phenomena. Furthermore, another area of > interest (to me anyway) is the question of the actual existence of magnetic > flux. This question appears (my interpretation) to be tied into Ide's > guess at a possible explanation of the anomaly he observed. I have > specific experiments planned in this area also. This all just goes to say > that the opposed pole stator motor appears to me to be a really fruitful > area for discussion and experimenting. This is One of my ways. More to come. Stay tuned. > Personally, I think a good specific place to begin an investigation is > maybe by building a motor based upon pulsed ferrite core stators, with a > ferrite armature, like Ide's, and then replacing one of the opposing > stators with a high temperature superconductor (HTSC). The stators in > Ide's experiment are pulsed upon approach of the armature by (opticallly) > triggering an SCR and storing the coil output in another capacitor. After > the armature pass, the second capacitor is brought up to full charge (if > necessary it is below unity) and the process is repeated in reverse. > There may be a common thread in this device and others. Still working. > More generally speeking though, I think a good strategy for the amateur is > to acquire and become familiar with HTSC's. This would be a good area for > sharing and in which to develop group level skills. There are various > inexpensive kits available. There were some postings on vortex-l a while > back about where to find them. > Will put on the back burner for now. > Also, if anyone is inerrested, the following is a dump of a spreadsheet of > superconductor suppliers. You might be able to cut and paste into your > spreadsheet program, or just use by changing "," to tab everywhere in a > word processor. The fields are company, state, type of material (C = > coatings or film, M = materials or components, W = wire), phone, FAX. > > Advanced Ceramics Inc.,NJ,M,609-397-2900,609-397-2708 > Alfa Aesar Johnson Matthes,MA,M,800-343-0660,508-521-6350 > All-Chemie LTD,SC,M,803-884-4400,803-884-0560 > Alloys International Inc.,NY,W,516-342-0043,516-342-0051 > Angstrom Sciences,PA,M,412-462-2777,412-462-2780 > California Fine Wire Co.,CA,W,805-489-5144,805-489-5352 > Commercial Crystal Labs Inc.,FL,M,914-643-5959,914-643-6058 > ESDI Inc.,NY,C,516-563-8278,516-563-8231 > G & J Steel & Tubing Inc.,NJ,W,800-322-8823,908-526-9487 > G&S Titanium,OH,W,800-860-0564,330-262-1550 > GE Co.,CT,M,800-626-2004, > Grove Grundilling Inc.,ME,W,207-743-7051,207-743-7083 > Hitachi Cable America,NY,M,800-394-0234,914-993-0990 > HITC Superconductors Inc.,NJ,M,609-397-2700,609-397-2708 > Hypres Inc.,NY,M,914-592-1190,914-347-2239 > IGC Advanced Superconductors Inc.,CT,W,203-753-5215,203-753-2096 > Innovare Inc.,PA,M,610-837-8830, > Intermagnetics General Corp.,NY,M,518-786-1122, > InterWire Group,NY,W,800-799-4978,914-273-6510 > MolecuWire Corp.,NJ,W,908-938-9473,908-938-3189 > Omega Engiuneering Inc.,CT,W,800-826-6342,203-359-7700 > Oxford Superconducting Technology,NJ,W,908-541-1300,908-541-7769 > Rea Engineeered Wire Products Inc.,IN,W,219-422-4252,219-422-4246 > SAES Getters USA Inc.,CO ,M,719-576-3200,719-576-5025 > Satcon Technology Corp.,MA,M,800-663-4916,617-661-3373 > SonoTec Corp.,NY,C,917-795-2020,914-795-2720 > Superconductive Componenets,OH ,M,800-346-6567,800-292-8654 > Superconductor Tech Inc.,CA,M,805-683-8527,805-683-8527 > Superconix Inc. ,MN,M,612-222-0046,612-222-0049 > Vacuumschmelze (Siemens),NJ,M,908-494-3530,908-603-5994 > Watteredge Uniflex Inc.,OH,W,216-871-9215,216-933-8248 > > Addresses and other supplier companies can be found at the Thomas Register > Company home page at: > > > > I am interrested in pursuing HTSC motor applications eventually but have > lots of unrelated experiments in my queue or on the table and zip for cash > lately, so I have been putting this off. The more discussion occurs about > superconductors the more it seems I have made a mistake in priorities. And > then there is the Tampere antigravity stuff ... > > It would be useful to find out what the best texts on superconductivity are > and where they can be bought, and similar info for HTSC kits. Maybe HTSC > ceramic making discussions would be worthwhile also. I seem to recall a > high school kit for such. Any suggestions on any of the above would be > appreciated. > > That's my two cents worth. Anyone else have feelings about finding an > overall approach to looking for EM solutions to the energy problem? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner Hi Horace, I enjoy your posts. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 07:10:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA08450; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:30:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:30:14 -0800 Message-ID: <32D7A406.7189 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:30:30 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: How to look for free EM energy? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cN5H81.0.y32.rFwro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > (snip) Anyone else have feelings about finding an > overall approach to looking for EM solutions to the energy problem? Yes. Find out how ball-lightning can bounce down a street and destroy a small utility building! (No, I don't think Paul K's model is the answer.) This is my pet anomaly. Good to have you back, Horace! I thought the bears got you. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 07:21:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA09145; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:37:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:37:58 -0800 From: RMCarrell aol.com Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:37:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970111093719_1175384309 emout20.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lenz Law Harnessing ---> Accelerating Turntable + coil Resent-Message-ID: <"z7UPe1.0.oE2.4Nwro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3306 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have been skimming the discussion of the experiments reported by Epitaxy. It seems to me there is a strong similarity to the operations that underly the Adams motor as described by Aspden in IE #10 and the UK Adams-Aspden patent. I need to study this more carefully, but I seem to see common features in the Ide paper, the Kawai patent, the Muller motor, the magnetic Wankel motor etc. Ferromagnetism is used to pull the rotor into an airgap. Then electromagnetism is used to nullify the attraction to that pole while inertia carries the pole on to be attracted to the next pole. There are a number of variations on this theme. Aspden seems to have a grasp of how the aether energy is tapped. Recommended reading. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 11:44:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA12643; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:28:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:28:15 -0800 Message-ID: <32D7C582.7B20 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 03:23:22 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lenz Law Harnessing ---> Accelerating Turntable + coil References: <970111093719_1175384309 emout20.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dGG-o3.0.L53.Cd-ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3308 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: RMCarrell aol.com wrote: > > I have been skimming the discussion of the experiments reported by Epitaxy. > > It seems to me there is a strong similarity to the operations that underly > the Adams motor as described by Aspden in IE #10 and the UK Adams-Aspden > patent. I need to study this more carefully, but I seem to see common > features in the Ide paper, the Kawai patent, the Muller motor, the magnetic > Wankel motor etc. Ferromagnetism is used to pull the rotor into an airgap. > Then electromagnetism is used to nullify the attraction to that pole while > inertia carries the pole on to be attracted to the next pole. > > There are a number of variations on this theme. Aspden seems to have a grasp > of how the aether energy is tapped. Recommended reading. > > Mike Carrell Hi Mike, Stay tuned. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 11:46:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA18440 for billb@eskimo.com; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:45:59 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:45:59 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Sat Jan 11 11:45:52 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA18351 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:45:45 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id LAA26952 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:45:39 -0800 Old-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:45:39 -0800 Message-Id: <199701111945.LAA26952 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Tessien Aether Hypothesis, g shielding X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Here is a manner in which the notion of gravitational shielding might make intuitive sense to some of you thinking about these ideas. I think I mentioned the notion of sound pressure inducing a thrust, for example if you have a bunch of crickets all around you singing, then you will be thrust away from that sound energy. But if it surrounds you all around, there will be no net thrust. It is only if you have some form of sound absorber between you and the noise on one side, assymetrically positioned, that you will experience a net thrust toward that sound absorber. Now this idea should give you a clear idea of how different particles of matter can gravitate if all matter consists of noise makers. Then, rather than "attracting" all other matter, you actually have all matter repulsing all other matter. Now it would seem like this wouldn't work at first glance, but then if you realize that the repulsion is due to phase and frequency errors in that incident sound energy, then it becomes immediately clear that in our universe with a Hubble expansive flow, that the sound energy arriving from deep space is frequency shifted relative to the resonant frequency nearby and so that energy, though weaker, will interfere more per unit of energy. I can also make the point that the CBR is just like the cricket noise, and it provides a thrust to our bodies in the same direction as that of gravitation. So, we are slightly pushed down by the CBR toward the earth. But what isn't clear is how you can use this notion to derive a thrust that is proportional to the mass of our gravitating objects. You see, the thrust from crickets noise, and from the CBR, will be proportional to the area of the body, not the mass. CBR thrust will be a bit more complicated since we are only a partially effective shield to that energy. So what is an aether theorist to do? Well, what you do is to consider wavelengths that will interact directly with our sub atomic matter. ie, you head on down to the quantum vacuum foam of Hawking and Penrose and others. At the Planck scale of about a wavelength of E-35 meters, we have an extremely turbulent universe according to QM and other theories. At that scale, you have a sort of turbulent spacetime foam as they call it. Now they consider it to be random and chaotic, while I consider it to be complex and organized into a nodal structure of standing waves we call spacetime. But no matter what, that energy is of a wavelength that is able to pass right on through all of our matter without interacting practically at all. Thus, the earth and even the nuclei in our matter are essentially transparent to energy of this scale. So, when you begin to consider the entire earth as a transparent sphere of extremely tiny dots of blockage of that wave energy at the Planck scale, then what you find is that the earth will gravitate according to its "mass", or the number of dots. This is because few of the dots actually shield one another. It gets slightly more complicated if you wish to consider the internal momentum of the matter resonances as they are coupled to the spacetime nodal structure, but not much. And so there you have it, we are shielding a tiny amount of the flux incident on our standing waves. The notion that such shielding might lead to a weakening of the thrust of gravitation is a very interesting one. You must first realize that for there to be a weakening locally, that you would need to be hidden by a large amount of matter, ie at the center of the earth or in the center of a galaxy. But remember that matter and stars and planets are almost entirely transparent so any sheilding will be tough to notice expecially when you aren't really weighing all those stars in the first place. But, it might just be possible to notice certain behaviors that will seem odd if the force of gravitation is a pull as opposed to if it is a push. It turns out that there is such a bizarre behavior noticed in certain galaxies. This is the formation of bars. The formation of a bar should not take place if you are pulling matter inward. The pulling should lead to the matter forming into ever tightening spirals sort of like the colors mixing into taffy, except in the case of a galaxy, it occurs only in a spiral instead of the wierd mixing arms of the taffy machine. But instead of just a bunch of spirals of stars what we find in a lot of galaxies are bars. Now a bar makes some sense if you are pushing these stars in toward one another. As they get near the center, the thrust inward from wave energy that has been filtered by a long streamer of stars should push less forcefully than the wave energy from free space at the leading edge of the transition to the bar. This is because bars tend to form where there is an enhanced view factor to deep space ahead of the stars in the bar. And so they experience an enhanced thrust in the direction toward the long spiral arm behind them, opposite to their direction of propogation around the galaxy. This compacts the stars in the bar and allows the bar to form. So yes, I do think that you can find instances of gravitational shielding leading to a reduction in the effectiveness of the gravitational force, and thus the value of the "constant", G. And likewise, the three teams that found that G was not a constant, if we take their measurements at face value, verify this supposition. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 12:17:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA21263; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:54:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:54:45 -0800 Message-Id: <32D7F0DD.2CB3 loc100.tandem.com> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:58:26 -0800 From: Bob Horst Reply-To: bhorst loc100.tandem.com Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New patent database on web Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"x3jnN.0.6C5.30_ro" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3310 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: IBM has just put up a great new website with all the patents issued since 1971. You can quickly look the abstract and claims, or more slowly see scanned images of the entire patent. Check it out at: http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/ -- Bob From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 13:11:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA08577; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:03:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:03:22 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:03:01 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970111160151.5f0fe390 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: the year in review Cc: Barry Merriman Resent-Message-ID: <"fTpSn.0.q52.N00so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3312 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:59 PM 1/7/1997 -0800, you wrote: >FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: >> >> I started 1997 just having returned from Power Gen 95 >> ...Jim Reding told me...commersial prototypes would >> appear within a year... > >> Now one year later. CETI cannot make any more good beads. >> The conferences are showing cells that produce less than a watt >> ... no more 1 KW cells to be seen...I still >> trying to get the Yusmar to work. >> >> Did I get caught in a time warp and did I land back in 1991? >> > >Nope, you just dropped back into reality. > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry > > IMHO the problem may not be solely the fabrication of the putatively important beads, but the failure of a adequate calibration in the initial studies. It is possible that they may have produced hundreds of milliwatts of excess heat, but missinterpreted the amount because of thermal bouyancy and the error it produces in a vertical flow system; the result was the reported "kilowatts". The mere plugging of numbers into a formula does not necessarily mean that the derived value is accurate unless the formula(e) applies to the experimental setup. This was discussed in Swartz, M, " Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) Swartz, M, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Bouyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221 (1996) Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 13:11:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA08502; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:03:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:03:00 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:02:49 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970111160138.121f0704 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Response to Elliot Kennel Resent-Message-ID: <"vnuPH3.0.k42.200so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3311 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:17 AM 1/10/97 EST, Jed wrote: >I do not think so. I see no problems with Ohmori's calibrations. And his >transmutations cannot be caused by a calibration error. Others have observed >excess heat in gold, including Swartz. > This is more complicated. We have observed excess heat in systems using gold, but there is not evidence that this occurs "IN" gold. Protium and deuterium are isotopic fuels not significantly soluble in gold as they are nickel, titanium, and palladium. The report to which Jed refers involves a cell using a cathode mainly of nickel, and contained in a light water system. The system's cathode arrangement was complex because it had a cathodic nickel base, covered by a relatively thin barrier, or surface layer, containing gold. [cf. M Swartz, "Possible Deuterium Production from Light Water Excess Enthalpy Experiments Using Nickel Cathodes", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 68-80 (1996). Some additional technical expt'al info is available in M Swartz, "Consistency of the Biphasic Nature of Excess Enthalpy in Solid State Anomalous Phenomena with the Quasi-1-Dimensional Model of Isotope Loading into a Material", Fusion Technology, January(1997)] Also, the report mentions that, by the end of the reaction, some of the physical properties of the surface barrier are consistent with other materials than simple metallic gold. The gold may be a barrier which impedes intra- and transsurface-electrode hydrogen flow which was previously reported to be a key in these reactions in M. Swartz, "Catastrophic Active Medium Hypothesis of Cold Fusion", Vol. 4, Proceedings: 'Fourth International Conference on Cold Fusion", sponsored by EPRI and the Office of Naval Research, 22-1 through 22-12, December (1993). Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 15:36:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA00561; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 14:57:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 14:57:46 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:52:07 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701112252.QAA19580 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Simpson motor? Resent-Message-ID: <"D6x-O2.0.g8.ch1so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3315 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Does anyone have any info on a magnetic motor developed by an elderly man named Simpson? I think he's in CA. Thanks. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 16:54:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA11680; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:49:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:49:03 -0800 Date: 11 Jan 97 18:46:50 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: quotes Message-ID: <970111234650_100433.1541_BHG48-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"YRkIc2.0.Os2.jR2so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3317 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bart Simon comments: > Note that Kuhn suggested that the older scientists would furnish > the strongest resistance to the new paradigm and that the younger > scientists would usher it in. What would Kuhn say about such > semi-retirees as Fleischmann and Bockris? I'd suggest that Kuhn didn't look for contrary examples. As Jed Rothwell points out, the CF situation is very like that of late C19th work on manned flight. There were a few old fellows getting nowhere fast and pretty dispirited, while the almost universal position was that their research was futile - until the young bloods came along. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 17:10:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA08712; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:39:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:39:30 -0800 Message-ID: <32D82394.5077 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 10:04:44 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: harti bbtt.de, vortex-l@eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com Subject: [Fwd: Re: Beyond Newman to DNMEC] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------2C6236166205" Resent-Message-ID: <"VaioO2.0.082.nI2so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3316 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------2C6236166205 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au --------------2C6236166205 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <32D82327.3DAF mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 10:02:55 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson mail.enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Beyond Newman to DNMEC References: <199701112128.WAA15424 mail.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > I just did understand, that at the right side we donīt have at all > any ferrite inside the coil, but just an aircoil ! > > So I guess, the simulation you have done is only valid for > your idea to introduce an coil wound on ferrite, but I bet, > that was not the idea by Epitaxy ?? > Ferrite on the right or not there will not be much difference, only the air coil will not have any back drag as a ferrite core would. > Can you please do the approching simulation again just > using the approaching moving ferrite plate and the PM at he left side, > but without any ferrite at the right side ? > > I guess, then things look much better. If you use > just an aircoil at the right side the field will be different > inside the gap and the coil can just be shorted only at > this moment when this strong REVERSE flow will occur. > The other time it can be opened, so it will not affect any > movement of the ferrite plate. > Thinking about it you are right. Coil should be shorted when the flux is at its min. I however also think about other design which do not need the magnet. Many ways possible once you understand the basics. > Could you also do the simulation with adding the aircoil > shorted at the right side ? Is the QuickField software > able to do that ? Or can it just calculate > with ferrites only and not with shorted aircoils ? > Can do either way. Don't get hung up on too many details. Think about what is happen and why. > >Don't get hung up with the falling field, they is nothing conductive > >around for eddy currents to be induced in. Putting a load on the > >coil is not a good idea as it will only retard the fall of the > >coil's field and increase back drag. It already done its work, let it > >die in peace. There is a small engineering problem as how to handle > >the very large voltages induced into the coil by this rapid field > >decrease. Perhaps something like a non linear load that only conducts > >at high voltages would be a good idea. Just be sure the current flow > >doesn't cause too much back drag. Just one of several engineering > >problems to be ironed out. I have an idea, what about a neon tube? > > Yes, that was what I meant, fluorescent neon tubes do it ! > As used my Newman! > > > >So what do we have? > > > >A system which delivers increasing moving ferrite energy AND very > >large reverse coil currents. > > > >Now if you are still with me, you may be starting to see where I am > >going. The above is real, I can simulate it and Epitxay turntable > >tests verify it. > > > >Lets alter a few items. > > > >If we want to reduce the back drag caused > >by ferromagnetic attraction, lets get rid of the right hand ferrite > >and use an air coil with many....many turns. If we put enough turns > >on, the effect on the approach phase will be the same, but on the > >exit phase there will not be ANY ferromagnetic drag back and the > >field will collapse very quick. > > I thought all the time only about this configuration ! > Never thought about using ferrite inside the coil ! > > Can you simulate it with the aircore coil ? > > >Know of any device > >which has stated that the device needs a LARGE air coil, using > >ferrites in the coil causes the device not to work so well and > >suffers problems with massive voltage spikes as the coil collapses? > > > >We should now move away from the coil being shorted all the time and > >look at other arrangements. The ideal method might be to power the > >coil from a DC source during the very early phase just long enough > >to overcome friction and the small reduction in attraction as the > >flux initially falls, > > Just let the aircoil be open until then ! So there will be no friction ! > > >then short the coil as the moving ferrite > >goes through the flux falling phase to the flux increasing phase, then > >connect the coil again to the DC source so it can receive the very > >large REVERSE current flow as the reverse coil current attempts to > >hold the coil flux constant and finally open the coil so as to > >reduce any back drag as the ferrite moves out of the gap. Would > >need a complicated commutator. > > Why at all use DC ??? > Just only short and open the aircoil via an incandescent bulb > as the load and have in parrallel > to the coil a neon tube for the HV spikes, that is enough ! > > >But maybe if we look at the overall > >engineering, we would find that the device would still work OK if we > >just powered the coil from a DC source. Only then need a simple > >commutator which just opens and closes the connection from the coil > >to a DC source. > > Donīt make it too complicated for the first try ! > > Suspect that if batteries were used to power the > >device, they might even be recharged by the reverse current flow. > >Again don't get hung up on the large voltage spikes as the coil > >opens, they need to be there as the coil's field needs to fall > >quickly to reduce back drag. Other than cause a problem they do not > >enter into the energy flow discussion. > > Right, this is no problem with using the neon tube, which > only ignites at High Voltage and then shorts and discharges > the coil very effective ! The coil's flux will die as soon as the current stops flowing, it needs NO help. Putting a load on the coil will reduce the back emf at the expense of field collapse time. If you can handle the voltages, just open the coil. Zip...no field. > > > > >One problem is that if we now attempt to power this device from its > >own reverse power output via a generator connected to a rotary > >moving ferrite system, we would find the generator now acting like > >a brake as the reverse current flow would turn the generator into > >a motor and the motor would counter the torque increase gained. > If you attempt to close the loop on this system using a generator, the reverse current flow will drive current back into the generator turning in into a motor and a motor which will turn against the rotary torque produced by the Watson Effect motor. Don't you see thats why Newman can't close the loop. The large reverse current flow will as Evan has said, "Work against the prime motor" (sorry Evan if I got the words wrong but I remember you saying something like this). > Uff, I quite donīt understand that now... > > > > >Does this sound familiar? > > > >Today I think we own Mr. Joseph Newman an apology. I have just shown > >his motor does work. It does produce over unity operation and I believe > >I have explained all the funny side effects we have all read about. > > Well, Mr. Newmanīs motor might show simular HV spikes and > recharge current spikes, but his setup is totally different ! Wrong. Think about it. The same basic Watson Effect is at work. > There is no iron or ferrite shield in his designs ! > He just uses a rotating PM and a stationary coil. > I donīt quite get your point of view here. > Please explain in more detail... > > >Mr. Joseph Newman, you were right. Your motor does work. But why did > >you and Evan cloud the issue with talk about things in left field. > > What do you mean by "left field" ?? > Gyrotrons and the like. I suspect Newman knows what I know but was worried about not having pattent protection. Interestion his small unit only has a simple commutator, like my above suggestions. > > > >Why have I had to reinvent the wheel today? Why don't I own my > >own Newman based power source? > > Good question ! :) > > > > >There is no need to invent new physics. > > > >Its all right here. The only problem > >is that the electrical output is not easily gotten at. Very much > >earlier I did suggest a way to get electrical energy from a Newman > >motor. Its on Stephan's web page. > > > >It is not my intention to restart the Newman flame war. I will, of > >course enter into sane, rational discussion about the above either > >by private or group email. I only ask that you first look at my > >20 simulation pics, read my earlier posts, open your minds and think > >through what I have said. Everything I have said is real. There > >may not be equations which mirror what's happening. Don't fall into > >the trap of trying to redefine my words to fit into your existing > >understanding of physics. Open your minds, look at the pics, read > >my words and think. Then lets talk. > > Okay, can you try to simulate again the pics without the ferrite > at the left side ?? > Sure. will do. > I still have questions, how much the moving ferrite plate is hold back by > the single > PM on the left side, when it wants to leave the gap ! > Could that force be stronger somehow, than the total of forces pulling > it in ?? > No way, I estimate a differential of 5 or 7 to one. Better still with air coil. > > > >This is only 1 (and not a very good one) of several ways to what I call > > > >Direct Nuclear Magnetic Energy Conversion. (DNMEC) (My copyright) > > > >I know that I have placed my words and ideas into the public domain. > >May it foster your thinking out of the square. > > > >I would be pleased to enter into private discussions with any > >interested parties about the commercialization of my other DNMEC ideas. > > > >Live long and prosper. > > Thanks for sharing all your ideas ! DNMEC sounds good ! :) > Maybe you will once running a big company with that name and > be famous and rich ! :) > The first step is being done today ! :) > Keep on ! :) > > Regards, Stefan. > Hi Stephan, Just keep thinking. Think outside of the square. Think. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au --------------2C6236166205-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 17:47:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA14340; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:04:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:04:54 -0800 Message-ID: <32D89B35.DB0 netcomuk.co.uk> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 00:05:09 -0800 From: Rob King X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-NC260 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Free Energy - Part 9 References: <32D898AB.61EF netcomuk.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lfYBq.0.wV3.ag2so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3318 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Date: 11th Jan, 1997 Time 22:43 GMT Dear All, PART 9. Sorry I have not mailed you all for a long time. Few Points: 1. Stanley Meyer looks determined to prove his water splitting device DOES work by building a hydrogen powered boat, despite the fact that he failed to do so in a court of law. I can-not help thinking he should have stuck with doing Hannibal in the A-Team (George Peppard ?). 2. I have built JOSEPH TATES ANTENNA, it worked but only produced a very small amount of power, around 5 uW. I had a very small antenna and this may have been my downfall. I would argue that if I were to carry out the same experiment on the dark side of the moon the power produced would be zero. I think that the energy produced is from local radio transmitters of all types. 3. I must ring Methernita again to see how they are progressing with their machine, if you want to ring them you need to speak to Victor Bosshard (their PR man), tel. 0041-31-7711165, fax 0041-31-7711165. Another company in Switzerland that (are rumored) manufactured these electrostatic OU devices is VENE, PO BOX 1451, CH-3601, THUN, SWITZERLAND, but these people want pots of money for a single device. 4. Looks like the slotted magnetic shield version of Robert Adams motor seems to be the topic of discussion at the moment. 5. The progress with John Searl’s SEG is at a pause at the time being, they require some 1500 GBP to get an engineering firm to manufacture the 35 cm ALNICO ring. They have financial backers ready to put money in as soon as they can demonstrate the SEG motor running but they need money up front to build the prototype. Their only hope is that someone will take the plunge and fund them for a bare essential prototype. Adams Motor. I have not done any more work on the Adams motor since my last posting a few months ago. I would like to have a go at using more powerful magnets (from old hard disks as someone suggested). With 4 relay coils and 6 neodymium/alnico magnets. But, like I keep saying, I need some super-conductor wire, this may be the answer, or I use normal wire but bathed in liquid nitrogen to get he resistance down. This in turn may strip the enamel coating from the wire. :-( Using a ferrite core on the coils will give a poor magnetic field, reduced by a factor of 50%, but it will also have a low magnetic esidue. I was thinking of pulsing the coil during ON part of the duty cycle so that there are many back EMF’s instead on just the one during the ON cycle. I see that Jean-Louis Naudin has been doing some work on the same machine as myself during August 1996, well done, I must borrow a scope so that I can get some pictures of the input/output of the coils. I am interested to know how he calculates the mechanical power of his motor? Regards Rob King Email address: ROBK netcomuk.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 11 19:19:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA12802; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:36:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:36:25 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701120228.SAA01665 shell.skylink.net> Subject: UFO Propulsion Paper To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:28:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <970110000041_844662388 emout07.mail.aol.com> from "FZNIDARSIC@aol.com" at Jan 10, 97 00:00:43 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nSskT2.0.y73.eu4so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3320 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: AIAA IAF Paper No. IAA-96- IAA.4.1.07 "An Electromagnetic Rocket Hyper-Light Stellar Drive" P.A. Murad 47th International Astronautical Congress October 7-11, 1996 Beijing China For permission to copy or republish, contact the International Astronautical Federation, 3-5 Rue Mario-Nikis, 75015 Paris France ================================================================== Abstract: Virtues of electromagnetic propulsion are examined in light of recent data published about unusual vehicles. If conditionally treated as credible evidence, enough information exists to develop an electromagnetic rocket and compels reexaming Maxwell's equations which implies that: . Electric surface currents exist that may substain a force, . An analogue exists regarding electric and magnetic effects to generate axial thrust, . Maxwell's equations admit a relativistic solution, and . A cyclonic drive may represent a hyper-light electromagnetic rocket capable of accelerating particles. The proposed device replicates a black-hole singularity creating an unconfined plasma toroid that acts as a particle accelerator for a segmented two-stage drive as well as exploits electric and magnetic currents and charges. The plasma sustains fields and generates electron rings which, due to instabilities, leave the toroid and are accelerated in a magnetic vortex. Analytical results suggest electric effects dominate sub-light speeds while magnetic effects dominate light-speed forces. Relativistic effects, magnetic monopoles, and ball lighting are discussed. Clearly these devices, if they exist, have capabilities probably beyond our current understanding. Paul Murad, Aerospace Engineer, Senior Member AIAA, Vienna Virginia. "The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US government." =================================================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 00:11:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA07232; Sat, 11 Jan 1997 23:01:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 23:01:16 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 00:56:23 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701120656.AAA16314 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: How to look for free EM energy? Resent-Message-ID: <"oTjCO3.0.sm1.wm8so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3322 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:33 PM 1/10/97 -0900, Horace wrote: >no amount of application of >conventional accepted "laws" of electromagnetism, or any analysis based >upon them, will provide any "proof" or evidence whatsoever for any "over >unity".... I agree, Horace. I have little or no interest in efforts to "figure out" how to make an over-unity electromagnetic system. In my mind that is perfectly equivalent with trying to figure out how to make an over-unity machine with weights, pulleys, and levers. I wish Vortex was not so full of such discussions. On the other hand, I am quite interested in discussing actual experiments in which apparent over-unity behavior has been observed, regardless of the nature of the experiment. An actual experiment is always a more complex system than the most complex theories we have. In an actual experiment, there is an infinite number of parameters which could possible combine in some heretofore unknown way to produce anomalous results. Regarding attempts to figure out what kind of experiments might lead to over-unity devices, I favor thinking about new ways to tap into zero-point energy or nuclear energy...i.e. ways to tap into an identifiable source of energy. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 02:12:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA09658; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 02:04:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 02:04:36 -0800 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 05:04:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970112050358_1418589209 emout20.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com, RMCarrell@aol.com Subject: Re : Re: Lenz Law Harnessing ---> Accelerating Turntable + coil Resent-Message-ID: <"FRjgi2.0.pM2.pSBso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3323 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 11/01/1997 16:18:50, you wrote : << Suj : Re: Lenz Law Harnessing ---> Accelerating Turntable + coil Date : 11/01/1997 16:18:50 From: RMCarrell aol.com Resent-from: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-to: vortex-l eskimo.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com I have been skimming the discussion of the experiments reported by Epitaxy. It seems to me there is a strong similarity to the operations that underly the Adams motor as described by Aspden in IE #10 and the UK Adams-Aspden patent. >> I have built recently an Adams motor, but I couldn't find unfortunately any overunity, It's work like an simple dynamo. I have a complete report test if you want in one word doc, and I have spread in december 96, this content in some freenrg-l messages, you could find it in "dec 96 archive messages" in eskimo.... Truly, Jean-Louis Naudin Email : JNaudin509 aol.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 07:37:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA14307; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:01:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:01:47 -0800 From: biberian crmc2.univ-mrs.fr Message-Id: <199701131454.PAA06076 mccir3.crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Subject: Re: Bravo Jean-Paul! To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 13 Jan 97 15:54:17 MET In-Reply-To: <970108193719_72240.1256_EHB144-1 CompuServe.COM>; from "Jed Rothwell" at Jan 8, 97 2:37 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Resent-Message-ID: <"qDMFJ.0.TV3.PpFso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3329 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed, Thanks for your comments. However you must understand that this field is not easy to deal with. Lots of people working there are very creative, smart, enthusiastic, optimistic and many more qualities, but not so many people are used to writting reports understandable to outsiders. My stay at E-Quest was very successful because I am an experimentalist who knew almost nothing on the subject of cavitation induced cold fusion, so I could easily pin point the important facts. Too often people get caught in the details that took most of their time, but are useless to the facts and forget the important points. There are two kinds of people, those who have synthetic views, and those who have analytical views. The first category sees sketches and major directions, the others see details and are very precise and accurate. The world needs both. My last comment is keep polite, no need to be rough. We are all in the same boat. We want this field to take off, and see some practical applications. However we can enjoy this unique opportunity of working together as a small group, knowing personnally almost everyone in the field. In a few years when things will catch on it will be very different. The sharks will be back. Jean-Paul From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 07:51:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA17281; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:20:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:20:59 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 09:20:45 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701121520.JAA23480 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: How to look for free EM energy? Resent-Message-ID: <"ZiOtf3.0.vD4.P5Gso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3330 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:33 PM 1/10/97 -0900, Horace wrote: >....and maybe open some discussion about superconductors. Horace, over the past year Puthoff and I have spent quite a bit of time studying the behavior of superconductors in elecromagnetic fields and, although they are spectacularly unique, there does not appear to be any departure from the conservative field theory behavior which, as you say, is fundamentally based upon the principle of Conservation of Energy. Again, I am quite willing to examine actual experimental evidence to the contrary but I feel like it is a waste of time to study the existing theory looking for ways to build over-unity devices. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 07:57:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA19632; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:34:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:34:28 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 09:34:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701121534.JAA24199 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing Cc: William Beaty Resent-Message-ID: <"qp_F91.0.go4.3IGso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3331 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill, I'm going to make a public appeal for some order and see what happens... One of the magnet theory enthusiasts wrote: >>I have been running my ideas of the Lenz law harnessing principles through >>the gauntlet of vortex-L and freenrg-L and NOBODY has voiced a VALID >>objection that stood its ground yet ! Unless you have an actual device that appears to produce more energy than it consumes...I'd like to see you confine this discussion to freenrg-L. I am proposing a subject-based split for Vortex-L and Freenrg-L. Discussion of actual experiments only for Vortex-L. Discussion of anything to do with free energy for Freenrg-L. All Vortex-L members are free to subscribe to Freenrg-L and vice versa. This arrangement would therefore not deny anyone access to any discusssion they might be interested in...but it WOULD significantly reduce the traffic on Vortex-L. Let's have some comments on this issue. Bill, can you set up a "voting booth" on your web page where we could efficiently poll this issue? - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 10:10:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA13372; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 09:47:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 09:47:52 -0800 Message-ID: <32D923D5.630B interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:48:05 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: How to look for free EM energy? References: <199701120656.AAA16314 natashya.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Pe4GK.0.oG3.7FIso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3332 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > (snip) > Regarding attempts to figure out what kind of experiments might lead to > over-unity devices, I favor thinking about new ways to tap into zero-point > energy or nuclear energy...i.e. ways to tap into an identifiable source of > energy. > YES! If one wishes to seek odd-ball, will-o-the-wisp ways to extract energy from nothing - thats OK and great fun too. But, if we want a good source of energy FAST, why ignore the vast ocean of hydrogen (+O2) this planet is blessed with? 1. Do CF until our beads get sore! Done this & Doing this -keep it up - good stuff! (I'm just an observer here) 2. Beat the TOKAMAK guys at their own game and come up with novel ways to raise various forms of H2, D2 etc. to the energy levels for "conventional fusion". a) sonoluminescence devices and cavitation machines b) novel ways to accelerate condensed H2, D2 (water) to high velocity (energy) 1) electric arc water guns 2) electrostatic water-ice accelerators - needs vacuum - sounds messy! 3) electromagnetic acceleration of metal pellets, loaded with H2, D2 against various targets - sounds messy and the pellets sound expensive c) Paul Koloc's method with little plasmoids or bigger ball lightning devices if we could find one. 3. Subject H2/D2 loaded metal chunks to extreme mechanical stress. a) Stenger's favorite mechanical engineering approach - put the chunk on an anvil and hit it REAL HARD with a hammer! Embed a thermocouple in the chunk and see if the initial impact temperature rise is followed by a continued post-wack rise (quickly stuff the crushed chunk + thermocouple into fiberglass insulation) b) Explode loaded Ni wires in Scott's calorimeter using capacitor-discharge. See if energy out divided by capacitor energy is OU beyond chemical reaction. c) Shock loaded Ni/Pd chunks with high explosive charges (Hey, I know that at least one lady does metal sculpture this way!) 4. Subject H2/D2 loaded metal chunks to industrial electron beam and laser welders - too messy? 5. Turn down our thermostats and muse about a BTU saved being a BTU earned! (sounds uncomfortable) Looking-for-his-largest-hammer, ---------- Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 12:34:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA13232; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:18:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:18:25 -0800 From: hjscudde pacbell.net Message-ID: <32D9491F.6325 pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:27:11 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-PBXE (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! References: <1.5.4.32.19970110031731.0066815c sparc1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4Rsbb1.0.gE3.FSKso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3335 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Elliot Kennel wrote: > > >>Jed wrote: > >>>> Elliot wrote: > Yet if anybody had a reproducible non-secret protocol that would work > Best regards, > Elliot Kennel > Sapporo_________________ Elliot Good answer to Jed. Check wirh Mark Hugo, MHUGO EPRI.COM about an experimemt. Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 12:36:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA15198; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:27:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:27:32 -0800 From: hjscudde pacbell.net Message-ID: <32D94B60.7C39 pacbell.net> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 12:36:48 -0800 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-PBXE (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing References: <199701121534.JAA24199 natashya.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9sECX.0.Oj3.oaKso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3336 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Bill, I'm going to make a public appeal for some order and see what happens... > > One of the magnet theory enthusiasts wrote: > > >>I have been running my ideas of the Lenz law harnessing principles through > >>the gauntlet of vortex-L and freenrg-L and NOBODY has voiced a VALID > >>objection that stood its ground yet ! > > Unless you have an actual device that appears to produce more energy than it > consumes...I'd like to see you confine this discussion to freenrg-L. > > I am proposing a subject-based split for Vortex-L and Freenrg-L. Discussion > of actual experiments only for Vortex-L. Discussion of anything to do with > free energy for Freenrg-L. > > All Vortex-L members are free to subscribe to Freenrg-L and vice versa. > This arrangement would therefore not deny anyone access to any discusssion > they might be interested in...but it WOULD significantly reduce the traffic > on Vortex-L. > > Let's have some comments on this issue. Bill, can you set up a "voting > booth" on your web page where we could efficiently poll this issue? > > - Scott Little > EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 > 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email)Scott I basically agree with you, but I would like to see initial postings on a topic in both groups, if that is possible. Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 14:56:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA17866; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:46:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:46:35 -0800 X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:47:27 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Change of charters Resent-Message-ID: <"1-nt5.0.-M4.9dMso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3338 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:56 AM 1/12/97, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >I have little or no interest in efforts to "figure out" >how to make an over-unity electromagnetic system. [snip] > >On the other hand, I am quite interested in discussing actual experiments in >which apparent over-unity behavior has been observed, regardless of the >nature of the experiment. [snip] Another post: >>....and maybe open some discussion about superconductors. > >Horace, over the past year Puthoff and I have spent quite a bit of time >studying the behavior of superconductors in elecromagnetic fields and, >although they are spectacularly unique, there does not appear to be any >departure from the conservative field theory behavior which, as you say, is >fundamentally based upon the principle of Conservation of Energy. > >Again, I am quite willing to examine actual experimental evidence to the >contrary but I feel like it is a waste of time to study the existing theory >looking for ways to build over-unity devices. > Yet another rpost: >Unless you have an actual device that appears to produce more energy than it >consumes...I'd like to see you confine this discussion to freenrg-L. > >I am proposing a subject-based split for Vortex-L and Freenrg-L. Discussion >of actual experiments only for Vortex-L. Discussion of anything to do with >free energy for Freenrg-L. > >All Vortex-L members are free to subscribe to Freenrg-L and vice versa. >This arrangement would therefore not deny anyone access to any discusssion >they might be interested in...but it WOULD significantly reduce the traffic >on Vortex-L. > >Let's have some comments on this issue. Bill, can you set up a "voting >booth" on your web page where we could efficiently poll this issue? > > I just want to emphatically agree with the above. In fact, I tried to post a response to Scott (similar in nature to the above) last night at 1:30 AM, but my system crashed, losing some email and what I was typing (I think Norton Utilities has an incompatibility with the new MacOS and PPP I just installed.) and I was too tired and disgusted to type it again. My apologies - especially for not watching the double posting. I really hoped to open some amateur level of discussion of superconductors on freenrg, not vortex. Once double posting starts it's like a self perpetuating disease. You have to be very deliberate in watching where your replies are going. I realize conventional EM o-u discussions and theories of everything are especially unwelcome to many subscribers to vortex, and that the vortex group was created for discussing Potapov, CF, and theories related to the o-u experiments. It also had become apparent to me, from the dearth of responses, that the subject discussions were of no interest to most everyone on vortex. Those on vortex who are interrested in such things can subscribe (and probably already are subscribed) to freenrg. I should have at least gotten myself out of the vortex loop on this sooner, if not speaking up about the problem. Now *my* pet peeve - double posting. (How embarrasing to be one of the worst recent offenders.) As a member of both vortex and freenrg, I have been deluged with posts, many of them double posts, and some of those double posts are returns of my own. Much more than 50 emails yesterday, and maybe close to a hundred. This is just unworkable. One helpful thing to do would be to restrict incoming posts to a single address. An alternative might be having the list server post them appearing that way, so reponses do not automatically go to multiple places. About topics on vortex - I would certainly not like to see the ball lightning discussions suppressed, even if these are not going on of late, as there appears to be strong *observational* as opposed to experimental evidence for o-u behavior. Possibly specific o-u observations as well as specific experiments could be grounds for discussion. There are also the discussions of the political and legal aspects of o-u, Tampere (Podkletnov), CF (Mills/Jones), etc., which also seem to have a place on vortex. Just some thoughts. I'll post this on freenrg also, but not jointly, thus responses will only go to the list of origin. Finally! Sorry. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 15:05:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA20422; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:56:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:56:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:56:53 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing Resent-Message-ID: <"hPcLE2.0.s-4.AmMso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3339 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:36 PM 1/12/97, hjscudde pacbell.net wrote: [snip] > I basically agree with you, but I would like to see initial >postings on a topic in both groups, if that is possible. >Hank Scudder It is the inital "dual post" that starts the problem. This sounds maybe OK if the postings to each group are totally separate and the topics are appropriate to both groups. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 15:57:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA00522; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:33:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:33:41 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 17:33:22 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701122333.RAA23711 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing Resent-Message-ID: <"IYiT42.0.48.HJNso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3340 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:36 1/12/97 -0800, Hank Scudder wrote: > I basically agree with you, but I would like to see initial >postings on a topic in both groups, if that is possible. Please explain why, Hank. Remember, if you don't want to miss anything then simply subscribe to both groups. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 16:03:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA01948; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:40:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:40:43 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 17:40:29 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701122340.RAA24204 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Change of charters Resent-Message-ID: <"4WGQC.0.KU.uPNso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3341 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 13:47 1/12/97 -0900, Horace wrote: >Possibly specific o-u observations as well as >specific experiments could be grounds for discussion. Absolutely, Horace. An observation can be thought of as simply an experiment that was easy to perform! >There are also the >discussions of the political and legal aspects of o-u, Tampere >(Podkletnov), CF (Mills/Jones), etc., which also seem to have a place on >vortex. I agree here as well. Such discussions are directly related to actual experiments which are currently being studied... Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 16:28:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA08419; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 16:06:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 16:06:08 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:07:14 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Lens Law Harnessing --> Second Phase Resent-Message-ID: <"KZhMI2.0.332.inNso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3343 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:33 AM 1/12/97, Epitaxy wrote: [snip] > >The purpose of this experiment is to demonstrate that 2 equal opposed >permanent magnets ( i.e. S-S configuration) with a small gap between them >WILL pull in the iron plate into that gap (until the plate is centered in >the gap) STRONGER than only ONE non-opposed permanent magnet. > [snip] This is blatantly obvious. Two fields (combined into the fields purpendicualr to the gaps) are stronger than one. However, by symmetry, the retarding field upon armature exit is also equally stronger. The sum total of kinetic, magnetic, heat, and electrostatic energies will remain unchanged without external input. Why bother with all this talk? Why not just build the motor? It would take less time than the talk already transpired, and what would it cost? $100? You have the magnets and wire. Couldn't take long. Getting something o-u, though, that is a whole 'nother can of worms. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 19:46:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01931; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 19:35:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 19:35:05 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970113030844.0066815c sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:08:44 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Subject: Elliot's response Resent-Message-ID: <"fvN4O1.0.dT.ZrQso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3352 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> but isn't Mizuno's 'lab' the closet-sized one<< Yes, Mizuno's lab is very small and cluttered, but I think he has done some very good work. >>Is not the big question in that device the existence or otherwise of an ENERGY anomaly?<< I think that the transmutation claim speaks to a nuclear anomaly. I've presumed that the heat and the transmutation (if they both exist) would be related, but of course I might be wrong. >> > However, as far as excess heat is concerned, the picture looks as muddled as ever.< >>Oh, come on.<< What I mean is that the CETI cell hasn't been made to produce excess heat (as far as I know) except in its own custom-designed calorimeter. I'd like to see that issue resolved before saying I accept the results. As you know, CETI is taking steps to do that, so in time we should have the answer. Kurt Johmann wrote: >>Isn't the NHE controlled by the hot-fusion group in Japan? << No, it's run under the auspices of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry. Toshiba, Hitachi, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Nippon Steel and Toyota have contributed personnel, not to mention me from tiny Applied Sciences Inc in Cedarville Ohio, where I worked on n-type diamond and sulfur removal from coal among other things. I don't know where you get your information, but it is not accurate. And by the way, your use of obscenity does little to further your credibility. I think it's inappropriate for this forum. Jed wrote: >>Storms used a flow calorimeter at Los Alamos.<< Of course I'm aware of Ed's work. But Ed's achievement of a more reproducible excess heat reaction came after retiring from LANL, so it really doesn't address the issue of reproducible excess heat in a mass flow calorimeter with water working fluid. By reproducible, I mean an experiment in which positive results can be achieved, say, ~50% of the time or better. >>Mizuno says he has never met you.<< Surely, you're thinking of someone else. Mizuno and I see each other regularly. He works down across town here in Sapporo. >>But officially the NHE is uncooperative and even hostile towards him and towards other outside academic scientists<< What on earth can you be thinking of? If we are successful, we're all going to keep our jobs and make a lot of money. Why would we oppose the good solid research of our colleagues?? Best regards, Elliot Kennel Sapporo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 12 22:25:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA01245; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 21:51:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 21:51:03 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970113055121.0066b51c sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 14:51:21 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Subject: Re: Surface treatments and spot welding Resent-Message-ID: <"koclg3.0.KJ.5rSso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3355 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed raises some good points about Pd treatment. There are a number of variables which could be (and have been) tried to prepare Pd, including heat treatment (vacuum annealing) acid etching, cold working polishing, etc. NHE Lab has systematically tried combinations of these, as have Storms, Cravens and others. Different researchers come up with slightly different protocols, so there will never be a universal protocol. Nevertheless, positive results seem to require high loading as at least one pre-condition, which has led NHE to try to maximize loading. BTW, one of the most interesting new techniques is that of Violante et al, to begin gas loading at high temperature and pressure to avoid the alpha-to-beta phase transition. As a result, they are claiming very fast loading rate and high loading level, due to the lattice remaining relatively free of damage due to their technique. If they are right, used as a pre-treatment technique, it might completely supercede the protocols now in use. We are willing to use palladium treated by others to see if theirs works better, and in fact I'm hoping to be able to use some Storms Pd in our cells soon and vice-versa. Jed is also correct that spot welding is used on some NHE electrodes, and that this is a legitimate issue. We have both Cu and Pt electrodes on site. I'm inclined to agree that Cu could be a problem due to its high vapor pressure. After spot welding, the standard procedure is to dip the whole assembly in aqua regia (HNO3 + HCl) to remove any surface layers. Nevertheless, I'm inclined to agree that if other researchers are getting better results with other methods, then those methods should be used. Thanks. Best regards, Elliot From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 01:54:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA23481; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 01:32:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 01:32:03 -0800 Message-ID: <32DA001A.766 lcia.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 04:31:00 -0500 From: HAMILTON lcia.com (DANNY HAMILTON) Reply-To: hamilton lcia.com Organization: The Hamilton Group X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Aether and Light Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OWcRJ2.0.pk5.H4Wso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3357 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Ross Tessien started a thread on Aether while I was out of town. If you don't mind going back to the thread for a moment please consider the following. One of the most compelling arguments for Aether is the need for a media for light (and the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum) to travel through. If you make the assumption that Aether is "something", exploring it's impact on our theories of matter becomes interesting to the point of fascination. If Aether exists, and EM waves travel through it, and those waves take on the characteristics of particles, is it possible that "matter" is somehow made-up of concentrations of Aether. Following that thread, can certain phenomenon be better explained if Aether contributes directly to the makeup of particles of matter? i.e. How do we "receive" radio transmissions? Further, perhaps Aether is not a simple media. How would do you explain the fact that EM waves travel through the same "media" with relatively little interference. What if Aether consists of different "levels" of "something", could the different elements of matter be the concentration of the different "levels" of Aether? I know this is an old thread, but if there is an "ocean of Aether" would it not have a bearing on most of the subjects discussed here. If Aether doesn't exist, what is the mechanism for wave transmission? If we understood "that" mechanism, would it have a bearing?? Danny Hamilton From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 02:59:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA31692; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:38:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:38:10 -0800 From: alansch zip.com.au (Alan Schneider) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:42:05 GMT Message-ID: <32da1e0f.6578806 mail.zip.com.au> References: <199701122333.RAA23711 natashya.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199701122333.RAA23711 natashya.eden.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99g/16.339 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"3Pe2d3.0.5l7.G2Xso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3358 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 12 Jan 1997 17:33:22 -0600 (CST), Scott Little = wrote: _>At 12:36 1/12/97 -0800, Hank Scudder wrote: _>> I basically agree with you, but I would like to see initial _>>postings on a topic in both groups, if that is possible. _>Please explain why, Hank. Remember, if you don't want to miss anything = then _>simply subscribe to both groups. Emphatic agreement here. I have been following the flux gate discussion with intense interest but have been quite peeved=20 at getting two copies of almost all related posts. Perhaps the best way to go is, if an intensely interesting discussion of this sort fires off on one group, to make *O*N*E* posting to the other group to let people know (in case they don't subscribe to=20 both groups) that the discussion has started and to come have a look if interested. Remember the archives are always available if you happen to come into such a discussion a bit late. Cheers all, Alan =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=3D=3D=3D Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams that Stuff is made of. - Michael Sinz =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=3D=3D=3D From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 03:22:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA01452; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:49:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:49:54 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970113105244.006799c4 atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:52:44 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Elliot's response Resent-Message-ID: <"eFETu2.0.cM.HDXso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3360 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Elliot Kennel wrote: >Kurt Johmann wrote: > >>>Isn't the NHE controlled by the hot-fusion group in Japan? << > > No, it's run under the auspices of the Ministry of International >Trade and Industry. Toshiba, Hitachi, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Nippon >Steel and Toyota have contributed personnel, not to mention me from tiny >Applied Sciences Inc in Cedarville Ohio, where I worked on n-type diamond >and sulfur removal from coal among other things. I don't know where you get >your information, but it is not accurate. And by the way, your use of >obscenity does little to further your credibility. I think it's >inappropriate for this forum. Calling the tame word "bullshit" an obscenity is an exaggeration. You know the composition of NHE much better than I, so I'll take your word for it. But the bottom line, regardless of its correct explanation, remains the same: 1) NHE is not getting results that can class it as a leader in the CF field. Instead, in terms of innovative research, the NHE appears to be a non-starter. If the explanation is that CF doesn't work, then the NHE should be disbanded. If the explanation is that CF works, then the NHE should still be disbanded, or at least ignored. My own guess is that CF is still too young to have a large bureacracy like the NHE thrown at it. CF still needs independent thinkers to advance the field (I'm not in the field and I am not talking about myself here), and those kind of people tend to be weeded out of bureacracies. Although throwing money at CF sounds like a good idea, apparently it's not a good idea if it takes the form of an NHE. But if the Japanese government wants to waste its funds on a Japanese version of America's make-work welfare programs for physicists and the companies that supply their tools, then go ahead. Now, if the NHE can just find a way to make CF research require tools of great complexity and expense ... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 04:34:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA16299; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 04:26:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 04:26:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:26:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Heat is not a dead end of energy transformation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"TrQ8W1.0.T-3.ZdYso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3361 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Pioneers, I am undertaking a research project and running a business in the realisation of an energy producing device. I am looking for the people with the following characteristics:- 1) Resources to do experiments 2) Ambition, flair and time to move things along quickly 3) Your either a great experimentalist not to hot on theory but great on the conceptual understanding (like an Edison), or you a great theorist who likes DOING THINGS (like a Tesla). There's only little I can get across in this initial email, but trust me though. I'm a masters qualified engineer, I've got the theory qualitatively and quantitatively worked out, it been reviewed by good colleagues - but some people sit on the fence when they smell controversy, they can never be pioneers. I WANT DOERS! COME AND JOIN ME! Now the idea: Theorem 1: At constant temperature, heat and work are interchangable. i.e. heat is not a dead end of energy transformation. Consider a gas in a closed, isolated vessel (insulated) in a gravity field. How is it possible for molecules going up to be doing work against gravity? This work comes from heat being transformed to work by other molecules colliding with it during its upward path. Of course it cancels on the downward path when the molecule does work on the gas system - The FIRST LAW ISN'T BROKEN. Corollary: It is possible to do work in constant entropy systems. How? You need a working substance that can 'collect' heat at constant temperature and be driven to a higher potential (ie. work done on it by Theorem 1). The working substance in the higher potential is made spontaneously unstable with respect to its lower potential state by a catalyst liberating the work as a rise in temperature, etc. Example: First order phase changes (water -> steam etc.) Spontaneous temperature rise on say steam -> water by hygroscopic substances. Don't deny it as some silly people do, I've done the calculations (1st, 2nd laws), experiment and literature search. Phase change occurs at constant temperature: higher potential phase is steam, lower potential water, work to do this came via Theorem 1. Phase change is only system I know by which to liberate the collected work by making the higher energy phase spontaneously unstable - there may be others... Make a CATALYST, separate the hygroscopic substance from the water by semi-permeable membrane:- Diagram of catalyst device in a tall vessel, apologies if your not in ASCII | | <- vapour condenses at top |--------| head of condensed water pushes down | | | | hygroscopic solution | | ~~~~~~~~~~ semi-permeable membrane flow out of water There is a gain, some people say that energy I gain from condensation has to cancel that from separation - TRUE but Theorem 1 says there is additional energy coming from the potential energy of the vapour (it did work against gravity at constant temp. right?) Imagine our closed, isolated vessel in a gravity field with the two phases present: water at the bottom, a vapour atmosphere. Introduce our catalyst and in this CONSTANT ENTROPY system there is a SPONTANEOUS TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCE or an availability of POTENTIAL ENERGY due to the condensed water having a higher density than vapour (downthrust, Archimedian principle - now there was a guy who got excited about Science!). Do the sums around the loop (1st, 2nd Laws Thermd.):- 1) vapour atmosphere depeleted by device, water evaporates from reservoir 2) catalysts, separation consumption, temperature rise, potential energy liberated 3) dissapation: cooling or falling of working substance, use this to run a heat engine, turbine etc... 4) return to reservoir No Laws broken! Macroscopic perpetual motion similar to dynamic equilibrium where there is no global change in entropy. I don't have to break the Second Law in the above cycle BUT I CAN (I'll tell you how next message). The second law IS NOT A LAW - you arrow of time people are going to need something related but different - I'm trying my best to formulate it. This material is copyrighted, patented, corroborated and disclosed (in that order). I have the cards, I want players where all can win if you work with me, there's enough in this for all players. By the way, look to the work of Rolf Landauer in Science June 1996, he's groping in a particular area of communications theory (they use thermodynamics too esp. entropy) whereas I have the general principle. Yours expectantly, Remi Cornwall MSc(Lon, UK) BEng(UMIST, UK) UK. P.S. If you got there before me, I'm dying to know if I'm right - It would be a great honour to work for that person or persons. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 05:15:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA20707; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:06:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:06:24 -0800 Date: 13 Jan 97 08:03:53 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Heat is not a dead end of energy transformation Message-ID: <970113130353_100060.173_JHB158-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"exlfB.0.T35.FDZso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3363 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Remi, Looks like your going round the Carnot cycle using the latent heat of condensation of water and using chemical/catalytic heating as your energy source. Sort of Stirling engine with internal heating. If you have a business plan or even a development plan with an indication of a real marketable product then I might be able to help. Suggest you email me direct on 100060.173 compuserve.com, or fax me on +44 (0)1342 834044, I'm located in E Surrey near Lingfield, U.K. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 05:26:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA22636; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:17:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:17:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 04:18:34 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Heat is not a dead end of energy transformation Resent-Message-ID: <"HvIj81.0.ZX5.SNZso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3364 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Dear Pioneers, > [snip] > Now the idea: > > Theorem 1: > At constant temperature, heat and work are interchangable. > > i.e. heat is not a dead end of energy transformation. > > Consider a gas in a closed, isolated vessel (insulated) in a gravity > field. How is it possible for molecules going up to be doing work against > gravity? [snip] Thought in this direction leads to some ideas, and questions. Suppose you place a dense high pressure gas in a sealed drum centrifuge. Down the central axis, but external to the drum, and around the central shaft, place a non rotating heat exchanger. Since hot air (gas) rises, then the mass heat flow in a dense high g environment should multiply the heat separation effect. Then use the heat to vaporize a low boiling point liquid in the heat exchanger and after that you simply use a steam (or sterling) engine to extract the energy to drive the centrifuge, using a heat exchanger on the outside of the centrifuge to provide the heat reduction to condense the vapor. Might have to run the centrifuge in a reduced pressure environment to decrease the air drag. This reminds me somewhat of the Hilsch tube. However, doesn't the hot gas migrate to the outside of the vortex in the Hilsch tube? Of course the implications to the Potapov device are obvious ... maybe the design can be improved by running a separate heat exchange pipe (carrying a separate water flow) down the center of the vortex tube. The question is, would water flowing vertically through the central core come out warmer, or cooler, than the water from the outer rotating jacket? Since cavitation bubbles (steam) are lighter than water they should migrate toward the center. That should help warm the central column, but what of the other mechanisms? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 06:44:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA05566; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 06:35:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 06:35:03 -0800 Date: 13 Jan 97 09:32:02 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Elliot's response Message-ID: <970113143201_72240.1256_EHB103-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"9Oz1W2.0.uM1.MWaso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3367 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I wrote that the NHE is uncooperative and even hostile towards outside academic scientists. Elliot Kennel asks: What on earth can you be thinking of? I am thinking of first-hand reports from outside academic scientists in Japan. If we are successful, we're all going to keep our jobs and make a lot of money. Why would we oppose the good solid research of our colleagues?? I do not know why the NHE opposes this research, but I believe the reports that it does. The usual reasons for such behavior are politics, jealousy, and the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome. You might as well ask why the larger scientific establishment is so hysterically opposed to CF. Scientists will benefit enormously if cold fusion is ever recognized, so why should they fight it? If the DOE had played their cards right in 1989 and allowed research into CF, by now they could have doubled their budget, and they could be playing a key role in revolutionizing every industry on earth. Instead, they have done everything they can to destroy CF. It does seem strange, but the fact is, people often act against their own best interests. Doctors fought antiseptics in the 1840s, and they fought Medicare and Medicaid in the 1960s. U.S. dairy interests successfully fought pasteurization for 60 years. This was a colossal mistake. By selling tainted milk, the dairies killed off hundreds of thousands of children, who were their best customers, and terrified their parents. That reduced the sales of milk. You will find other compelling examples of self-destructive behavior in Tuchman's book "The March of Folly." I suppose the NHE sees everyone else in the field as a competitor who must be squelched. This is irrational; there is plenty of room for success. Many thousands of labs could do CF research without running out of new subjects to investigate. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 10:17:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA13917; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:46:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:46:21 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:48:19 +0100 Message-Id: <199701131748.SAA22629 mail.bbtt.com> X-Sender: harti bbtt.de (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: harti bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) Subject: Re: Heat is not a dead end of energy transformation Resent-Message-ID: <"ldeUK3.0.ZO3.QJdso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3368 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Dear Pioneers, > > I am undertaking a research project and running a business in the > realisation of an energy producing device. I am looking for the people > with the following characteristics:- > > 1) Resources to do experiments > 2) Ambition, flair and time to move things along quickly > 3) Your either a great experimentalist not to hot on theory but great on > the conceptual understanding (like an Edison), or you a great theorist > who likes DOING THINGS (like a Tesla). > > There's only little I can get across in this initial email, but trust me > though. I'm a masters qualified engineer, I've got the theory > qualitatively and quantitatively worked out, it been reviewed by good > colleagues - but some people sit on the fence when they smell controversy, > they can never be pioneers. I WANT DOERS! COME AND JOIN ME! > > Now the idea: > > Theorem 1: > At constant temperature, heat and work are interchangable. > > i.e. heat is not a dead end of energy transformation. > > Consider a gas in a closed, isolated vessel (insulated) in a gravity > field. How is it possible for molecules going up to be doing work against > gravity? This work comes from heat being transformed to work by other > molecules colliding with it during its upward path. Of course it cancels > on the downward path when the molecule does work on the gas system - The > FIRST LAW ISN'T BROKEN. > > Corollary: > It is possible to do work in constant entropy systems. > > How? You need a working substance that can 'collect' heat at constant > temperature and be driven to a higher potential (ie. work done on it by > Theorem 1). The working substance in the higher potential is made > spontaneously unstable with respect to its lower potential state by a > catalyst liberating the work as a rise in temperature, etc. > > > Example: First order phase changes (water -> steam etc.) > > Spontaneous temperature rise on say steam -> water by hygroscopic > substances. Don't deny it as some silly people do, I've done the > calculations (1st, 2nd laws), experiment and literature search. > > Phase change occurs at constant temperature: higher potential phase is > steam, lower potential water, work to do this came via Theorem 1. Phase > change is only system I know by which to liberate the collected work by > making the higher energy phase spontaneously unstable - there may be > others... > > Make a CATALYST, separate the hygroscopic substance from the water by > semi-permeable membrane:- > > Diagram of catalyst device in a tall vessel, apologies if your not in > ASCII > > | | <- vapour condenses at top > |--------| head of condensed water pushes down > | | > | | hygroscopic solution > | | > ~~~~~~~~~~ semi-permeable membrane > flow out of water > > There is a gain, some people say that energy I gain from condensation has > to cancel that from separation - TRUE but Theorem 1 says there is > additional energy coming from the potential energy of the vapour (it did > work against gravity at constant temp. right?) > > Imagine our closed, isolated vessel in a gravity field with the two phases > present: water at the bottom, a vapour atmosphere. Introduce our catalyst > and in this CONSTANT ENTROPY system there is a SPONTANEOUS TEMPERATURE > DIFFERENCE or an availability of POTENTIAL ENERGY due to the condensed > water having a higher density than vapour (downthrust, Archimedian > principle - now there was a guy who got excited about Science!). > > Do the sums around the loop (1st, 2nd Laws Thermd.):- > 1) vapour atmosphere depeleted by device, water evaporates from reservoir > 2) catalysts, separation consumption, temperature rise, potential energy > liberated > 3) dissapation: cooling or falling of working substance, use this to run > a heat engine, turbine etc... > 4) return to reservoir > > No Laws broken! Macroscopic perpetual motion similar to dynamic > equilibrium where there is no global change in entropy. > > I don't have to break the Second Law in the above cycle BUT I CAN (I'll > tell you how next message). The second law IS NOT A LAW - you arrow of > time people are going to need something related but different - I'm trying > my best to formulate it. > > This material is copyrighted, patented, corroborated and disclosed (in > that order). I have the cards, I want players where all can win if you > work with me, there's enough in this for all players. > > By the way, look to the work of Rolf Landauer in Science June 1996, he's > groping in a particular area of communications theory (they use > thermodynamics too esp. entropy) whereas I have the general principle. > > Yours expectantly, > Remi Cornwall MSc(Lon, UK) BEng(UMIST, UK) > UK. > > P.S. If you got there before me, I'm dying to know if I'm right - It > would be a great honour to work for that person or persons. > > Mr. Bernhard Schaeffer from Berlin, Germany has done simular work via the Russian Serogodsky invention using 2 gas mixtures. There are simular effects. He can al I recommend to contact his son at: schaeffer krypta.aball.de He is pretty busy, so I hope he will respond ! Good luck ! Regards, Stefan. > > -- Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 12:38:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA00512; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:06:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:06:46 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:57:21 -0800 Message-Id: <199701131957.LAA11525 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Quasar web sites, Black Holes, Tessien Aether Hypothesis Resent-Message-ID: <"ec-er3.0.r7.LNfso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3372 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If you are interested in what I am talking about as pertains to black holes being highly compressed regions of the ocean of aether wherein the aether has condensed into a core, then these web sites will be of interest to you. You can read about quasars, and then you can look at the images, and then you can tell me if it doesn't look to you like a convergent flow into a region had the vortices like in the bathtub discussion touch down into that high pressure condensate black hole core and breach the confinement of the core such that the aether again vaporized and shot out through those vortices in two opposing jets. And remember, Hubble saw a black hole core (suspected) 20 light years away from the center of convergence, as one would expect for a core that only recently breached its first jet. You look at these images and tell me if you cannot imagine the flow outward of highly compressed aether. Even the discussion about the initial expansion of the flow and then knots in the flow, and then the hot spot where that flowing aether slams into our ocean of aether and heats up is all just exactly like you would expect of any fluid flow. discussion; http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?A95-64827&db_key=AST images; http://www.cv.nrao.edu/~abridle/images.htm more and better images; http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/atlas/icon.html If you check these images out and don't think that black holes have a highly compressed core that has breached confinement then you have no imagination! The whole universe is an ocean of aether, and matter is nothing but standing waves in that ocean, and spacetime is nothing but a standing wave nodal structure of acoustic energy permeating that ocean. There exist in nature, no attractive forces. And there exist in nature, no static structures. The whole of the universe is in motion, "particles" included. And I do not mean simply motion of translation through space, but as well, I mean that a particle is not like a pea that just sits there still like Einstein thought the universe did when he added the cosmological constant. Matter consists of standing waves coupled to the spacetime metric. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 17:31:57 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA05704; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:51:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:51:06 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970113165139.00977f28 mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:51:40 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Epitaxy Subject: Re: New Newman machine building advices ! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"S2CLG1.0.1P1.uXjso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3381 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oh, c'mon... although I didn't write the below post I can tell you this is a joke. It is pretty funny too. If you consider that Mr. Newman wants to charge royalties on anyone who has ever put a magnet and a coil together you will understand how funny this joke is. If you keep posting on legal matters in this list instead of technical issues I will report you to Mr. Newman and tell him that you keep a coil&magnet in your basement, THEN he will sue you. =20 Ha, Ha, Ha.... At 03:36 PM 1/13/97 -0800, you wrote: >5% Royality: You guys are amazing! No offense intended, but you don't >even have a working protoype!... There is too much talk in this group - >like most theoretical scientists. How about building a WORKING model. I >may even be interested to invest time and money myself. > >Stop the talk and build a test. Talk is cheap and the physical universe >runs by its own rules, regardless of what we think or say. Just my 10 >cents worth - please ignore at will. > >-Nils > >On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Greg Watson wrote: > >> Stefan Hartmann wrote: >> >=20 >> > >Can show you how to make the coil current go negative, but first we >> > >still >> > >have some theory work to do. >> >=20 >> > Not easy possible with a Newman design, but probably otherway possible. >> > Newman=B4s current goes only negative, when you open the coil ! >> >=20 >> > >Over unity is only possible when we know ALL the requirements. >> > > >> > >Send me the physical data on your proposed generator. Will simulate >> > >and suggest mods to achieve the Watson Effect and make it possible >> > >to run over unity. >> >=20 >> > I will now overthink the magnetic flux switch based on the ideas, I= have >> > just understand and let you know. >> >=20 >> > Here are a few new comments about the Newman devices: >> >=20 >> > So far I have understood it this way: >> > Newman doesn=B4t need to build the coils as huge as possible, but just >> > should use huge dimension ferrite material inside his machines >> > to have maximal influenced atom alignment for magnet domains inside the >> > ferrite material ! >> > Then when one switches OFF the relatively small coil with a huge >> > ferrite core inside it, probably the neon tubes will explode >> > due to the immense HV back pulse. So Joe can you hear me ? >> >=20 >> > Try it with huge rods of ferrite material in your biggest coil ! >> >=20 >> > Do you still have your first big motor in your Workshop in Lucedale ? >> > Just place it full of ferrite material and thus create a huge >> > electromagnet and pulse this on and off. >> > Be cautious ! These induction voltage HV spikes could kill you ! >> > They should have enormous energy output. >> > But probably it would need to move inside the coil, so do it >> > like your reciprocating device but with just a huger ferrite >> > inner rod. So you can keep the coil size pretty small compared >> > to the ferrite rod size and have to use less copper wire >> > which reduces cost ! >> >=20 >> > If this works, I want 5 % royalities ! :) >> > Donate another 5 % to Greg ! He has led us to the right way ! :) >> >=20 >> > Any comments ? Am I right or am I wrong ? >> >=20 >> > Regards, Stefan. >> >=20 >> Hi Stephan, >>=20 >> The 5% royalty is ok with me. While I can explain Newman's motor, >> don't get too excited, they are just one class of many. >>=20 >> I believe Newman is right in NOT using a ferrite core for his coil. >> His rotor is a PM and the ferrite core would cause back drag in his >> design. Also the flux utilization could be much better. Another >> subject for later discussion and building test rigs. >>=20 >> Another point you need to think about. The reverse current flow >> occurs then the coil is CONNECTED to the power source due to the >> movement of the magnet (It's domains are stiff). More about this >> later. You still need to understand my line by line description >> of the ferrite rod moving 1 mm example. >>=20 >> There is more, much more to understand to FULLY utilize DNMEC >> in a working generator. One clue. A DNMEC generator will self >> run due to the internal energy flows. But not yet. >>=20 >> Lets get the basic DNMEC principles fully understood by ALL. >>=20 >> --=20 >> Best Regards, >> Greg Watson, >> Greg Watson Consulting, >> Adelaide, South Australia, >> gwatson enternet.com.au >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 17:44:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA14231; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:22:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:22:02 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:22:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Magnetic Free Energy Resent-Message-ID: <"Olat82.0.0U3.r-jso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3383 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I side with Horace Heffner and Scott Little, that the present furious discussion on 'free' energy from magnet systems be displaced from Vortex-L. My main reason is that, because Maxwell's equations clearly contain conservation of energy, then anyone who argues otherwise by some circuitous path has simply made a mistake somewhere. We should not have to put up with many messages per day about a subject that is settled. In point of fact, many of the posts (not all) contain errors. On the other hand, if someone has either new experimental evidence or a new idea for an experiment that might alter Maxwell's equations, then that is interesting and appropriate for Vortex-L. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 18:18:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA25259; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:05:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:05:22 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970113180517.0097d94c mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:05:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Epitaxy Subject: Re: Magnetic Free Energy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"-ImYF1.0.3A6.Idkso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3388 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 05:22 PM 1/13/97 -0800, you wrote: >I side with Horace Heffner and Scott Little, that the present furious >discussion on 'free' energy from magnet systems be displaced from Vortex-L. "Displacing" any discussions on any particular subject would be equivalent to censorship and unfair >My main reason is that, because Maxwell's equations clearly contain >conservation of energy, then anyone who argues otherwise by some circuitous >path has simply made a mistake somewhere. No true because it is possible to discuss Maxwell's equations and try to reconcile them with experimental results and themselves in order to find paradoxes. Remember that EM radiation was discovered by pointing out an inconsistency in the laws preceding Maxwell's equations. Maxwell's equations probably would not exist or would be significantly delayed if people listened to your LIMITING suggestions that existing law NOT be used to find anything wrong with them. > We should not have to put up >with many messages per day about a subject that is settled. In point of >fact, many of the posts (not all) contain errors. If they contain errors, than it is your duty to point them out ! This way we all can learn. Don't just write "... there are errors.." help us understand where the errors are. >On the other hand, if someone has either new experimental evidence or a new >idea for an experiment that might alter Maxwell's equations, then that is >interesting and appropriate for Vortex-L. Many of the discussions on these subjects you do not approve of, actually result in experimentation in order to prove or disprove some "component" phenomenon. (ie. the turntable experiment as a result of the Lenz law harnessing thread) >Michael J. Schaffer >General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA >Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 18:32:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA24929; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:04:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:04:06 -0800 Message-ID: <32DADF3A.1CA2 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:49:54 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, Nils Rognerud Subject: Re: New Newman machine building advices ! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yhUhm1.0.N56.Fckso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3385 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nils Rognerud wrote: > > 5% Royalty: You guys are amazing! No offense intended, but you don't > even have a working prototype!... There is too much talk in this group - Why do you say that? Where do you think my postings and ideas come from? If Over Unity were so easy, it would be here NOW. I am trying to build, step by step an understanding of the underlying principles behind an over unity device. Each principal has been and will be released with backup simulations and cold hard logic which works within the existing laws of physics. The simulation have been built from my experimental work with real devices. I can't send prototypes via e-mail. But I can and have sent pictures and clear, concise descriptions of each Watson Effect as a link to the understanding of what DNMEC is and how it works. Have you tried and verified ANY of the effects? Would be interested to know what results you obtained and what your thinking is on these principals. > like most theoretical scientists. How about building a WORKING model. I > may even be interested to invest time and money myself. > > Stop the talk and build a test. Talk is cheap and the physical universe > runs by its own rules, regardless of what we think or say. Just my 10 > cents worth - please ignore at will. > > -Nils > Hi Nils, I ignore no one. All comment and input is valued. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 19:14:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA07065; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:00:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:00:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:00:43 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Move magnets "thread" to freenrg-L In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970113180517.0097d94c mail.localaccess.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"tNNU43.0.Jk1.XRlso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3390 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Epitaxy wrote: > At 05:22 PM 1/13/97 -0800, you wrote: > >I side with Horace Heffner and Scott Little, that the present furious > >discussion on 'free' energy from magnet systems be displaced from Vortex-L. > > "Displacing" any discussions on any particular subject would be equivalent > to censorship and unfair No, it would only be unfair if the discussion was halted. Maintaining identical discussion on two lists having lots of subscribers in common is unfair because of the doubled messages. ALso, some threads are only on one group or the other, so it is confusing for those who only subscribe to one. The magnetics discussion is really a single thread (having many sub-threads of course) and should be limited to a single list. That way people who wish to participate can avoid the missing posts and redundant posts, and those who are not interested can unsubscribe or simply delete messages. The magnet thread is better suited to freenrg-L (or maybe Neotech, since both freenrg-L and vortex-L lean towards discussion of numerical results and real hardware, while Neotech does not.) So for now, lets move the magnet discussion to freenrg-L. Vortex subscribers who wish to participate can subscribe to freenrg-L if not already on it. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 19:15:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA05729; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:54:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:54:47 -0800 Date: 13 Jan 97 21:52:34 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Stop Quoting Everything! Message-ID: <970114025234_72240.1256_EHB89-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"kbVhL2.0.LP1.pLlso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3389 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Will the people engaged in this discussion of Magnetic Free Energy kindly abide by the Vortex-L rules and stop quoting entire messages. Please! This is a serious issue for some of our overseas subscribers, who pay a lot of money for e-mail. There is no reason for you people to quote large chunks of messages with these ">" and ">>" things in front, like this: >> >=20 >> > Any comments ? Am I right or am I wrong ? >> >=20 >> > Regards, Stefan. >> >=20 >> Hi Stephan, >>=20 These rules were published by Our Leader Bill. Okay? Actually, I agree with Heffner, Little and Schaffer: this discussion would be more appropriate in another forum. Schaffer expressed it well: "if someone has either new experimental evidence or a new idea for an experiment that might alter Maxwell's equations, then that is interesting and appropriate for Vortex-L." The same goes for the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which people have called into question here. I have defended it, but I want to make it clear that I agree with the Schaffer Rule. If you have a new theory or experimental evidence showing the law might be wrong, great. Let's hear it! But please don't ignore or dismiss established science. The same goes for the First Law, too. From time to time people have casually stated that "CF devices violate the conservation of energy." This leads some people to dismiss CF and others to dismiss the First Law. I say there is no evidence for this assertion. Nobody has ever tried to detect the reduction in mass from a CF device, so we have no direct evidence either way. I say the default assumption is that the law is correct. (Actually, according to P & P Morrison, nobody has ever attempted to detect the loss of mass from any energy producing system. They describe an interesting approach to doing that with a uranium oxide heating element.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 19:43:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA13529; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:30:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:30:27 -0800 From: "Jay Olson" Organization: University of Idaho To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:29:03 PST8PDT Subject: atomic expansion in dying stars? Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a) Message-ID: <616DA80B6C hickory.csrv.uidaho.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"H5o6V2.0.IJ3.Htlso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3391 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just a bit of something that doesn't seem to agree with the atomic expansion hypothesis. Why do dying stars undergo gravitational collapse when they run out of nuclear fuel? One might reason that if electron orbitals are supported by zero-point energy, when a star runs out of nuclear fuel and after it undergoes it's period of swelling and contracting to bleed off gravitational energy in the form of heat, new orbitals would form around the nuclei of the (denser than lead) plasma at the core of the star, slowly pushing the star into a huge ball of much lower density gass, instead of superdense plasma (near the core). This does not agree with the current model of star death, however. Stars do not seem to gain energy from atomic expansion and become a big, cold ball of slowly expanding gas. Instead, they lack the energy to allow their atoms to expand and thus undergo gravitational collapse becoming a white dwarf, or possibly even a neutron star or black hole. Once this occurs, it is generally believed that the white dwarf would simply cool down to become a nonluminous bunch of really dense (but cold) plasma, remaining ionized for the simple reason that the star hasn't enough energy to allow orbitals to form. Once again I don't know if I overlooked something, but it sure looks like stars don't benefit much from zero point energy. They just burn out and die (or explode, if the star is massive enough). But either way, it looks to me like zero point energy doesn't do much, if that really is the force that allows orbitals to form. Anyone see it differently? Jay Olson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 21:59:57 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA13714; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:46:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:46:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:46:24 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: theory vs. experiment Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"wBhat1.0.8M3.rsnso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3392 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The freenrg-L forum currently has a ban on theory-only discussions. I noted that keelynet BBS, sci.physics.new-theories, and other forums had a huge level of traffic regarding scalar speculation, errors in relativity, vortex theories of matter, etc. I saw a need for a place for hobbyists who want to extract answers from nature rather than explore details on the mental plane. **************************************************************************** FREENRG-L RULES 1. Heavy on experimentalism. Or theory-led experiments. Or theoretical implications of experiments. This is not a forum for all those controversial physics theories being ignored by mainstream science. Try NEOTECH for those. But if your theory leads directly to interesting, testable, real-world phenomena, then by all means discuss the experimental possibilites. If your experiments reveal anomalies not predicted by ANY theory, definitely jump right in and discuss your findings. Also it's very acceptable to publish theoretical work on a web page and announce its presence here. **************************************************************************** Up until now this issue hasn't appeared on vortex-L. But when traffic gets too high, possible solutions are to split the forum into more specialized fragments, or to change the rules to require a more limited span of topics, or to limit the total subscribers (require a fee, subscribe by invitation only, etc.) I could add the above rule to vortex-L. Would it have exactly the desired effect? Perhaps instead we could adhere to a specific list of allowed topics, and have the group approve new topics as necessary. Or govern by complaints: if n subscribers complain, shut down a discussion thread, with n >> 1. Another possibility: the current problem is with cc: and replies with cc. If I add a rule which forbids the including of another email list in either the cc or the To-line of messages to vortex-L, then identity crises between vortex-L, freenrg-L, and neotech won't be as likely. (Or in Douglas Adams terms, the independant organisims will avoid that most dreaded of all afflictions: Telepathy.) This would allow members to forward other lists' messages one at a time, while preventing crosspost-storms. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com www.eskimo.com/~billb EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 22:31:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA15791; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:54:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:54:19 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:54:07 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Rc5-F2.0.es3.8-nso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3393 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:27:31 -0800 From: Gary & Deb Steckly To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether At 23:32 07/01/97 -0800, Ross Tessien wrote: >...If you want to see spin 1/2 motion in a one dimensional quasi fluid >consisting of beads, then check out the Sci Am article on oscillons about >two months ago now. These are little peaks on a shaker table that moves up >and down with a bunch of beads on it. The up down motions are analogous to >the acoustic compression waves permeating the universe of aether, and which >we call spacetime. The oscillons, are one dimensional "vortices" in those >beads. If you want to read an interesting artice on-line about these oscillon structures (and see some fascinating images) check out the following URLs: http://www.areacom.it/html/arte_cultura/loris/armchair.html http://aps.org/mar96/vpr/Q5.02.html Quoting from the article found at the first URL: "Paul Umbanhowar (Texas) described an experiment at last month's (March 1996) American Physical Society (APS) meeting in St. Louis, in which the effects of air between the grains and the interaction between the grains and the walls were minimized by using a wide, shallow container. When the grain sample is vibrated, numerous patterns form:stripes, hexagons, and baseball stitches. When the layer thickness is of exactly 17 particles, novel localized structures appear. According to Umbanhowar, these "oscillons" are like ripples in a pond but with an important difference; they do not spread out and they can form bound states." "The Physics Today authors speculate that the role of gravity in shepherding galaxies may be analogous to the role played by container walls in shaping granular fluids into clusters. At the cosmological level, the "grains" would be stars and galaxies. " regards Gary From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 22:43:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA19239; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:11:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:11:41 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 17:11:17 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: theory vs. experiment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"02GwT1.0.Pi4.REoso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3394 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, William Beaty wrote: > > Another possibility: the current problem is with cc: and replies with cc. > If I add a rule which forbids the including of another email list in > either the cc or the To-line of messages to vortex-L, then identity crises > between vortex-L, freenrg-L, and neotech won't be as likely. (Or in > Douglas Adams terms, the independant organisims will avoid that most > dreaded of all afflictions: Telepathy.) This would allow members to > forward other lists' messages one at a time, while preventing > crosspost-storms. > This would be a minimal solution to the problem and I fully support it. Personally I now immediately delete anything to do with getting energy out of Maxwell's equations without reading. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 13 23:04:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA27559; Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:53:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:53:35 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 01:52:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970113225042_1343628013 emout05.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: thank you Scott and Bill B Resent-Message-ID: <"ASb6w3.0.Vk6.iroso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3396 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott I agree with you that there has to be a way to reduce traffic on vortex-l. My AOL is overloaded and most of the time I can't even phone in. As it is and at times I must delete messages without reading them. Maybe we should all be more prudent on what we post. To much of a traffic will ruin a good thing. ..................................................................... Horace, over the past year Puthoff and I have spent quite a bit of time >studying the behavior of superconductors in elecromagnetic fields and, >although they are spectacularly unique, there does not appear to be any >departure from the conservative field theory behavior which, as you say, is >fundamentally based upon the principle of Conservation of Energy. .............................................................................. ............... Scott, "You and Puthoff are wrong!" As I told R. Huish over one year ago superconductive systems offer the best hope of producing electricity directly from a zero point interaction. Lets wait to see what comes out of the Marshall Space Center "Tempere Experiment" before we exclude superconductors. I, in fact, applied for a patent on such a device a few years ago. This device is a modified "Tempere device'" No I do not yet have a working model and patent was not granted. Yes I'm going to talk to G. Miley and David Noever about it. Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 00:58:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA14032; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 00:22:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 00:22:26 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 03:21:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970113221223_201951775 emout09.mail.aol.com> To: david vesicle.ibg.uu.se, CldFusion@aol.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, 72240.1256 compuserve.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, 101544.702 compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter itim.org.soroscj.ro, zap@dnai.com, reed@zenergy.com, vortex-l eskimo.com, jseese@gpu.com Subject: fuel cell idea unveiled Resent-Message-ID: <"CxaPF1.0.9R3.19qso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3397 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Trip report from Detroit Jan 23 Hi I'm back from visiting some friends in Detroit. While there I stopped in at the COBA Stadium to visit the largest automobile show in the world. On display there was the Phaeton concept car. This car is of modern design but has the look of a 1930's luxury car. I particularly liked the window between the front and back seats. Also on display was the Rageous (short for outrageous) concept car. It looked like a sort of cross between a space age pinball machine and a car. One notable feature was the rear door which opened forward. Both automobiles were very attractive. I would look really good in either of them. On a more serious note Chrysler presented their vision of a fuel cell powered car. This car would run on gasoline, accelerate to 60 MPH in 4.5 seconds, get twice the range and gas mileage of a conventionally powered car. It best feature is its only exhaust emission, environmentally friendly water vapor. This is how it works: 1 Fuel enters a fuel vaporizer where it is heated and turned to gasoline vapor. 2. The vapor is sent to a POX Partial OXidation reactor. In the POX a limited amount of air reacts with the gasoline vapor producing hydrogen and carbon monoxide gas. 3. The hydrogen and carbon monoxide gas are then sent to a Water Gas Shift Reactor. In this reactor water and carbon monoxide unite to produce more hydrogen. The level of carbon monoxide is reduced to less than one percent. 4. The gas mixture in now sent to a third PROX PReferential OXidation reactor. This reactor reduces the 1 percent of carbon monoxide to a level of less than 10 PPM. Carbon monoxide is a poison and would damage the fuel cells. In the PROX the CO is removed by burning it at a catalytic surface. 5. Finally the mixture of hydrogen and carbon dioxide is sent to a fuel cell. The fuel cell produces the electrical power that drives the vehicle. So they you may wonder what is the problem with this system? Chrysler states, "The car costs more than you could afford in a lifetime." The trip was fun but, for now, I'm going to keep driving my present automobile. If you want to see more, or you are just curious to see where olf Frankey Z. went, CNN is airing a special on the event next week. Frank Znidarsic Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 04:48:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA14669; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 04:39:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 04:39:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:16:49 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <32db7935.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: "vortex" Subject: Dialogue between Rothwell and Kennel Resent-Message-ID: <"FKBXd3.0.4b3.2wtso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3399 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Elliot and Vortexers, Re: dialogue between Rothwell and Kennel I hope that this message will not be drowned in a flood of magnetic stuff. Who is right? I think that: Jed is right, AND.... Elliot is right, BUT and BUT.... This message is intended to be a part of the AND from above. Jed's open letter to the NHE Lab directories is an important document, well written; Elliot's answer also has a few elements of truth and motivation in it. My opinion is that actually, the question needs a "MU" answer, an answer much beyond the question..that is the problem is even more complicated and difficult than ever imagined. (I have always thought that Pirsig's book is taught in the Aamerican schools, however Elliot is in a zen-friendly environment) Cold fusion is clearly a problem placed at the extreme right side of the Medawar Zone...horribly difficult yet. The main reason: there is no guiding idea or hypothesis available; at least for the basic solid Pd/D2O system we have only a type of empirical vodoo, the research here is a game with fuzzy and changing rules. Even the most intensive and intelligent learning process cannot assure a technologically acceptable reproducibility for this system. See for illustration the papers of Storms [1] and Bockris [2] with complementary conclusions at most. NHE's troubles are due to both low efficiency and low effectiveness. ............................................ Efficiency: to do the things right Effectiveness: to do the right things (P. F. Drucker) ............................................ The open letter is emphasized on the subject of efficiency: clever choice of Pd, good treatment, smart device, use of the positive effect of the temperature, reliable and not-ultrasmart measurement. Unfortunately, irreproducibility is not "erreproducibility" that is many failures cannot be attributed to concrete errors. It seems to be a genetic disease of palladium. One of the basic aspects of lack of effectiveness is presented clearly in the letter : "Not only have you ignored the literature, but you have concentrated exclusively on bulk palladium with heavy water, ignoring the easier, better alternatives" etc. The other, perhaps in causal relationship with the former is the lack of a vision, strategy or simply working hypothesis. If you have had a global understanding of the field you would have changed the approach and the program. I am offering you now a some ideas with the unique aim to help; I am convinced that these ideas work and can contribute to the increasing of your lab's effectiveness and efficiency. Simply, we will explain and eliminate irreproducibility. The main ideas. a) Cold fusion is a complex phenomenon or a complex of phenomena, any trial to a simple theory is warranting failure and it is even dangerous due to misleading partial successes, A theory must comprise : TOPOLOGY, NATURE, MECHANISM(S) each chapter with its own intricacies. See please my papers [3.4] and those cited herein. Unfortunately again, the basic topology is the least understood; I have repeatedly stated that these reactions take place on the very surface and are very local (concentrated to a few, small active sites). Therefore it is useless and "bloody waste of time" as Ron would say, to try to correlate the success rate with ANY of the global characteristics of the metal. And any system which is not intrinsically catalytic (i.e. generates continuously a great number of vigorous catalytic sites) will not work reliably. The most misleading, fetishized factor is deuterium loading ratio but e.g Celani's experiments have demonstrated that a very high value of this parameter doesn't lead to an intense heat excess. I have serious doubts that a perfect protocol for bulk Pd can exist, without profound changes of the nature of this material despite the claimed long range (months) functioning of the boiling Pons device..is this really bulk palladium? b) I have published my hypothesis for the first time in 1993 (actually in May 1992 in Fusion Facts) and all the following working CF systems (Arata, George, Dufour, Patterson (who uses "catalytic" beads), then the Reifenschweiler phenomenon, the data of Kamada, directly proving locality... all are confirming that CF is an extreme case of catalysis. In my definition, catalysis is cooperation between two levels of organization of matter. We have to search for many types of active sites, leading to different reactions and perhaps finally we will understand what is the relationship between "ethergy" and the nuclear phenomena, an 'olla podrida' in any case. This idea is very simple, however its implementation is not; my experience shows that it is much better to have a wrong guiding hypothesis than to have no one. Active sites- catalytic or cavitational- is only a part of the story. Something like Shoulder's NEV can be an other part. c) The great difficulty will be to find a resistant non- suicidal generator, the energy influx seems to destroy the generators for many systems. This problem is ..it seems.. a stumbling block for the most successful Patterson device. An adequate degree of internal cracking is, in my opinion only a process of creation of new active sites on the juvenile surfaces. The trick is not to crack. And, as Mitch would say: I hope that helps! I am ready too. References [1] E. Storms: "Some thoughts on the nature of the nuclear-active regions in palladium" presented at ICCF-6 [2] J O'M Bockris: "The complex conditions needed to obtain nuclear heat from D-Pd systems" Journal of New Energy vol 1, no 3, 210-218 [3] P. Gluck: "The 'Surfdyn' concept: an attempt to solve (or rename) the puzzles of cold nuclear fusion" Fusion Technology vol 24, no 1, Aug 1993, p 122-126. [4] P. Gluck: "The basic facts of our field" Fusion Facts vol 7, no 6, Dec 1995 Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania Home: 064-174976 E-mail: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro , peterg@oc1.itim-cj.ro From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 05:22:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA19653; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:14:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:14:02 -0800 From: Tstolper aol.com Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:13:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970114081327_1142933043 emout08.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Change of Charters Resent-Message-ID: <"OzWVO1.0._o4.PQuso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3400 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little suggested that messages about electromagnetic over unity theories stay on Freenrg-L and not spill over to Vortex-L. Hank Scudder basically agreed with Scott Little. Hugh Heffner also agreed with Scott Little but suggested that topics like the missing Miles rebuttal of Jones, or observations and experiments like Li Ning's experiments trying to confirm the HTSC antigravity claims of Podkletnov (spelling?) and others, should still be welcome on Vortex-L. Heffner also warned of the danger of double-posting and how double-posting can create unmanageable volumes of email. I agree with all of this. The literature on electromagnetic over-unity theory is enormous, both in print and in electronic form. It threatens to overwhelm a list like Vortex-L. It would be better for Vortex-L if the EM over-unity stuff stayed on Freenrg-L. Tom Stolper From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 05:44:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA04093; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:35:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:35:48 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:35:40 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701141335.HAA04726 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: DNMEC --> Experiment results Resent-Message-ID: <"Uq6U32.0.t_.okuso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3401 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:38 PM 1/13/97 PSTP+0000, Warlord wrote (about an experiment, thank you): >I have confirmed experimentaly that AS a solenoid coil (externaly powered by >constant voltage power supply) attracts a non-conductive ferromagnetic >material, the external-supply-current decreases. I believe this is as expected from conventional theory. >...since this current is in the same direction as the external-supply-current, >the external power supply IS aided by this induced current resulting in the >drop of the requirement of the external-supply-current. I don't think this is correct. When you superimpose a second current onto one going in the SAME direction, the resulting current is bigger than either. Electromagnetics can be confusing. I know because I've spent a lot of time being confused by it. However, I have largely succeeded in overcoming this confusion and have actually contributed significantly to the design of a novel variable reluctance generator which is now being employed in a new flywheel energy storage system. Here is the way I have found to qualitatively analyze situations like your solenoid experiment: Given: a power supply applies a voltage across your solenoid (of inductance L) which makes a current flow which establishes a B field. You bring up a piece of non-conductive ferrous material which greatly improves the solenoid's magnetic circuit allowing the B field to increase rapidly (without the detrimental eddy-current squelching that occurs when conductive ferrous materials are used). While you are bringing up the ferrous material...i.e. while the B is increasing, the inductance of the coil "reacts" so as to prevent the increase of B (this is the key point...and it is an innate property of inductances). This reaction takes the form of an induced emf whose polarity is opposite that of the power supply because that is the only polarity which will act to prevent the B from rising in the coil. Thus, briefly, a current "tries to flow" in the opposite direction from the power supply's current and you observe this as a momentary reduction in the power supply's current. There are more formal ways to state the above...but I believe I got the job done...i.e. determining that your experiment is behaving exactly as expected. Congrats on an accurate observation. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 05:57:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA05800; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:48:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:48:20 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:48:03 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701141348.HAA05384 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, gwatson@enternet.com.au From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Understanding Newmam machine and DNMEC principle now ! Resent-Message-ID: <"EU2jS.0.PQ1.Ywuso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3402 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:16 AM 1/14/97 +1030, Greg Watson wrote (ACROSS FOUR DISCUSSION GROUPS, DAMN YOU): >...The coil will resist this by generating a emf (voltage) >which will resist the current now flowing. The result is the coil >current dropping to 5ma, the energy stored in the field staying constant and >the ferrite rod having increased kinetic energy. Nice effect, yes? You've got the current drop right, but there is no energy gain in the ferrite rod's motion. Conservation of energy is at work in pulling the ferrite rod up to the coil. Remember the energy stored in the mag field is (1/2)B*V^2 where V is the volume of space that the B fills. As the rod approaches the coil, the B tries to increase but doesn't very fast...but the V DECREASES real fast since the ferrite rod is "trapping" all the B that used to fan out into the surrounding space. Thus the stored magnetic field energy is decreasing and this is manifested as a force that pulls the ferrite rod toward the coil. Any kinetic energy gained by the rod came from the magnetic field. P.S. As our honorable list owner has requested, please stop posting yr messages to more than one discussion group. Choose one group for each message. - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 06:30:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA09032; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 06:08:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 06:08:49 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:08:41 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701141408.IAA06520 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Superconductivity and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"BGshI.0.2D2.mDvso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3403 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: New email abbreviation: SC = Superconductor At 01:52 AM 1/14/97 -0500, Frank Z wrote in response to my statement that SC's were all figured out: >Scott, "You and Puthoff are wrong!" As I told R. Huish over one year ago >superconductive systems offer the best hope of producing electricity directly >from a zero point interaction. Lets wait to see what comes out of the Marshall >Space Center "Tempere Experiment" before we exclude superconductors. Good point, Frank. If the Tampere experiment is replicated successfully then clearly there are FANTASTIC aspects of SC's that are not described by our present theories... - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 06:39:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA10380; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 06:17:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 06:17:44 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:17:32 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970114091614.45a7ee2a world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Understanding Newmam machine and DNMEC principle now ! Resent-Message-ID: <"YgHPJ1.0.2Y2.7Mvso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3404 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:48 AM 1/14/97 -0600, Scott Little wrote: > >You've got the current drop right, but there is no energy gain in the >ferrite rod's motion. Conservation of energy is at work in pulling the >ferrite rod up to the coil. Remember the energy stored in the mag field is >(1/2)B*V^2 where V is the volume of space that the B fills. As the rod >approaches the coil, the B tries to increase but doesn't very fast...but the >V DECREASES real fast since the ferrite rod is "trapping" all the B that >used to fan out into the surrounding space. Thus the stored magnetic field >energy is decreasing and this is manifested as a force that pulls the >ferrite rod toward the coil. Any kinetic energy gained by the rod came from >the magnetic field. > There appears to be two errors in Scott's definition of the magnetic field energy. Is not the magnetic field energy, after the volume integral, = (1/2) mu * H^2 *V ? And therefore (1/2) B^2 * V/mu and not "(1/2)B * V^2" Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 07:39:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA23726; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:27:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:27:56 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701140924.ZM8218 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:24:14 -0600 In-Reply-To: William Beaty "theory vs. experiment" (Jan 13, 11:45pm) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: William Beaty's post Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"YicGx1.0.do5.wNwso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3406 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 13, 11:45pm, William Beaty wrote: > Perhaps instead we could adhere to a specific list of allowed > topics, and have the group approve new topics as necessary. Or govern by > complaints: if n subscribers complain, shut down a discussion thread, with > n >> 1. --- Very good sugestion. I agree on the restrictions on the blue sky stuff too. Not that the 250+ year old man stuff isn't interesting.... (HEAVY sarcasm)... there are other places for that. > If I add a rule which forbids the including of another email list in > either the cc or the To-line of messages to vortex-L. --- Another very good sugestion. I had 248 emails from vortex and freenrg from the weekend waiting for me monday morning. Close to 50% were duplicates. What a waste of time. I feel theoretical brainstorming is important for new ideas and new approaches, but should only be discussed if someone plans to DO something with it. I do not suport wholesale censorship because an idea is not yet fleshed out, however. Odd discussions can sometimes catalyze real solutions to unrelated experiments. Any new rules should be inclusive to this end. Respectfully. -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 08:11:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA30809; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:58:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:58:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:58:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: General broadcast to people contacting me, Remi. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Afpc72.0.GX7.-qwso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3407 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Contactees, First any apologies if I've been slow to respond or forgotten you. Here's who I think you are, I'm tending to associated you with idea or correspondance at this stage as it will take a little time to become familiar with your names. (Forgive me if I disclose anything that was given in confidential correspondance) John Schrurer: USAF, Applied Scientist Wanted to know my situation, resources. Pointed me to his web page to look at a diagram of his patent. Sent email with two papers attached and a snippet of my patent with diagram that I think best shows paradox. Given a ftp site with a named directory: incomming/remi/your name Norman Horwood: Engineer, Businessman. Friend of Chris Tinsley. Talked about Stirling Engine, Catalyst, business plan. Will recieve same email (14/1/97) as to John and papers, etc best sent by post/fax. Given ftp site, similar see above. Horace Heffner Talked about Stirling Engine, Hilsch Tube, Potapov device. More reference information would be appreciated: text books, conference proceedings, journals etc. Given ftp site, see above. Stephan Hartmann All round 'good egg' who seems to be taking part in most of the discussions at vortex. Told of others who think second law is suspect. Gave email of researcher. All the best to everyone, Remi. P.S. all correspondance respected and dealt with as quickly as possible, sometimes there might be delays. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 08:55:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA08588; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:42:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:42:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 16:42:18 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: General broadcast correction. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"fYxgd2.0.162.ZTxso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3408 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: CORRECTION. ***************************************************************************** John Schrurer details were missinterpreted in a garbled email message. He is in fact a retired technician working on his own for the last twenty years. He would be very appreciative if people note this and do not bombard his account with emails as it costs a lot to retrieve them. This correction has been broadcast through standard channels and should be heeded. Subsequent mistakes won't be discounted but logged. ***************************************************************************** From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 09:27:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA14992; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:15:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:15:51 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:15:36 -0800 Message-Id: <199701141715.JAA23116 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Aether (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"nFefQ1.0.8g3.3zxso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3409 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >If you want to read an interesting artice on-line about these oscillon >structures (and see some fascinating images) check out the following URLs: > >http://www.areacom.it/html/arte_cultura/loris/armchair.html > >http://aps.org/mar96/vpr/Q5.02.html > >Quoting from the article found at the first URL: > >"Paul Umbanhowar (Texas) described an experiment at last month's (March >1996) American Physical Society (APS) meeting in St. Louis, in which the >effects of air between the grains and the interaction between the grains and >the walls were minimized by using a wide, shallow container. When the grain >sample is vibrated, numerous patterns form:stripes, hexagons, and baseball >stitches. When the layer thickness is of exactly 17 particles, novel >localized structures appear. According to Umbanhowar, these "oscillons" are >like ripples in a pond but with an important difference; they do not spread >out and they can form bound states." > > "The Physics Today authors speculate that the role of gravity in >shepherding galaxies may be analogous to the role played by container walls >in shaping granular fluids into clusters. At the cosmological level, the >"grains" would be stars and galaxies. " Yes, these are the sorts of things I have been talking about, except that you must recognize that with the oscillons, you are dealing with just a one dimensional driving oscillation in the vertical axis. The oscillons, while themselves 3D forms, are really only excited in the vertical, while aether acoustic exitations take place in all 3 directional modes simultaneously. But the shapes and structures you will see in those images are what I have been talking about as far as the spacetime nodal structure. And, it sounds like they have now succeeded in forming stationary standing waves like the ripples on a pond. Those are exactly the shape of the matter standing waves I have been discussing in all of these threads. The only difference is that the matter standing waves I am dealing with and studying are also 3D structures. So you must in your mind wrap those pond ripples around into a spherical standing wave. Other than that, I know that the work on oscillons will one day be recognized as significant work that is closely related to the real particles of nature. It remains to be seen whether or not they will ever be able to link multiple of those "pond ripple" waveforms together into a single composite standing wave. If they can, then they stand a chance of forming a proton or a neutron. Those particles if my ideas are right are in actuality 3 sets of 3 muon standing waves where each of those closely resembles a 3D version of the pond ripples. The trick here though is that these standing waves are going to be sort of dancing around each other in a spinning motion due to their phase angles relative to the spacetime nodal structure. That is a long story though. But note that they have been able to get groups of the normal oscillons to link together and they indeed do rotate about one another. And note also that they have succeeded at demonstrating that phase coherent and phase opposed oscillons do indeed repulse and attract respectively. In other words, the pulsation of the aether which we call spacetime is in effect analogous to the shaking of the table in these experiments. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 09:33:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA15730; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:21:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:21:04 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:19:08 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: General broadcast correction. From the horse's mouth. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"7lFIF1.0.fr3.z1yso" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3410 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., Recent news of my retiremant has been greatly exaggerated. General information: Over 12 peer reviewed published papers bear my name as etther co author, first author or sole author. Many are USAF cleared papers. Many are either USAF technical reports. Primary subjects include; a] Closed loop EEG analysis and Brain Actuated Control b] Bio or neuro magnetometry c] Non invasive sensing of human system d] Excitation of human system I have worked with systems used by and-or evaluated by USAF, NASA, DOT, and industrial, commercial, medical and academic communites. I have also been USAF prime contractor and-or subcontractor. I am heavily commited to educational outreach, de-mining technology, which is the detection of anti-personnel mines and several methodologies for improving the quality life for those with motor and-or sensory impairments. I am also commited to methodolgies to increase safety, including, but not limited to methods for; a] combating fire, primarily oil fires b] ballistic protection c] medical monitoring and telemetry d] materials sciences for rugged thermal materials I have some patents in the mill, some applied for and one has been assigned to a medical company and has gone interntional. I have skill and have worked professionally in and with, but not limited to the following disciplines; a] molecular biochemical b] high gradient and density magnetics fields c] sensors and manifold signal processing d] materials sciences The majority of my work is development of instrumentation for NDE of 'you can't do it' issues such as geophyical exploration, macro to nano scale materials examination, very small and very large and very subtle effects. I treat all the work as a series of puzzles or challenges and try to have a good time doing it if is paper counting instrument or discrimination of the diferences between lab grown or natural colorless diamonds. It is impossible to list in a short time professional work in applied sciences since 1968. On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Remi Cornwall wrote: > CORRECTION. > ***************************************************************************** > John Schrurer details were missinterpreted in a garbled email message. He > is in fact a retired technician working on his own for the last twenty years. > > He would be very appreciative if people note this and do not bombard his > account with emails as it costs a lot to retrieve them. > > This correction has been broadcast through standard channels and should be > heeded. Subsequent mistakes won't be discounted but logged. > ******* ********************************************************************** > > JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 11:54:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA12711; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:40:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:40:45 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:40:18 -0500 (EST) From: Todd Heywood To: minnie.nic.kingston.ibm.com:vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Patent Search Web Site (fwd) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"yrYAL2.0.V63.x4-so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3411 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Just received this in internal email. Should be of general interest to vortex-l. Todd ---------- Forwarded message ---------- ======================================================================= IBM Launches Comprehensive, Free U.S. Patent Search Web Site ------------------------------------------------------------- Date: January 9, 1997 970101271 Source: Business Wire IBM today launched one of the most comprehensive free World Wide Web services for finding and viewing information contained in more than 2 million U.S. patents issued in the past 26 years. Leveraging its technical skills in databases, digital libraries and electronic commerce, IBM's Patent Server site (http://www.ibm.com/patents) permits anyone with access to the World Wide Web to search and retrieve information free of charge on patents granted since 1971. Searches can be requested by patent number or by keywords in certain patent information categories: title, inventor, assignee, abstract, claims, attorney/agent and patent references. Full images of nearly 1 million U.S. patents issued since 1987 can also be viewed free of charge. IBM intends to add the images of the 1974-1986 patents during the first few months of 1997. Using a Web order form, copies of U.S. patents can be easily ordered for a fee from Optipat, Inc., with delivery by mail, fax or on CD-ROM. In time, IBM intends to expand its patent server's capabilities to include searching of the full text of patents, international patent data and links to other patent-information vendors providing additional supplementary services. IBM's Patent Server site is an outgrowth of a capability developed within IBM's Research Division that has enabled IBM's own researchers and patent attorneys to search U.S. patents for the past year. "It saved us time and money, so we thought it would be a valuable resource to the public as well," said Marshall Phelps, vice president, IBM intellectual property and licensing. "Being able to view the patent images is especially important because so much critical information is contained in a patent's figures and drawings. "Our site provides more patent images for free viewing than any other Web site we're aware of," he added. Free access to such comprehensive patent information is also expected to hasten the pace of innovation across the board, because inventors can more easily find and improve upon or license -- rather than inadvertently duplicating -- inventions that have already been made. Another goal of IBM's Patent Server project is to create a comprehensive, easy-to-use digital archive prototype for making public information available on the World Wide Web. This activity is expected to help increase the number of people who recognize the value of Internet-based activities and the number of public-and private-sector organizations worldwide that will create similar servers for their internal and external needs. Technical details ----------------- IBM's Patent Server provides easy access to the information in patents issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office from January 5, 1971 until December 17, 1996. Information and images of newly issued patents will be regularly added to the database. The server supports simple searching by keyword, phrase or patent number as well as more advanced searching using boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT). Within any patent, references made to other U.S. patents are hyperlinked, allowing users to locate and view the "prior-art" by simply clicking on the cited patents. These links are bi-directional and use IBM's DB2 relational database to permit easy access to later patents that reference the document being viewed. In addition, IBM's Patent Server includes information on patents that have lapsed and entered the public domain before reaching their maximum lifetime because their required maintenance fees had not been paid. (Such fees are due on the fourth, eighth and twelfth anniversaries of a patent's issue date.) IBM's Patent Server Web site uses many open-system technologies. When all of the images are loaded into the system, some 1.2 trillion bytes of patent data will reside on about 2,800 CD-ROMs made by Optipat from the official public information files of the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. (The information available today -- including images of patents issued since 1987 -- are on about 1,300 CD-ROMs.) The CD-ROMs are accessed by using multiple jukebox-like optical-disk library units from Pioneer. The searchable data are contained in a DB2 database running on RS/6000 computers in an AIX environment. Searches are done by IBM's DB2 and Vertiy's Topic search engines. The World Wide Web queries are managed by IBM RS/6000 SP supercomputers. The selected content is delivered to users via IBM's Advantis network. The IBM home page can be found on the Internet at: http://www.ibm.com Note: IBM is a registered trademark of the International Business Machines Corp. Contact: IBM Michael Ross, 408/927-1283 mikeross almaden.ibm.com ======================================================================= From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 12:07:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA15121; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:53:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:53:09 -0800 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:50:16 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701141950.NAA17396 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Understanding Newmam machine and DNMEC principle now ! Resent-Message-ID: <"7iD-x3.0.wh3.OG-so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3412 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:17 AM 1/14/97 -0500, Mitchell wrote: > There appears to be two errors in Scott's definition of the magnetic >field energy. > And therefore (1/2) B^2 * V/mu and not "(1/2)B * V^2" Right...the V^2 was a typo but I genuinely left out the 1/mu. The correct expression is, as you say: E = (1/2)*B^2*V/mu My point still holds, though. As the rod approaches the energy stored in teh magnetic field decreases. The energy goes into doing Force*Distance work on the rod. If the rod were supported by a spring, the spring would be extended and energy would be xferred from the mag field into the spring. Thanks, Mitchell...I always seem to leave out that mu....seems out of place somehow...but it sure is required to make the units work out right.... - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 13:37:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA03457; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:16:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:16:25 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970114211548.008dca78 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 16:15:48 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Patent Search Web Site (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"MSVmp1.0.vr.cU_so" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3413 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:40 PM 1/14/97 -0500, you wrote: > >Just received this in internal email. Should be of general interest >to vortex-l. > >Todd > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- > ======================================================================= > > IBM Launches Comprehensive, Free U.S. Patent Search Web Site > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Date: January 9, 1997 970101271 > Source: Business Wire > > Leveraging its technical skills in databases, digital libraries > and electronic commerce, IBM's Patent Server site > (http://www.ibm.com/patents) permits anyone with access to the World I have checked it out. It is great! I wish something like this was available while I was still in the work force. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 14 14:37:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA19215; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:23:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:23:33 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Re: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:22:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MkNI-3.0.0i4.YT0to" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3414 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott The answer is time, of course. The Vortex-l reading takes more then enough of it. I don't subscribe to free energy, but would for a while if a topic sounded particularly good. The idea is to find out when I should look elsewhere. Hank ---------- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Any attempt at Lens Law Harnessing Date: Sunday, January 12, 1997 3:33PM At 12:36 1/12/97 -0800, Hank Scudder wrote: > I basically agree with you, but I would like to see initial >postings on a topic in both groups, if that is possible. Please explain why, Hank. Remember, if you don't want to miss anything then simply subscribe to both groups. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 05:59:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA13255; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 05:50:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 05:50:47 -0800 Date: 15 Jan 97 08:48:25 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Post Freenrg-l summaries Message-ID: <970115134825_72240.1256_EHB84-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"HfNxI2.0.1F3.q2Eto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3416 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Hank Scudder suggests that people post the first messages from dual-interest discussions both here and in Freenrg-l. Why not grab a few lines from the messages and post a summary? You can say "Here is a discussion over in [Freenrg / s.p.f. / alt.pets.ferrets] that might interest the readers of this forum." One of the beauties of the new Internet WWW structures is the ability to reduce redundant information. Let's take advantage of it! I want to emphasize again that we ask people to move these discussions to reduce bandwidth clutter and to organize the data better. This should not be construed as disapproval or censorship. I predict that one of the next big breakthroughs in Internet technology will be better organization, hierarchy, and features for discussion group threads and the like, plus the universal use of something like HTML or Acrobat to allow sophisticated formatting. If I wasn't so busy with CF I might try to work something up myself. Someone will make a lot of money doing that. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 06:09:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA22174; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:35:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:35:24 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: RE: Aether and Light Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:34:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"h2FQr3.0.NQ5.he0to" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3415 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Danny The original reason for an aether, was to have a medium for EM/ light waves to travel through in analogy to sound waves. A moving medium adds/subtracts to the velocity of a sound wave. This was thought to be necessary for EM waves too. Later results, Michaelson-Morley, Einstein etc. showed this was not the case. We can live without an aether to explain all of the EM theory results. Whether this is true in quantum mechanics, ZPE, etc. is another story. Hank Scudder ---------- From: HAMILTON lcia.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Aether and Light Date: Monday, January 13, 1997 1:31AM To: Vortex Ross Tessien started a thread on Aether while I was out of town. If you don't mind going back to the thread for a moment please consider the following. One of the most compelling arguments for Aether is the need for a media for light (and the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum) to travel through. If you make the assumption that Aether is "something", exploring it's impact on our theories of matter becomes interesting to the point of fascination. If Aether exists, and EM waves travel through it, and those waves take on the characteristics of particles, is it possible that "matter" is somehow made-up of concentrations of Aether. Following that thread, can certain phenomenon be better explained if Aether contributes directly to the makeup of particles of matter? i.e. How do we "receive" radio transmissions? Further, perhaps Aether is not a simple media. How would do you explain the fact that EM waves travel through the same "media" with relatively little interference. What if Aether consists of different "levels" of "something", could the different elements of matter be the concentration of the different "levels" of Aether? I know this is an old thread, but if there is an "ocean of Aether" would it not have a bearing on most of the subjects discussed here. If Aether doesn't exist, what is the mechanism for wave transmission? If we understood "that" mechanism, would it have a bearing?? Danny Hamilton From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 09:00:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA26330; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 08:38:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 08:38:30 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:36:46 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: General broadcast to people contacting me, Remi. Resent-Message-ID: <"dlirW2.0.uP6.RVGto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3417 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dear Contactees, [SNIP] > >Horace Heffner >Talked about Stirling Engine, Hilsch Tube, Potapov device. >More reference information would be appreciated: text books, conference >proceedings, journals etc. >Given ftp site, see above. [SNIP] >Remi. My interest was to encourage discussion of practical applicability of your idea to the general issues of extraction of energy from kinetic distributions. I have no information for ftp on the above. Could you provide the patent number for your invention? Would suggest you check the following www URL's for information: SOMETHING ABOUT EVERYTHING: The above page will get you to the vortex archives, which have lots of information on the Potapov device, and to various other pages related to the subjects below. VORTEX GENERATION/UTILIZATION: HILSCH TUBE/WIRBELROHR: EXTENSIVE REFERENCE LIST ON BOUYANCY PARADOX, HILSCH TUBE ETC.: STIRLING ENGINE: Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 09:42:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA17350; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:29:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:29:27 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701151721.JAA00409 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Tampere Replication (fwd) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:21:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <9701140924.ZM8218 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> from "John Steck" at Jan 14, 97 09:24:14 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"X1Q1i3.0.nE4.jFHto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3418 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's a message forwarded from the moderated usenet group sci.physics.research. Presumably the "researcher in Ohio" discussed below, is our favorite non-retired USAF scientist. One might ask -- why is it taking NASA such a long time to duplicate this "difficult" experiment? Regards, Robert Stirniman ---------- > From: Troy Dawson > Newsgroups: sci.physics.research > Subject: Tampere Replication -- How to > Date: Saturday, January 11, 1997 5:34 AM > > [Moderator's Note: as directed by the author, please follow up by > e-mail until this experiment is made public. The author of the article > has informed me that his intent was primarily to make it known how > easily reproduced this experiment is, presumably in the hope of > wide spread replication. Hopefully papers describing these replication > attempts will be forthcoming for our future discussion. -WGA] > > A researcher in Ohio has attempted to replicate Podkletnov's > gravity modification superconductor results. > > The Setup > --------- > > 1) 1" YBCO superconducting disc. > > 2) Magnetic field generator (producing a 600 gauss/60Hz EM field). > > 3) Pan-and-beam balance: > > Beam: bamboo, coming to a point on one end (24.6cm long, > weight 1.8647g) > > Pan: a cardboard rectangle (15.8cm x 10.0cm x 0.131mm) is suspended > from the balance with 28.1cm of cotton string. > > A polystyrene "pan" (7.2cm x 8.7cm x 1.78 mm) is attached with paper > masking tape to the cardboard rectangle. > > The pan assembly (w/ string, cardboard, tape) weighs 1.6502g. > > The balance is suspended from the end of a 5' wood beam by ~30cm > of monofilament fishing line (8lb. test) attached to the balance's > center of mass (5.5cm from the pan end). > > The other end of the crossbeam is firmly anchored by a heavy > steel tripod (normally used for holding photographic lights). > > 4) Thermal and EM isolation is hopefully provided by a glass plate > (15cm x 30cm, 0.7cm thick) with a brass screen attachment. > > This plate-and-brass-screen assembly is held about ~4.5cm below the > pan by a '3-finger' ring stand clamp. > > 5) A straightsided, 6" diameter, 10" deep dewar with 3 - 4" of > liquid nitrogen is used to cool the sc below its Tc, and is > removed from the experiment area before the trial. > > > Experiment Procedure > -------------------- > > 1) The YBCO superconductor is placed in a liquid nitrogen bath and > allowed to come to liq N temp (as indicated when the boiling of > the liq N ceases). The sc will remain below its 90C Tc for the > duration of the trial (less than 20sec). > > 3) The disc is then removed from the bath & placed on a strong NdFeB > magnet to induce a supercurrent. The Meissner effect is counteracted > by a wooden stick. The sc disc has a cotton string attached to it to > assist handling. > > 3) The HTSC and wooden stick assembly is placed on the EM field > generator, about 33cm below the glass/screen isolation plate. > > The HTSC is ~40cm *directly* below the pan. > > 4) The AC field generator is then cycled for ~ 5sec with 0.75sec > equal-time on/off pulses. > > > Experiment Findings > ------------------- > > o While AC current was flowing though the AC field generator, the > balance pointer was deflected 2.1mm downward. > > o When the AC field generator was pulsed with no superconductor > present, there was no measurable pointer deflection. > > > Experimenter's Comments > ----------------------- > > o The additional pan weight required to *raise* the balance pointer > 2.1mm was later found to be 0.0891g (~5% of the pan's weight). > > o The idea was that the 'column' of modified gravity (as described by > Podkletnov) HAS to hit the pan somewhere ...as the HTC is only 1" > diameter and the pan is larger. > > o Only one experimental setup was constructed, with several trials. > The experimenter welcomes further replication attempts & comments. > > == > > Please direct questions & comments to e-mail, as further > discussion on s.p.r seems unwarranted as of yet. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 12:13:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA10136; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:00:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:00:52 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:00:37 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Aether and Light Resent-Message-ID: <"V4SEX2.0.HU2.pTJto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3419 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 2:34 PM 1/14/97, Scudder,Henry J wrote: >Danny >The original reason for an aether, was to have a medium for EM/ light >waves >to travel through in analogy to sound waves. A moving medium >adds/subtracts to the >velocity of a sound wave. This was thought to be necessary for EM waves >too. >Later results, Michaelson-Morley, Einstein etc. showed this was not the >case. >We can live without an aether to explain all of the EM theory results. >Whether this is >true in quantum mechanics, ZPE, etc. is another story. >Hank Scudder Maybe its a personal defficiency, but I have some difficulty believing in the requirement of aether for light transmission, and even more difficulty believing in the required infinite universe to support the ZPE and "gravity as a sheilding effect" concepts. Maybe there are different and better resolutions, like convolution, to answer these requirements. However, on the other side of the coin, there is one fact that makes it equally difficult for me *not* to believe in some comparatively fixed fabric of space time, similar to Ross Tessian's view. That fact is that, while all linear motion is relative, all rotational motion is not. In a closed environment, we can know, without any external reference queues, if we are rotating relative to the universe, and what axis we are rotating about. Rotational motion is not strictly relative. There is a fixed coordinate system, established by measuring centrifugal force, that determines in an absolute way the rotational direction of an object. Of course there can be relativistic components to very high speed rotating systems, but this is due to instantaneous linear values. One can determine the direction of rotation of any system by observing the presence of centrifugal force in the system, whether in the same or a different reference frame. The FitzGerald contracition, time dilation, etc. can modify the observed *magnitude* of the centrifugal force, from an external reference frame, and thus the apparent rate of rotation, but not a determination of the direction of and the axis of rotation, true? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 13:02:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA23689; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:51:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 12:51:16 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:52:21 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: atomic expansion in dying stars? Resent-Message-ID: <"ROkOs3.0.1o5.2DKto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3420 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:29 AM 1/13/97, Jay Olson wrote: >Just a bit of something that doesn't seem to agree with the atomic >expansion hypothesis. Why do dying stars undergo >gravitational collapse when they run out of nuclear fuel? The conditions for the AEH are not met in a pure plasma. The hypothesized energy release is in the formation of a deformed orbital in the presence of another orbital, without the subsequent instantaneous formation of a bond that eliminates the pressure by reducing the orbital sizes. This is to ensure that work takes place in the form of force applied through distance. Also, the Casimir effect is an effect between atoms, and therefore actually an effect between electron shells, or orbitals, arrayed in the form of a surface. No dialog about pure plasma can relate to these effects. >One might >reason that if electron orbitals are supported by zero-point energy, >when a star runs out of nuclear fuel and after it undergoes it's >period of swelling and contracting to bleed off gravitational energy >in the form of heat, new orbitals would form around the nuclei of the >(denser than lead) plasma at the core of the star, slowly pushing the >star into a huge ball of much lower density gass, instead of >superdense plasma (near the core). The plasma temperature would have to be below the corresponding ionization voltage of the atoms to be formed. In addition, the work done in expanding the volume per nucleus to the nearly normal atomic volume (in order to form an orbital) would have to be less than the ionization energy. These conditions work against each other in a sufficiently dense star, because the density increases as the star cools. This does not agree with the current model of >star death, however. Stars do not seem to gain energy from atomic >expansion and become a big, cold ball of slowly expanding gas. Instead, >they lack >the energy to allow their atoms to expand and thus undergo gravitational >collapse becoming a white dwarf, or possibly even a neutron star or >black hole. Once this occurs, it is generally believed that the >white dwarf would simply cool down to become a nonluminous bunch of >really dense (but cold) plasma, remaining ionized for the simple reason that >the star hasn't enough energy to allow orbitals to form. Yes, and it is the orbitals that must exist for the expansion to take place. > Once again I don't know if I overlooked something, but it sure looks like >stars don't benefit much from zero point energy. True, stars could not generate the stated pre-conditions of the AEH and thus could not benefit from ZPE related to the AEH. Maybe in the outer mantel of a red giant? Even then, the frequency of the described events would be low. One of the problems with the AEH is it is very difficult even to contrive an experiment that clearly demonstrates the effect. I am not even sure the effect cant take place in a gas environment, other than possibly by splitting off an atom from a molecule (e.g. splitting H2 or H2O). I suspect that when a deformed orbtal is formed, the deformation is sufficient that a Rydberg style orbital is formed, where in the outer fringes of the orbital the electron loses its strict quantized nauture and can emit photons in a spectral continuum. This is bad for ZPE energy production, in that the closer the energy level of the photon emission matches the non-deformed state less the distortion, the less energy is extracted from ZPE. It could be that there is always an exact match, and thus no ZPE energy is available from the proposed mechanism in a gas, except possibly from the case of the expansion of molecular orbitals into larger atomic orbitals upon a split, where no photon needs be emitted at all as the molecule was already in a low energy state. >They just burn out >and die (or explode, if the star is massive enough). But either way, >it looks to me like zero point energy doesn't do much, if that really >is the force that allows orbitals to form. Anyone see it >differently? > Jay Olson I don't think "force that allows to form" is as accurate as "mechanism that maintains a formed orbital without emissions". Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 16:41:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA16852; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:30:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:30:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:29:43 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: td twics.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Suggested new tests for Tampere Replication Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vj9cL.0.C74.8QNto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3421 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Troy, I received this message from the vortex-l eskimo.com discussion list. This sounds very interesting. I have a few suggestions for further controls for the experiment. Could you pass them on to the "Researcher in Ohio"? 1. Make measurements as a function of height above the disk. All magnetic and electric effects should decrease at least as fast as (1/r**2). 2. Try a copper plate of the same dimensions as the SC plate above the 60 Hz magnet source. 3. Try the same experiment without first inducing the supercurrent in the SC. Actually I would expect the supercurrent to fall to zero in the process of removing the magnet. 4. Try a variety of materials of different masses for the balance beam. If you've truely got a gravitional effect, everything should show the same effect. Martin Sevior > > A researcher in Ohio has attempted to replicate Podkletnov's > gravity modification superconductor results. > > The Setup > --------- > > 1) 1" YBCO superconducting disc. > > 2) Magnetic field generator (producing a 600 gauss/60Hz EM field). > > 3) Pan-and-beam balance: > > Beam: bamboo, coming to a point on one end (24.6cm long, > weight 1.8647g) > > Pan: a cardboard rectangle (15.8cm x 10.0cm x 0.131mm) is suspended > from the balance with 28.1cm of cotton string. > > A polystyrene "pan" (7.2cm x 8.7cm x 1.78 mm) is attached with paper > masking tape to the cardboard rectangle. > > The pan assembly (w/ string, cardboard, tape) weighs 1.6502g. > > The balance is suspended from the end of a 5' wood beam by ~30cm > of monofilament fishing line (8lb. test) attached to the balance's > center of mass (5.5cm from the pan end). > > The other end of the crossbeam is firmly anchored by a heavy > steel tripod (normally used for holding photographic lights). > > 4) Thermal and EM isolation is hopefully provided by a glass plate > (15cm x 30cm, 0.7cm thick) with a brass screen attachment. > > This plate-and-brass-screen assembly is held about ~4.5cm below the > pan by a '3-finger' ring stand clamp. > > 5) A straightsided, 6" diameter, 10" deep dewar with 3 - 4" of > liquid nitrogen is used to cool the sc below its Tc, and is > removed from the experiment area before the trial. > > > Experiment Procedure > -------------------- > > 1) The YBCO superconductor is placed in a liquid nitrogen bath and > allowed to come to liq N temp (as indicated when the boiling of > the liq N ceases). The sc will remain below its 90C Tc for the > duration of the trial (less than 20sec). > > 3) The disc is then removed from the bath & placed on a strong NdFeB > magnet to induce a supercurrent. The Meissner effect is counteracted > by a wooden stick. The sc disc has a cotton string attached to it to > assist handling. > > 3) The HTSC and wooden stick assembly is placed on the EM field > generator, about 33cm below the glass/screen isolation plate. > > The HTSC is ~40cm *directly* below the pan. > > 4) The AC field generator is then cycled for ~ 5sec with 0.75sec > equal-time on/off pulses. > > > Experiment Findings > ------------------- > > o While AC current was flowing though the AC field generator, the > balance pointer was deflected 2.1mm downward. > > o When the AC field generator was pulsed with no superconductor > present, there was no measurable pointer deflection. > > > Experimenter's Comments > ----------------------- > > o The additional pan weight required to *raise* the balance pointer > 2.1mm was later found to be 0.0891g (~5% of the pan's weight). > > o The idea was that the 'column' of modified gravity (as described by > Podkletnov) HAS to hit the pan somewhere ...as the HTC is only 1" > diameter and the pan is larger. > > o Only one experimental setup was constructed, with several trials. > The experimenter welcomes further replication attempts & comments. > > == > > Please direct questions & comments to e-mail, as further > discussion on s.p.r seems unwarranted as of yet. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 18:54:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA18422; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 18:44:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 18:44:10 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dialogue between Rothwell and Kennel Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 02:44:08 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e6aeae.39095918 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <32db7935.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> In-Reply-To: <32db7935.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eOBij1.0.lV4.tNPto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3423 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:16:49 GMT, Peter Glueck wrote: [snip] >It seems to be a genetic disease of palladium. It is a genetic disease of palladium. Palladium has a cubic lattice. The more pure the metal, the more perfect the cube, the worse CF will work. A nicely distorted lattice is mandatory. That is why certain alloys or contaminants produce better results. That is why some suppliers produce better results than others. That is why CETI's multilayered beads produce heat - many interfaces between different metals, resulting in distorted lattices. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 18:55:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA18399; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 18:44:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 18:44:01 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: fuel cell idea unveiled Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 02:44:05 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e5ac67.38512237 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <970113221223_201951775 emout09.mail.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <970113221223_201951775 emout09.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"a06mJ1.0.KV4.lNPto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3422 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997 03:21:39 -0500 (EST), FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: [snip] > On a more serious note Chrysler presented their vision of a > fuel cell powered car. This car would run on gasoline, Why doesn't this surprise me? > accelerate to 60 MPH in 4.5 seconds, get twice the range and gas > mileage of a conventionally powered car. It best feature is its > only exhaust emission, environmentally friendly water vapor. Wrong. It also emits CO2. (The "C" from the gasoline has to go somewhere). [snip] > 5. Finally the mixture of hydrogen and carbon dioxide is sent > to a fuel cell. The fuel cell produces the electrical power > that drives the vehicle. And the carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere? (Unless trapped and stored - pull the other one ;). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 19:34:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA27927; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 19:23:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 19:23:58 -0800 Message-ID: <32DD9F5C.CB5 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:24:12 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether and Light References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fTBxc2.0.Cq6.DzPto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3424 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > (snip) > However, on the other side of the coin, there is one fact that makes it > equally difficult for me *not* to believe in some comparatively fixed > fabric of space time, similar to Ross Tessian's view. That fact is that, > while all linear motion is relative, all rotational motion is not. In a > closed environment, we can know, without any external reference queues, if > we are rotating relative to the universe, and what axis we are rotating > about. Rotational motion is not strictly relative. There is a fixed > coordinate system, established by measuring centrifugal force, that > determines in an absolute way the rotational direction of an object. This is a fascinating aspect of reality, Horace! Is it Mach's principle that addresses such problems? "The idea is that the motion of a particle is meaningful only when referred to the rest of the matter in the universe. Geometrical and inertial properties are meaningless for an empty space and the motion of a particle in such space is devoid of physical significance." I guess this idea does not demand an Aether, as such, but it does require some "structure" to each space-point in our universe - shared by all the mass elements in the universe. Frank Stenger P.S. To keep us list-legal, Horace, I am now spinning around in my office chair - experimentally detecting the rotation with my eyes closed. It works! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 00:36:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA21645; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:28:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:28:12 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:28:03 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: non-magnetic balance beam Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Snw323.0.7I5.QQUto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3426 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > 3) Pan-and-beam balance: > > Beam: bamboo, coming to a point on one end (24.6cm long, > weight 1.8647g) > Speaking of diamagnetism, John should try waving a great big NIB permanent magnet around his balance beam arrangement as a sanity check. If the magnet deflects the beam, skeptics are going to jump on this as an explanation even if the magnetic levitator's forces are too small to explain the deflection. Of course ground yourself first, John, since e-fields forces can raise their ugly heads depending on what type of shoe soles you wear. In playing with the diamagnetic water dimple, I notice that viewing the reflected light directly will reveal that certain dust motes collect in the dimple, repel each other and form small arrays, and refuse to budge when breathed upon. Could be meteoric dust. Another neat kid's science demonstration if so! What havoc might be played by meteoric dust getting into small SEM samples. I bet that contamination by iridium, etc., can come from the air. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 00:59:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA19311; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:11:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:11:48 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:11:40 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: diamagnetic water Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nuBNI.0.fj4.3BUto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3425 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: DIAMAGNETIC WATER Place a neodymium disk magnet in a shallow dish. Fill the dish with water so the magnet is completely covered (about .5cm water above the magnet). Bounce light from a distant small source off the water surface at a shallow angle and onto a wall or screen. You will see an oval reflection from the water surface, and at the location of the magnet will be a small bright splotch. The bright area is caused by a concave dimple in the water surface. The magnet repels the water slightly, which creates the concavity. Add more water and the dimple remains, even with a large obvious layer of water over the magnet. (I heard about this one from someone who was deflecting streams of water with a large neodymium magnet. The dimple effect is easier to show to a large audience.) So, does the Podkletnov effect do a similar thing to water, but for less conventional reasons? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 01:44:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA29350; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 01:35:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 01:35:04 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:35:51 -0900 To: fstenger interlaced.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Aether and Light Resent-Message-ID: <"wZxqA1.0.WA7.7PVto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3427 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:24 PM 1/15/97, Francis J. Stenger wrote: [snip] > >This is a fascinating aspect of reality, Horace! Is it Mach's >principle that addresses such problems? > "The idea is that the motion of a particle is meaningful > only when referred to the rest of the matter in the > universe. Geometrical and inertial properties are > meaningless for an empty space and the motion of a particle > in such space is devoid of physical significance." > >I guess this idea does not demand an Aether, as such, but it does >require some "structure" to each space-point in our universe - shared >by all the mass elements in the universe. > >Frank Stenger [snip] I think Mach could only be correct if centrifugal force does not exist unless the rest of the universe is out there somehow creating inertia here locally. As long as there exists centrifugal force, and therefore anglar momentum, and inirtia, in the small system under observation (you spinning in you chair momentarily oblivious to the rest of the universe) then no reference point is needed. If you could suddenly see me and be made aware that I am the only other thing in the universe, and that I am experiencing such and such centrifugal force spinning in my chair, you could determine, knowing the rest of our physical properties, my angular velocity relative to an absolute zero angular velocity, and relative to you. Knowing my situation does not change the centrifugal force you experience. Our simple relative angular velocities do not change our individual measurements of the the centrifugal forces we feel. The apparent rate of rotation (clock) and the apparent pole of rotation can be distorted by relativistic shifts, but the fact of rotation, or none, relative to some absolute framework, can not. Either the matter out there, through direct action, or space itself, must be providing more than just a reference point. I don't see anyway to capitalize on this notion, though. I don't suspect we can make the rest of the universe go away momentarily so we can do an experiment either. So ... I guess we should just leave it as a curiosity. Wondering why the universe is now suddenly spinning, Horace From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 02:40:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA16852; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:30:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:30:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:29:43 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: td twics.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Suggested new tests for Tampere Replication Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vj9cL.0.C74.8QNto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3421 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Troy, I received this message from the vortex-l eskimo.com discussion list. This sounds very interesting. I have a few suggestions for further controls for the experiment. Could you pass them on to the "Researcher in Ohio"? 1. Make measurements as a function of height above the disk. All magnetic and electric effects should decrease at least as fast as (1/r**2). 2. Try a copper plate of the same dimensions as the SC plate above the 60 Hz magnet source. 3. Try the same experiment without first inducing the supercurrent in the SC. Actually I would expect the supercurrent to fall to zero in the process of removing the magnet. 4. Try a variety of materials of different masses for the balance beam. If you've truely got a gravitional effect, everything should show the same effect. Martin Sevior > > A researcher in Ohio has attempted to replicate Podkletnov's > gravity modification superconductor results. > > The Setup > --------- > > 1) 1" YBCO superconducting disc. > > 2) Magnetic field generator (producing a 600 gauss/60Hz EM field). > > 3) Pan-and-beam balance: > > Beam: bamboo, coming to a point on one end (24.6cm long, > weight 1.8647g) > > Pan: a cardboard rectangle (15.8cm x 10.0cm x 0.131mm) is suspended > from the balance with 28.1cm of cotton string. > > A polystyrene "pan" (7.2cm x 8.7cm x 1.78 mm) is attached with paper > masking tape to the cardboard rectangle. > > The pan assembly (w/ string, cardboard, tape) weighs 1.6502g. > > The balance is suspended from the end of a 5' wood beam by ~30cm > of monofilament fishing line (8lb. test) attached to the balance's > center of mass (5.5cm from the pan end). > > The other end of the crossbeam is firmly anchored by a heavy > steel tripod (normally used for holding photographic lights). > > 4) Thermal and EM isolation is hopefully provided by a glass plate > (15cm x 30cm, 0.7cm thick) with a brass screen attachment. > > This plate-and-brass-screen assembly is held about ~4.5cm below the > pan by a '3-finger' ring stand clamp. > > 5) A straightsided, 6" diameter, 10" deep dewar with 3 - 4" of > liquid nitrogen is used to cool the sc below its Tc, and is > removed from the experiment area before the trial. > > > Experiment Procedure > -------------------- > > 1) The YBCO superconductor is placed in a liquid nitrogen bath and > allowed to come to liq N temp (as indicated when the boiling of > the liq N ceases). The sc will remain below its 90C Tc for the > duration of the trial (less than 20sec). > > 3) The disc is then removed from the bath & placed on a strong NdFeB > magnet to induce a supercurrent. The Meissner effect is counteracted > by a wooden stick. The sc disc has a cotton string attached to it to > assist handling. > > 3) The HTSC and wooden stick assembly is placed on the EM field > generator, about 33cm below the glass/screen isolation plate. > > The HTSC is ~40cm *directly* below the pan. > > 4) The AC field generator is then cycled for ~ 5sec with 0.75sec > equal-time on/off pulses. > > > Experiment Findings > ------------------- > > o While AC current was flowing though the AC field generator, the > balance pointer was deflected 2.1mm downward. > > o When the AC field generator was pulsed with no superconductor > present, there was no measurable pointer deflection. > > > Experimenter's Comments > ----------------------- > > o The additional pan weight required to *raise* the balance pointer > 2.1mm was later found to be 0.0891g (~5% of the pan's weight). > > o The idea was that the 'column' of modified gravity (as described by > Podkletnov) HAS to hit the pan somewhere ...as the HTC is only 1" > diameter and the pan is larger. > > o Only one experimental setup was constructed, with several trials. > The experimenter welcomes further replication attempts & comments. > > == > > Please direct questions & comments to e-mail, as further > discussion on s.p.r seems unwarranted as of yet. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 05:12:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA22903; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:03:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:03:39 -0800 Date: 16 Jan 97 08:01:48 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Electrons are Clouds? Message-ID: <970116130148_76570.2270_FHU57-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Ef-xj2.0.ib5.eSYto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3428 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. --Gene Mallove WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind.-- According to recent measurements by Purdue University physicists, an electron may not be a simple negative point charge, after all. "Science and engineering students have learned for years that the electron has a constant electronic strength, but now we've seen that this may not be the case," says David Koltick, professor of physics at Purdue. Koltick says his research shows that the electromagnetic force from the electron, or its electronic strength, may increase toward the particle's central core. According to his data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" of virtual particles, which wink in an out of existence in pairs--one particle in the pair is positively charged, the other negatively charged. The pairs essentially cancel each other out so that they do not "add" any net electric charge to the electron, Koltick says, but the cloud plays a key role in how we perceive the electromagnetic force from the electron. "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields the true value of the central core," Koltick explains. "As we probe into the cloud, getting closer and closer to the core charge, we 'see' less of the shielding effect and more of the core. This means that the electromagnetic force from the electron as a whole is not constant, but rather gets stronger as we go through the cloud and get closer to the core. "Ordinarily when we look at or study an electron it is from far away and we don't realize the core is being shielded. We are the first researchers to actually measure this effect." Koltick's results appear in the Jan. 20 issue of Physical Review Letters. >>> Koltick and his colleagues also determined that the strong nuclear force, which is the "glue" that holds together elementary particles such as protons, gets weaker closer to the core charge. Other researchers also have seen this effect in the strong force. "Because the electromagnetic charge is in effect becoming stronger as we get closer and the strong force is getting weaker, there is a possibility that these two forces may at some energy be equal," Koltick says. "Many physicists have speculated that when and if this is determined, an entirely new and unique physics may be discovered." <<< To obtain their results, Koltick and his colleagues, Purdue physics Professor Edward Shibata and former doctoral students Barry Howell and Ilan Levine, collided very high-speed beams of particles at a facility at the Japanese Laboratory for High Energy Physics. Source: David Koltick, (317) 494-5557 (h:447-7932) koltick physics.purdue.edu Writer: Amanda Siegfried, (317) 494-4709; amanda_siegfried uns.purdue.edu From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 05:59:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA06457; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:50:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:50:08 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:50:15 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re. Heat not dead end. Nothing to do with Stirling, Hilsch or Potapov In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"JxxV51.0.oa1.F8Zto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3429 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Subscribers, Many thanks to Horace Heffner who gave me some leads to Web pages to find out more on devices he said might be similar. Many thanks for all your responses. In my first message I said I didn't regard heat as a dead end of energy transfer. This really describes the content of my papers submitted to 'respectable' journals but rejected without proper answer. Let me get rid of the theorising (I think I've done most of it) and give you the paradox in the form I patented. The original presentation and papers were done to hide my patent. I'll never get anywhere without disclosing, academic wrangling can stifle engineering creativeness. Here goes:- Imagine bubbles made from a semi-permeable membrane pervious to water whose innards are a soluble hygroscopic substance. Water vapour can permeate into the bubbles, condense and flow out. According to thermodynamics, at eqm. the chemical potential of the mobile species (the water) is equal both within and outside the bubbles. This is approximately the same as saying concentration. Do a very simple calulation: relate water concentration within to without by considering the volume of water relative to the total volume of free-water-volume to bubbles (ther're small okay). You get a free-water-volume at least greater than the interstitial volume between the bubbles. Put the system in a tall vessel. Now provided that the vapour pressure at the top of the vessel is sufficent for the hygroscopic process to occur - tell me WHERE DID THE POTENTIAL ENERGY OF THE FREE WATER VOLUME COME FROM? (Heat has done work, but I'm sick of theoretical wrangling and want to do experiments). Oh yes, application to: wet scrubbers, dehumidifiers, Artifical Self-Irrigating Soils and Energy Production have been patented. I know the prior art, this is different. If this is correct and you want to do business - let's sign a contract, R and D plan etc. there's enough here for everybody. Feel free to view my ftp site (Netscape ftps too, ftp://iesun1 city.ac.uk) at iesun1 city.ac.uk. Logon as ftp, no password. Change to directory /incoming/remi/Remi_Cornwall. You'll find three Word 6/7 docs: 2 papers and 1 short doc of part of the patent; or find them in Postscript .prn format. Hackers, vandals, disk free-loaders (1st law of conservation of disk space, 2nd concerns fragmentation) or 'leave a 1Meg picture of my cat, dog or overweight girl-friend' freaks, will be logged and castrated. Please obey my copyright, one copy per viewer, else please contact me. Plagarizers (I've got nothing against prior art or people better than me, just tell me where to look and find their work) a plague on your house and your spawn. May the memory of the courageous inspire you all. Remi Cornwall. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 06:47:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA14027; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 06:38:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 06:38:03 -0800 Message-ID: <32DE3D04.7667 lcia.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:36:52 -0500 From: HAMILTON lcia.com (DANNY HAMILTON) Reply-To: hamilton lcia.com Organization: The Hamilton Group X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Aether and Light References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uxPUC3.0.4R3.9rZto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3430 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] > Maybe its a personal defficiency, but I have some difficulty believing in > the requirement of aether for light transmission, and even more difficulty > believing in the required infinite universe to support the ZPE and "gravity > as a sheilding effect" concepts. Maybe there are different and better > resolutions, like convolution, to answer these requirements. > > However, on the other side of the coin, [snip] Michelson and Morley were mentioned in an earlier post and I assume the reference was to their experiment which is used occasionally to "prove" aether does not exist. Doing a search on "Michelson and Morley" and aether provides some interesting reading! References to Dark Matter and actually questioning the validity of Einstein's theory of relativity. Do the results you see in experimentation go against Einstein? Again I ask: "If Aether doesn't exist, what is the mechanism for wave transmission? If we understood "that" mechanism, would it have a bearing"..on the experimental results we see? One of the big difficulties we are having is explaining the mechanism for ZPE. It implies some underlying "something" that doesn't "fit" current theory. Here is one of the sites that really goes after Einstein's theory and poses some interesting questions, including why don't we see the impact of velocity on time predicted by Einstein in the atomic clocks we use today? I didn't realize the implications of aether or the controvercy it it causing. Does anyone know of experimental results in any of our high altitude laser programs that might raise questions about the constancy of the speed of light? http://nucleus.ibg.uu.se/elektromagnum/web/physics/Tedenstig/EINSTEIN'S%20THEORY%20OF%20RELATIVITY%20A%20BRIEF%20ANALYSIS%20941211 Danny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 07:30:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA20244; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:08:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:08:41 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:40:11 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <32de2fc1.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"db5R_2.0.Ey4.uHato" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3431 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:03:39 -0800, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: > > > A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. > --Gene Mallove Very, very interesting! Thanks! Just a remark: the same is true for protons and neutrons: at the inner levels of the organization of matter, COMPLEXITY is NOT decreasing as logically expected. Elementarity is wishful thinking. Complexity is the main feature of CF too. Its beauty and its problem. Its beauty because exists and its problem because it is not understood yet. The colleagues of our dear friend D R O Morrison have a fine research program re the structure of the proton. Beyond mathematical models. BTW, has Morrison published his ICCF-6 report? I need it for my collection. Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania Home: 064-174976 E-mail: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro , peterg@oc1.itim-cj.ro From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 07:39:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA23747; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:23:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:23:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 06:25:05 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"K0mUq1.0.uo5.-Vato" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3432 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 8:01 AM 1/16/97, Eugene Mallove wrote: [snip] > Koltick and his colleagues also determined that the strong nuclear force, >which is the "glue" that holds together elementary particles such as protons, >gets weaker closer to the core charge. Other researchers also have seen this >effect in the strong force. > "Because the electromagnetic charge is in effect becoming stronger as we get >closer and the strong force is getting weaker, there is a possibility that >these >two forces may at some energy be equal," Koltick says. "Many physicists have >speculated that when and if this is determined, an entirely new and unique >physics may be discovered." [snip] The strong force affects electrons? I thought the strong force only affected quarks. Leptons and quarks interact via the weak force, don't they? Or is the above a reference to a similar virtual particle cloud about protons? This is confusing. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 08:01:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA29910; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:51:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:51:07 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 06:52:16 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Re. Heat not dead end. Nothing to do with Stirling, Hilsch or Potapov Resent-Message-ID: <"oJ2672.0._H7.bvato" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3434 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dear Subscribers, > >Many thanks to Horace Heffner who gave me some leads to Web pages to find >out more on devices he said might be similar. Many thanks for all your >responses. > [snip] >Remi Cornwall. Not really similar devices, but related issues. If the energy derived basically comes from "hot air rising", it seems like you are describing a glacially slow process at best. Without some method of improving the rate of energy extraction, like high g forces, how is this of utility? You have a patent application, not a patent, is that correct? In other words, your application is not just waiting for publication, but is waiting for, or in, the review process, is that true? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 08:16:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA00220; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:03:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:03:50 -0800 From: Xkan aol.com Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:03:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970116104759_1623824274 emout09.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: theory vs. experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"_HNYn2.0.M3.a5bto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3435 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Could someone tell me the complete address for : sci.physics.new-theories and NEOTECH? I agree that the traffic is too high in vortex-l. If the number of topics reduces, people can get more out of the vortex forum. Thanks. Xiaobo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 08:20:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA29304; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:49:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:49:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:50:38 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Electrons and Gyrons Resent-Message-ID: <"uszDt1.0.m97.ytato" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3433 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. >--Gene Mallove > > WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind.-- According to recent measurements by Purdue University >physicists, an electron may not be a simple negative point charge, after all. >"Science and engineering students have learned for years that the electron >has a >constant electronic strength, but now we've seen that this may not be the >case," >says David Koltick, professor of physics at Purdue. > Koltick says his research shows that the electromagnetic force from the >electron, or its electronic strength, may increase toward the particle's >central >core. According to his data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" >of virtual particles, which wink in an out of existence in pairs--one particle >in the pair is positively charged, the other negatively charged. snip-- > To obtain their results, Koltick and his colleagues, Purdue physics >Professor >Edward Shibata and former doctoral students Barry Howell and Ilan Levine, >collided very high-speed beams of particles at a facility at the Japanese >Laboratory for High Energy Physics. > Source: David Koltick, (317) 494-5557 (h:447-7932) >koltick physics.purdue.edu > Writer: Amanda Siegfried, (317) 494-4709; amanda_siegfried uns.purdue.edu > Dear Gene, Thanks for passing along the above information. These experimental results further confirm the mechanical nature of the fundamental gyroscopic particles which comprise all matter/energy as Joseph Newman originally published in 1984. As Joseph Newman has stated, it would stand to reason that the since the gyroscopic particles increase in density towards the center of the electron that the resultant electromagnetic force would also increase as one approaches the center of the electron. Since the gyron (gyroscopic particle) both spins at c and moves in any given direction at c -- with a greater number of such particles at the core -- the periphery interactions of such gyrons with other gyrons would increase, hence a stronger electromagnetic force would be found at the core. As Joseph Newman has stated: "....the essence of Magnetism, Electricity, Gravity, Inertia, Planetary Motion, Thermodynamics, and a New Source of Energy and Matter are __all mechanically explained__ by the nature of a 'gyroscopic-action-type particle.' It was long after I had developed my concepts that I discovered my 'mechanical' explanation correlated precisely with Dirac's concept of mathematical spin. The reader should find it easy to advance from quantum mechanics to the mechanical essence of all matter consisting of the gyroscopic-action-entity which I present in this Book....__A gyroscopic action is the 'mechanical' essence of a 'spin__.' "....consider the possibility that if you could exert enough force to flip over this basic gyroscopic-action-particle of matter 180 degrees, then to an outside observer it would appear to be an opposite, electric charge. Since this is true, then the basic mechanism of nature is even more ingenious than I suspected because: all matter is composed of one type of gyroscopic-action-particle. Moreover, by mechanically rotating (in varying degree directions) the gyroscopic-action-particles, such particles are capable of exerting a 'force influence' upon one another. Such a 'force influence' causes the gyroscopic-action-particle to gyrate (relative to one another) and subsequently, _such infinitely-possible-degree-gyrations form infinite types of matter_. "Such a perspective is consistent with all Matter in the Universe being composed of the same entity having an attraction of one towards another. Mathematically, this explains the consistency of the Laws of Magnetism, Electrical Charge, and Gravity." --- from pages 72-73, The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman copyright, 1984. Best regards, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 09:45:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA02828; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:32:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:32:34 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970116093146.006e44e4 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:31:49 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: theory vs. experiment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"PoO1K2.0.5i.mOcto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3436 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >I could add the above rule to vortex-L. Would it have exactly the desired >effect? Perhaps instead we could adhere to a specific list of allowed >topics, and have the group approve new topics as necessary. Or govern by >complaints: if n subscribers complain, shut down a discussion thread, with >n >> 1. this will just be cleaning up spilt milk >Another possibility: the current problem is with cc: and replies with cc. >If I add a rule which forbids the including of another email list in >either the cc or the To-line of messages to vortex-L, then identity crises >between vortex-L, freenrg-L, and neotech won't be as likely. (Or in >Douglas Adams terms, the independant organisims will avoid that most >dreaded of all afflictions: Telepathy.) This would allow members to >forward other lists' messages one at a time, while preventing >crosspost-storms. > try this PS - I am still a week behind in Vortex posts, which I have cleverly learned to filter into a special box. Eudora Pro was well worth the $50 I spent on it two weeks ago. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 10:21:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA10561; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:07:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:07:31 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:06:45 -0700 (MST) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Slap me in the face Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xF4PP.0.ra2.Xvcto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3437 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Slap me in the face and call me 'Sally'< I may have got ALL WRONG, BUT, (still trying to grasp the essence of Aether waves) but Shouldn't our earthly cloud cover be 'Upside Down' if PULL Gravity exixted? I was looking up at a huge storm front on the horizon that had a Thunder head of a mile or two high.. (I understand thermo-rise and EM pre-lightning condensations) but if the clouds 'compression' at this turmulant level IS IN SYNCH (more so than than lower wisps of cloud) Shouldn't our clouds be 'Upside down?' "gravity pulling the larger mass or cloud tops toward the earth" Aether (in resonence with the (synched'd compression)) would explain our current upwardly cloud formations would it not?? (duh, now I really feel like a dummy, but it seems to me this might be the local proof that others couldn't find during experimentation AND its been right in front of our eyes all the time???) PUSH Gravity. Heck, Maybe it's proof for just the opposite (Pull gravity) thoughts? ok,ok I'll quit smoking my pipe while i look up at the clouds. steve ekwall mile-high Denver (ah, that explains some of it!) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 10:50:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA15481; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:34:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:34:17 -0800 Message-ID: <32DE7463.5A5F lcia.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:33:07 -0500 From: HAMILTON lcia.com (DANNY HAMILTON) Reply-To: hamilton lcia.com Organization: The Hamilton Group X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? References: <970116130148_76570.2270_FHU57-1 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eB81p2.0.mn3.dIdto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3438 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Eugene Mallove wrote: [snip] According to his data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" > of virtual particles, which wink in an out of existence in pairs--one particle > in the pair is positively charged, the other negatively charged. > The pairs essentially cancel each other out so that they do not "add" any net > electric charge to the electron, Koltick says, but the cloud plays a key role in > how we perceive the electromagnetic force from the electron. [snip] These words are amazingly close to some descriptions of the ?energy? filled regions of space. Is it possible they are really seeing a concentration of the "something" (I won't use the A word) around the "particle". Danny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 11:39:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24719; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:11:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:11:31 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:12:30 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"Y4l6L2.0.426.Wrdto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3439 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind.-- According to recent measurements by Purdue University >physicists, an electron may not be a simple negative point charge, after all. ... > According to his data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" Although I'm not a particle physicist, perhaps I can offer a bit of background. The structure of particles is explored by colliding two particles at high energy. When the interaction force is Coulombic electrostatic, you get a particular distribution of angles of particles leaving the interaction point (scattered particles). This is how Rutherford discovered the presence of positively charged nuclei in gold foil. Needless to say, physicists are a curious lot (pun intended :-) and they have been colliding particles ever since. Now, if the interacting particles approach closely enough that some force other than electrostatic is present, then the angular distribution of scattered particles changes, and the new distribution puts some constraints on the magnitude and radial dependence of the new force. From experiments of this kind, it has been known for a goodly time (since the 1950s?) that protons and neutrons are non-Coulombic at a distance smaller than a femtometer or two (1 fm = 1 fermi = 10^-15 m). This is where the nuclear force, which decay much more rapidly than 1/r^2, take over, and it defines a kind of radius for the proton and the neutron. BTW, the scattering angles from the neutron also showed that a neutron is NOT a composite of a proton and an electron. During many years of colliding electrons at ever increasing energies (to push in to ever smaller radii against the coulomb repulsion between two electrons), people always saw scattering that looked just like electrostatic. This is why it has been said that the electron behaves like a point charge; there was no experimental evidence to the contrary. At this point I've reached the limit of my knowledge. The Standard Theory says that e- should be made of quarks, and most, if not all of them have been found. I don't know what the Standard Theory says about the 'pointness' of electrons nor where Koltick's work fits into all of this. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 12:57:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA18146; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:39:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:39:30 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:39:48 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"IJ0XT2.0.XQ4.k7fto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3440 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:12 AM 1/16/97, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: [snip] >The Standard Theory >says that e- should be made of quarks, and most, if not all of them have >been found. I don't know what the Standard Theory says about the >'pointness' of electrons nor where Koltick's work fits into all of this. > >Michael J. Schaffer Let me properly qualify my remarks (unusual) by saying I am not a physicist a particle physicst, or physicist at all. However, I am fairly sure that the leptons (the electron, muon, tauon and related neutinos: electron-neutrino, muon-neutrino, and tauon-neutrino) are fundamental particles, as are the messenger particles of the four fources: photon (electromagnetism), graviton (gravity), weak (W+-, Z), and strong (gluon). The hadrons are made of quark-anit-quark pairs (the mesons) or in trios of quarks (the baryons, which include the proton and neutron). As far as I know, quarks are held together by gluons carrying the strong (color) force. Interactions of leptons and quarks (weak transmutations) require the W or Z messenger interaction. Having the space about fundamental particles filled with borrowed energy (virtual particles) helps make more sense (to me anyway) of the famous Feynman diagram in that if space is filled with stuff the messenger particles don't have to be endowed with some clarivoyant power to know when there is an approaching particle, i.e. when to jump into the act and do the force exchange. An interresting question: if electrons are clouds, what are orbitals? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 12:58:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA19322; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:43:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:43:41 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:42:14 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Info about "antigravity" list Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"4hAi2.0.wi4.YBfto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3441 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To subscribe, contact "R. Daniel Woolman" ****************** PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING RULES ******************** FAILURE TO HONOR THESE WILL RESULT IN YOUR REMOVAL FROM THIS LIST. *********************************************************************** Contents: I. Charter II. Rules III. List Net Etiquette IV. Technical Tips V. Posting information VI. Unsubscribe Information ************************************************************************ I. Charter: The primary purpose of the Antigravity Mailing List is to create a peer-level and peer review of scientific analysis and development of leading edge technologies. As a Ph.D. scholar in physics, I am interested in any and all advances in the sciences. In particular, due to my military background and knowledge, I have personally been redeveloping many of the works originally developed by Maxwell, Planck, Mach, Einstein, Bose, etc. Scientific analysis has determined that an existing force in nature has become feasible to develop. However, our current state of knowledge in physics does not include the set of equations necessary to formulate and analyze the force in operation. In particular I am referring to electrogravitics (anti-gravity.) However, I should note the ability to generate a negative gravity effect may come as no surprise to experimenters who have worked with Bose-Einstein condensates, superfluids, or superconductor material in which the angular momentum of quantum level particles can become aligned along a "macroscopic" spin axis. And it is probably also not a surprise to those who have looked at devices such as the inventions of Henry Wallace, in which a macroscopic body is mechanically spun at high speed in order to cause a "kinemassic" gravito-magnetic field due to spin alignment of the nucleus of elemental materials having an odd number of nucleons (un-paired spin). This, the ANTIGRAVITY Mailing List is an E-mail discussion list devoted to the technical and scientific issues relating to these topics. The ANTIGRAVITY List will be a high signal to noise list with open subscriber roles, and will be closely monitored for proper conduct. Only subscribers will be able to post. Those who don't follow the rules of the List, will be removed. Certain individuals who have exhibited poor conduct in the USENET newsgroups, will not be allowed. The List is maintained by R. Daniel Woolman . Information about the Mailing List is always available on the In Search of UFO's and Other Phenomena page at : http://mmm.simplenet.com ************************************************************************ -- E-Mail, personal => danwoolman earthlink.net In Search of Web Site => http://mmm.simplenet.com Mail list => Send "subscribe antigravity " to: antigravity mmm.simplenet.com Mail list => Send "subscribe in_search_of " to: webmaster mmm.simplenet.com eof From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 14:32:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA05793; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 14:12:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 14:12:32 -0800 Date: 16 Jan 97 16:41:11 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Water pollution disease statistics Message-ID: <970116214110_72240.1256_EHB87-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"ZWJ8.0.dP1.xUgto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3443 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex >From time to time I have written here that approximately 30 to 50 thousand people die every week from polluted water. Those numbers or old, and they are wild approximations (obviously). Better statistics appeared last week in two excellent articles published in the New York Times, by Nicholas D. Kristof: Malaria Makes a Comeback, And is More Deadly Than Ever, January 8, 1997 For Third World, Water Is Still Deadly Drink, January 9, 1997 The first article reports that malaria kills between 1 and 3 million people every year. The numbers are unclear. Most of these deaths could be prevented with mosquito nets. A $5 net can cover several people. Here are some statistics from the second article for the most common water borne diseases: Diarrhea 3,100,000 Deaths per Year Schistosmiasis 200,000 Trypanosomiasis 130,000 Intestinal Helminth Infection 100,000 Total: 3,530,000 That's ~68,000 per week, almost all children. Sources: World Health Organization, American Medical Association, Encyclopedia of Medicine Virtually all of these water borne diseases could be eliminated by boiling the water used for cooking and drinking and by cooking foods more thoroughly. Better hygiene would also eliminate them, but boiling will work. For a family of four in India, this costs about $4 per month in kerosene. Many poor families earn less than $20 per month, so this is far more than they can afford. The article concludes: "All in all, human wastes may be more menacing than nuclear wastes, for feces kill far more people than radioactive substances." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 14:47:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA14299; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 14:34:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 14:34:05 -0800 Message-ID: <32DE9905.462B lcia.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:09:26 -0500 From: HAMILTON lcia.com (DANNY HAMILTON) Reply-To: hamilton lcia.com Organization: The Hamilton Group X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MGqaF3.0.6V3.Ppgto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3444 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > Here is a thought regarding transmutation. [snip] Remember that an electrical current seems to enable the process. Danny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 15:46:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA28900; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:36:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:36:58 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:36:48 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? In-Reply-To: <970116130148_76570.2270_FHU57-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hOfkY3.0.U37.Okhto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3446 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 16 Jan 1997, Eugene Mallove wrote: > > > A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. > --Gene Mallove > This effect has been well predicted and entirely expected. It doesn't mean its not interesting! However, it has little relevence to CF. The sort of energies at which this effect becomes noticable can only be generated at the world's highest energy accellerators like that reguiled (here) institution, CERN. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 15:51:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA27868; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:32:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:32:11 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:31:45 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701162331.RAA11369 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Rifex kit photos Resent-Message-ID: <"xWYQU.0.0p6.sfhto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3445 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Howdy Vortexans, Look at the slowly evolving EarthTech web page: http://www.eden.com/~little to see a couple of photos of the Rifex kit all set up and ready to run. We are now analyzing all the components BEFORE the electrolysis run and soon we will start the actual experiment. Also new on our web page are some photos of the shop, lab, some of the interesting devices we have built, and some of the inhabitants of this place. If the pictures are a bit dark, try turning up yr screen brightness...it helps. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 16:01:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA00020; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:51:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:51:16 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:51:06 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: theory vs. experiment In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970116093146.006e44e4 aa.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"qaCjE3.0.C.oxhto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3447 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Michael Mandeville wrote: > > PS - I am still a week behind in Vortex posts, which I have cleverly > learned to filter into a special box. Eudora Pro was well worth the $50 I > spent on it two weeks ago. Did you try "pine" first? The price is much better! ( $0.0) Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 16:37:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA07645; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:25:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:25:13 -0800 Message-Id: <199701170026.QAA06598 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:26:27 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"Dbt8t3.0.It1.eRito" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3448 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gene, >From a good friend who knows the standard model and the quark very well. The article you sent is a bit opaque, but probably deals with what are known as "running coupling constants", a well known feature of the Standard Model. It has been difficult to get clear experimental evidence for the running, but there is pretty solid evidence for the strong coupling case, and this paper is probably evidence for the same sort of thing in the electromagnetic case. If I am correct, it will not affect our view of the electron in the Standard model, RG From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 17:15:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA16177; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:04:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:04:20 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:05:36 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"Gx-0D2.0.hy3.I0jto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3449 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:36 AM 1/17/97, Martin Sevior wrote: >On 16 Jan 1997, Eugene Mallove wrote: > >> >> >> A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists >>appreciated. >> --Gene Mallove >> > >This effect has been well predicted and entirely expected. It doesn't >mean its not interesting! However, it has little relevence to CF. The sort >of energies at which this effect becomes noticable can only be generated >at the world's highest energy accellerators like that reguiled >(here) institution, CERN. > >Martin Sevior Despite the regalia, the high energy is only required to take a look at what is there close to the electron. What is there should be there whether one looks or not, true? It is intuitively obvious such phenomena should exist if electrons can truly be a point charge. It has been theorized that positron-electron pair formation would occur near the nucleus of a sufficiently massive atom, if such could exist. The strength of the field gradient in a zero size point charge would appraoch any arbitrary limit as you approach the charge, much larger than that theorized for a heavy atom. Further, the energy in the electrostatic field for a single electron would be infinite it the electron had 0 dimension. At *some* level the field strength must maximize if energy is conserved. Funny, here the vacuum would be providing continuous energy to prevent an infinite hoard of it. Kind of like if the government spent a bunch to make sure too much wealth was not accumulated. The other possibility has been that the electron is truly a cloud, that the charge itself is distributed in the quantum waveform. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 19:02:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA09679 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:47 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:47 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Thu Jan 16 19:01:27 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA09587 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:24 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id TAA22560 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:15 -0800 Old-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199701170301.TAA22560 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Slap me in the face X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: >I may have got ALL WRONG, BUT, (still trying to grasp the essence of >Aether waves) but Shouldn't our earthly cloud cover be 'Upside Down' >if PULL Gravity exixted? NO. Keep in mind the magnitudes of the thrusts of gravitation vs the thrusts of moving nearby particles. Gravitation is a downward thrust due to the sheilding of the earth which is relatively very weak. ie, the earth is a poor shield. The clouds are rising because they are made of hotter air. To be hot, means to be moving relative to some frame of reference very fast. Hotter is faster, it is KE, that is all. That is the definition of Temperature, ie the average KE of the ions in the or gas. And if you are rapidly moving back and forth, thermal energy, then you are **accelerating** a lot due to collisions with other particles in your cloud example. And accelerations lead to an interference with the incident wave energy of spacetime which increases the amount of aether confined by a given standing wave. But this effect is really tiny and we cannot measure it except in the case of fusion reactions where we notice finally that the isotopic masses are altered when different nuclear reactions occur (fission too). In any case, your atoms in the molecules of the cloud are colliding into each other and accelerating and thus have become compressed with an excess of aether. It used to be called "caloric", and the notion I have found seems to work perfectly for standing waves. So, the thrust due to the collisions of the molecules are very much more energetic than is the thrust due to gravitation. As a result, the energetic molecules burst and billow away from the region of excess heat, and the easiest direction to get away is up. Once you excite that motion of convection, then you get secondary effects occuring like the other air down below flowing horizontally inward toward that rising air column. But note that the air is not being pulled in by the vacuum, it is instead being pushed into the low pressure region by the surrounding high pressure heated air. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 19:02:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA09682 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:46 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:46 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Thu Jan 16 19:01:27 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA09590 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:25 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id TAA22552 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:11 -0800 Old-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:01:11 -0800 Message-Id: <199701170301.TAA22552 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Gene; Thanks for this post, this is really illuminating and I think if you guys read what I have to say you will become even more interested in the notions of standing waves as matter and as spacetime. > >A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. >--Gene Mallove > > WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind.-- According to recent measurements by Purdue University >physicists, an electron may not be a simple negative point charge, after all. snip > "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields >the true value of the central core," Koltick explains. "As we probe into the >cloud, getting closer and closer to the core charge, we 'see' less of the >shielding effect and more of the core. This means that the electromagnetic force >from the electron as a whole is not constant, but rather gets stronger as we go >through the cloud and get closer to the core. > "Ordinarily when we look at or study an electron it is from far away and we >don't realize the core is being shielded. We are the first researchers to >actually measure this effect." They are not really measuring the shielding of the core. They are measuring the effect of handing acoustic resonant energy from the standing wave center out through about E20 shells of wave energy to the scale of the nucleus, and then out from there to whatever scale they are actually measuring at. The effect they are noticing is that if you have two standing waves nearby, they will interact more efficiently as they become close. Put another way, the phase and frequency errors of the oscillations will become reduced and the effectiveness of coupling energy is enhanced. This is what happens right on in to the core of a nucleus. My model holds that a proton or neutron are made up from 3 sets of three muon cores that are oscillating at different phase angles from one another and this leads to a precession, or, spinning if you prefer. The electron, if you measure it in very close will tend toward having an energy coupling effectiveness that is on a par with the nuclear force. So there should be a continual increase up to those levels. But as the nucleus must be made of muon cores, rather than electron cores, the energy density inside a nucleus is far greater than the intensity required to cause to manifest an electron. So the effeciency of coupling energy is going to be analogous, but the levels of energy density are not going to be the same between an electron and a proton, say. > Koltick's results appear in the Jan. 20 issue of Physical Review Letters. >>>> > Koltick and his colleagues also determined that the strong nuclear force, >which is the "glue" that holds together elementary particles such as protons, >gets weaker closer to the core charge. Other researchers also have seen this >effect in the strong force. According to my theory, this is incorrect. The nuclear force gets continually stronger, or more accurately, as two standing waves become closer together their mutual phase and frequency errors of oscillation are reduced. This continually leads to an increasing repulsion all the way in to where you have two quarks that are too close together and finally the net thrust is outward. What they are missing is the compressive thrust arriving from deep space (the same thrust I speak of in terms of gravitation, as all of the work and all forces are simply different observations of the identical thing as far as I am concerned with this theory.). Note that if you have two standing waves that are being thrust toward one another, (pretend by using two quarks, but we will ignore that these are themselves necessarily composite for other reasons and made of three muon cores. There is still a net resonance communicated to the external world and that is what we will deal with here). So if two standing waves are thrust toward one another by incident energy from outside, and they are thrust away from one another by their internal mutual resonances, then there comes a distance at which those two opposing thrusts offset and balance in equilibrium. This is the balance separation distance for quarks. If you have the quarks too close, then their mutual repulsion (due to being **closer**) becomes stronger than the approximately constant incoming energy from space that is thrusting them together. And if they are too far apart, then their mutual repulsion is reduced (due to being farther, the repulsive force is weaker), but the incident energy from spacetime is not changed all that much since they are already huge standing waves extending way out into the surrounding spacetime. Thus, the nuclear force treated as a differential force works just as we would expect. But, the nuclear force treated as it currently is, is totally absurd. If two quarks become separated too much, supposedly the nuclear strong force all of a sudden becomes intense and pulls them back in. Now I don't know if you caught that, but there is absolutely no other force in nature that is supposed to get stronger the further apart two force emitters are. This behavior makes no sense. Why would something become stronger when its arms are extended? And again, it makes no sense that any region of spacetime could reach out and pull on any other region of spacetime in the first place. The entire notion has to be incorrect and we need to learn this. > "Because the electromagnetic charge is in effect becoming stronger as we get >closer and the strong force is getting weaker, there is a possibility that these >two forces may at some energy be equal," Koltick says. "Many physicists have >speculated that when and if this is determined, an entirely new and unique >physics may be discovered." Absolutely, they will call it standing waves or Wave Mechanics instead of Particle Physics. Thanks for the article. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 19:37:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA16276; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:26:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:26:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 22:25:45 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970116222425.47670e6c world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"n3b4c.0.9-3.95lto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3450 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is an interesting subject: pair and triplet production, but there are some incorrect statements. At 04:05 PM 1/16/97 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > >Despite the regalia, the high energy is only required to take a look at >what is there close to the electron. What is there should be there whether >one looks or not, true? It is intuitively obvious such phenomena should >exist if electrons can truly be a point charge. It has been theorized that >positron-electron pair formation would occur near the nucleus of a >sufficiently massive atom, if such could exist. Pair production is well known and occurs above about 2 MeV quite frequently, thereby accounting for the Z (atomic number) dependance of absorption in that energy range and beyond. ----------------------------------------------------- > The strength of the field >gradient in a zero size point charge would appraoch any arbitrary limit as >you approach the charge, much larger than that theorized for a heavy atom. The four vector determines the requisite energy, and IMHO this above statement is hypothetically wrong, and numerically wrong. The requirement is two rest masses. ----------------------------------------------------- >Further, the energy in the electrostatic field for a single electron would >be infinite it the electron had 0 dimension. At *some* level the field >strength must maximize if energy is conserved. Funny, here the vacuum >would be providing continuous energy to prevent an infinite hoard of it. >Kind of like if the government spent a bunch to make sure too much wealth >was not accumulated. The other possibility has been that the electron is >truly a cloud, that the charge itself is distributed in the quantum >waveform. Triplet production, that is - pair production of a recoiled electron creating the "appearance" of forming two electrons and a positron is well known, and also fits the four vector. Furthermore, it suggests that there is a point source to the electron since the math fits the observations. BTW, the requirement is four rest masses for the triplet production, and not two or three rest masses as might be guessed without use of the equation. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 20:15:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA23712; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:54:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:54:46 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: water resonance Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 03:54:32 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e4baf3.12843497 mail.netspace.net.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kflcc2.0.Fo5.0Wlto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3451 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I have just been looking at a few natural constants, and came across this: "Gyromagnetic ratio of protons in water" =2675215255*radians/(sec*tesla). If the Earth's field is 1 gauss, and we divide by 2*PI to get cycles /sec, then we get a frequency of 42.58 kHz. A slight variation in the local strength of the Earth's field will move this around a bit :). You should be able to taylor it at will pretty much by using your own magnetic field. Perhaps someone here could tell me the consequences of stimulating this resonance? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 22:00:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA22453; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:53:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:53:45 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:54:53 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"hbxRz2.0.fU5.KLfto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3442 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here is a thought regarding transmutation. If electrons are surrounded by virtual electron-positron pairs, then the probability of a weak interaction in a Bose condensate may be much larger than thought. If one of the virtual particles experinces a weak ineraction with a hadron in the soup, the paired particle (probably a positron) becomes real, and energy is permanently borrowed from the vacuum. The freed positron can then pair with the original electron or some other electron, releasing energy. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 16 23:55:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA09990; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:46:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:46:51 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970116234730.00996a98 mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:47:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Epitaxy Subject: Re: water resonance Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"8-9iL.0.zR2.gvoto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3452 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Didn't you confuse division with multiplication ? At 03:54 AM 1/17/97 GMT, you wrote: >I have just been looking at a few natural constants, and came across this: >"Gyromagnetic ratio of protons in water" =2675215255*radians/(sec*tesla). >If the Earth's field is 1 gauss, and we divide by 2*PI to get cycles /sec, >then we get a frequency of 42.58 kHz. A slight variation in the local >strength of the Earth's field will move this around a bit :). You should be >able to taylor it at will pretty much by using your own magnetic field. >Perhaps someone here could tell me the consequences of stimulating this >resonance? > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* >Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on >temperature. >"....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 00:22:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA14756; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:12:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:12:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:13:12 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"99dlL3.0.Uc3.uHpto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3453 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > This is an interesting subject: pair and triplet production, but >there are some incorrect statements. > >At 04:05 PM 1/16/97 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >> >>Despite the regalia, the high energy is only required to take a look at >>what is there close to the electron. What is there should be there whether >>one looks or not, true? It is intuitively obvious such phenomena should >>exist if electrons can truly be a point charge. It has been theorized that >>positron-electron pair formation would occur near the nucleus of a >>sufficiently massive atom, if such could exist. > > > Pair production is well known and occurs above about >2 MeV quite frequently, thereby accounting for the Z (atomic number) >dependance of absorption in that energy range and beyond. What is important is the size of the gradient, not some absolute energy. You are thinking about a different phenomenon. Virtual pair production happens all the time at 0V and with 0 bodies. It just happens for a very short time in the vacuum. With a sufficient gradient the pair can be separated and extend the borrowed time. Such a gradient requires only one charged body. If a hadron is also in the vicinity, a weak interaction can take place with one of the virtual particles. If the particle consumed by the weak reaction is a virtual electron, then the important point is that the likelyhood of that happening is twice as good with two electrons in the vicinity as it is with only one. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > >> The strength of the field >>gradient in a zero size point charge would appraoch any arbitrary limit as >>you approach the charge, much larger than that theorized for a heavy atom. > > The four vector determines the requisite energy, and >IMHO this above statement is hypothetically wrong, and numerically wrong. >The requirement is two rest masses. See Feynman's Lectures in Physics. > > ----------------------------------------------------- > >>Further, the energy in the electrostatic field for a single electron would >>be infinite it the electron had 0 dimension. At *some* level the field >>strength must maximize if energy is conserved. Funny, here the vacuum >>would be providing continuous energy to prevent an infinite hoard of it. >>Kind of like if the government spent a bunch to make sure too much wealth >>was not accumulated. The other possibility has been that the electron is >>truly a cloud, that the charge itself is distributed in the quantum >>waveform. > > Triplet production, that is - pair production of a recoiled electron >creating the "appearance" of forming two electrons and a positron >is well known, and also fits the four vector. Furthermore, it suggests >that there is a point source to the electron since the math fits the >observations. > BTW, the requirement is four rest masses for the triplet production, and >not two or three rest masses as might be guessed without use of the equation. > > Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) The subject experiment referenced by Jed seems to indicate a lot more than triplet production. I wouldn't call a triplet a "cloud." Something is out of kilter somewhere here. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 00:40:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA17499; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:25:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:25:45 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:26:59 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"l5J3-3.0.GH4.7Upto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3454 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 6:54 PM 1/16/97, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >I have just been looking at a few natural constants, and came across this: >"Gyromagnetic ratio of protons in water" =2675215255*radians/(sec*tesla). >If the Earth's field is 1 gauss, and we divide by 2*PI to get cycles /sec, >then we get a frequency of 42.58 kHz. A slight variation in the local >strength of the Earth's field will move this around a bit :). You should be >able to taylor it at will pretty much by using your own magnetic field. >Perhaps someone here could tell me the consequences of stimulating this >resonance? You get a magnetometer. There was an amateur scientist article many years ago about how to build your own magnetometer with a gallon jug of water wrapped with some coils of wire. It worked by adding/subtracting from the earth's magnetic field with one coil while exciting with another perpendicular coil. The exciter coil ran at a set frequency. Energy was absorbed from the exciter coil as the combined B approached the correct value for resonance, and added to the exciter coil when the resonant peak was passed (if long term memory serves.) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 03:45:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA04369; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 03:36:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 03:36:35 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 06:35:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970117063522_1244096505 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: in_search_of primenet.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, zap@dnai.com Subject: One picture is worth 1000 words..the zero point interaction Resent-Message-ID: <"GQG-W3.0.B41.1Hsto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3455 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The-zero-point-interaction PICK_ME ftp://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/temp.gif From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 05:59:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA19550; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 05:50:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 05:50:03 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 08:49:50 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970117084830.3b4fb4e0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"kU0jp.0.On4.AEuto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3456 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:13 PM 1/16/97 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >> Pair production is well known and occurs above about >>2 MeV quite frequently, thereby accounting for the Z (atomic number) >>dependance of absorption in that energy range and beyond. > > >What is important is the size of the gradient, not some absolute energy. >You are thinking about a different phenomenon. Virtual pair production >happens all the time at 0V and with 0 bodies. Please excuse. I am talking about REAL, not virtual, pair production. It does not happen all the time, but does occur with ionizing radiation interacting with matter if the energy is greater than the rest mass of the two particles (electron and positron). It does not involve 0 bodies, but involves a photon interacting with a relatively heavier mass (atom or electron). This physics is well-known and understood. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 06:10:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA21073; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 06:01:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 06:01:36 -0800 Message-ID: <32DF94DA.2FDD rt66.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 07:03:54 -0800 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: drom vxcern.cern.ch, rollo@artvark.com, hheffner@corecom.net, 76570.2270 compuserve.com, mica@world.std.com, dennis@wazoo.com, barry math.ucla.edu, bssimon@helix.ucsd.edu, ine@padrak.com, rgeorge hooked.net, little@eden.com, puthoff@eden.com, peter itim.org.soroscj.ro, jonesse@plasma.byu.edu, britz@kemi.aau.dk, g-miley uiuc.edu, design73@aol.com, blue@pilot.msu.edu, wireless rmii.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, msevior liszt.ph.unimelb.edu.au, vortex-l@eskimo.com, discpub netzone.com, jlogajan@skypoint.com, bockris chemvx.chem.tamu.edu, ghlin@greenoil.chem.tamu.edu, bhorst loc100.tandem.com, wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov, 72240.1256 compuserve.com, claytor_t_n@lanl.gov, ceti@onramp.net, letters csicop.org, editors@sciam.com, dashj@sbii.sb2.pdx.edu, scienceletters aaas.org Subject: Update No. 12 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------78020623843" Resent-Message-ID: <"hP8SC2.0.B95._Outo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3457 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------78020623843 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit January 17, 1997 Dr. Douglas Morrison, This post mentioned wanting your Cold Fusion Update No. 12. I read the Update very carefully twice. I am glad you are taking so much time to investigate thoroughly and write with patience, clarity, and just the right amount of pepper. I am sure many in the field will read it carefully, and either discontinue unproductive research or find ways to tighten it up considerably. I wish the various publications in the field would publish your Updates in full, rather than try to dismiss your fine work and demonize you. What do you see in "Excess heat and unexpected elements from electrolysis of heavy water with titanium cathodes," in J. New Energy, R. Kopecek and J. Dash.? I called John Dash, 503-725-4222, dashj sbii.sb2.pdx.edu, Portland State U., and he told me the experiment also works with light water, and never fails, and sent me Radovan Kopecek's 113-page thesis. The thesis is free of typos and obvious errors, and has dozens of microphotos of the cathode spots, up to 1,770X, with corresponding EDS spectra. I wished he talked more about EDS spectra technology, how it works, and possible pitfalls: I haven't yet found the time to go read up on it at Los Alamos. There are many excellent websites for SIMS analysis, however. Dash said Storms was going to replicate the experiment. Have you heard of any attempted replications? I plan to try in the next three months. Even if the cathode spots contain isotopic anomalies, that does not prove nuclear transmutations. As in Miley's experiments, impurity concentration could be be operating. The current densities and magnetic fields in the tiny spots would be very high, and might create novel effects that seperate out isotopes. This could make for interesting physics. The same goes for the amazing 1,000X SEM image of a gold cathode spot by Ohmori, Mizuno, and Enyo on page 99 of J. New Energy. I've fantasized sending that one to National Enquirer with a claim that it's a photo of 1 cm fossils from a Martian meteorite! It seems from the research you summarized that Claytor's tritium production experiment may not be very anomalous, with his 2,000 volt glow discharge, since deuterium does sustain some level of nuclear reactions at that energy range. Do I have that right? Would the 16 kev oxygen ions used in SIMS produce significant nuclear reactions in the target zone? This might be relevant in deciphering some of the strange data reported by Miley, and by Mizuno. These is a vast research literature on cathode spots in glow discharges, electric sparks, and arcs, along with cathode erosion and sputtering. It could be that complex electromagnetic effects at high current densities on the microspots are somehow accelerating incident ions to much higher interaction energies, thereby promoting a low level of essentially conventional nuclear reactions. Regards, Rich Murray --------------78020623843 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Received: from mx1.eskimo.com (mx1.eskimo.com [204.122.16.48]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA01169 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:10:55 -0700 (MST) Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA20244; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:08:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:08:41 -0800 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:40:11 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <32de2fc1.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"db5R_2.0.Ey4.uHato" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3431 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:03:39 -0800, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: > > > A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. > --Gene Mallove Very, very interesting! Thanks! Just a remark: the same is true for protons and neutrons: at the inner levels of the organization of matter, COMPLEXITY is NOT decreasing as logically expected. Elementarity is wishful thinking. Complexity is the main feature of CF too. Its beauty and its problem. Its beauty because exists and its problem because it is not understood yet. The colleagues of our dear friend D R O Morrison have a fine research program re the structure of the proton. Beyond mathematical models. BTW, has Morrison published his ICCF-6 report? I need it for my collection. Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania Home: 064-174976 E-mail: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro , peterg@oc1.itim-cj.ro --------------78020623843-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 08:03:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA04579; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 07:36:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 07:36:51 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 06:38:12 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"5cS6b3.0.P71.Hovto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3458 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 8:49 AM 1/17/97, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >At 11:13 PM 1/16/97 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>> Pair production is well known and occurs above about >>>2 MeV quite frequently, thereby accounting for the Z (atomic number) >>>dependance of absorption in that energy range and beyond. >> >> >>What is important is the size of the gradient, not some absolute energy. >>You are thinking about a different phenomenon. Virtual pair production >>happens all the time at 0V and with 0 bodies. > > > Please excuse. I am talking about REAL, not virtual, pair production. > It does not happen all the >time, but does occur with ionizing radiation interacting with matter >if the energy is greater than the rest mass of the two particles >(electron and positron). > It does not involve 0 bodies, but involves a photon interacting >with a relatively heavier mass (atom or electron). This physics is well-known >and understood. > Best wishes. > Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) Gene Mallove originally quoted Amanda Siegfried: "Koltick says his research shows that the electromagnetic force from the electron, or its electronic strength, may increase toward the particle's central core. According to his data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" of virtual particles, which wink in an out of existence in pairs." Yes, we are talking about a virtual particle cloud, not real. That is my point. I am suggesting that if electrons are clouds, the original premise, then the physics of virtual particles and electrons is *not* well understood. For one thing, not even the charge of the *real* electron is known. For another, and this is "on the down side" for transmutation, the distance of weak force interaction would not have been measured correctly either, it would be way too large. Another consequence is that new "virtual current" mechansims, electrons one direction positrons the other, are available for induction in a changing magnetic field, at least on a brief basis, and could create variable (still quantized but with many degrees available) magnetic fields about the electron. Joe Newman's gyromagnetic particles don't seem quite as remote a possibility either, as there would be angular momentum issues. Then there is the issue of how you could measure spin at all. Spin of what? There are the obvious possible transmutation effects related to Bose condensates, which include in them the electron clouds, and even the possibly variable transmutation potential of a free electron. If electrons are clouds, then a condensed charge is a cloud of clouds, where the ratio of positive to negative charge is not as low as thought, and the number of charges is much higher. Lots of possible new things to consider there. The Casimir force - is it now simply due to magnetic fields from virtual particle currents? If (e+ and e- direction opposed) virtual particle currents exist, then the geometry is similar to the Hooper experiment - so what does this have to say about electrogravity or second order effects? The ramifications are mind boggeling - if electrons truly are surrounded by a cloud of virtual particles at their cores. My original point, though, is that there seems to be a very surprizing result (to me anyway) in relating the strong nuclear force and electrons in some way. Amanda Siegfried writes: "Koltick and his colleagues also determined that the strong nuclear force, which is the "glue" that holds together elementary particles such as protons, gets weaker closer to the core charge. Other researchers also have seen this effect in the strong force." I am confused. Is there some link between the strong and weak force implied here? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 08:41:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA14037; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 08:23:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 08:23:03 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 08:22:56 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Saludos desde Colombia, South America. (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vV0dc2.0.CR3.bTwto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3459 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:37:57 -0500 (GMT) From: Carlos Henry Castano To: billb eskimo.com Subject: Saludos desde Colombia, South America. Good day Mr. Willam Beaty Happy new year, in nowsdays i am send to e-mail at the professor Dieter Britz, with any questions about the people that work Cold Fusion Projects in ligth water, with nickel catode in this moment i'm make a experiment with a experimental protocol similar at the professor Robert Bush in Calpoly, (electrochemically) with light water, a mesh of Nickel Fibrex (TM) as catode, and in a solution of K2CO3 (0,57 M), with termisthors, in a closed cell (with recombinator of black platinum). This is my work of directed thesis. However i am working alone here in Colombia, i need share any doubts, the professor Robert Bush send me several articles, but the details are crucials, and he is a very busy man, he not return the mail. The professor Britz tell me that you know all the people in CNF projects, can you tell me who can help me? can you send me the e-mail address of the people that work in CNF with H2O and Nickel catode? thanks for your help, Carlos Henry Casta~o Giraldo, Chemical Engineer, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Medellin. _____________________________________________________________________________ hay mas cosas en el cielo y en la tierra que ideas en la mente de los hombres ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- there are more things in heaven and earth that dream in the mind of the people _____________________________________________________________________________ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 10:59:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA11492; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:42:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:42:36 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:42:19 -0800 Message-Id: <199701171842.KAA23751 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"9-Ylc2.0.Lp2.QWyto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3460 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 8:49 AM 1/17/97, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >Gene Mallove originally quoted Amanda Siegfried: "Koltick says his research >shows that the electromagnetic force from the electron, or its electronic >strength, may increase toward the particle's central core. According to his >data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" of virtual >particles, which wink in an out of existence in pairs." > >Yes, we are talking about a virtual particle cloud, not real. That is my >point. I am suggesting that if electrons are clouds, the original premise, >then the physics of virtual particles and electrons is *not* well >understood. For one thing, not even the charge of the *real* electron is >known. For another, and this is "on the down side" for transmutation, the >distance of weak force interaction would not have been measured correctly >either, it would be way too large. Another consequence is that new >"virtual current" mechansims, electrons one direction positrons the other, >are available for induction in a changing magnetic field, at least on a >brief basis, and could create variable (still quantized but with many >degrees available) magnetic fields about the electron. The above describes, if you consider the notion, an essentially spherical standing wave in an aether. And the force described is that of the interference of two individual standing waves interacting and breaking down their respective waveforms leading to a breach in confinement of some of the density build up induced by the waveform. That breach allows some of the confined fluid to escape, at the sound speed of the acoustic waves. Thus, you wind up with the acceleration being according to the KE emitted, and the "energy" that manifests is given by E = mc^2. The only confusing thing about this is that you do not have a 1/2 in front of the m. The reason is because as you emit that aether, it becomes a part of the ocean that the standing wave is resonating in. ie, it forms space if you will. This is why we observe with the SOHO satelite, O and H ions having the same velocity dispersion in the corona, a feat that is not possible except by a long shot accident if the acceleration force mechanism were EM based rather than inertially based. But as gravitation is not the culprit, only an acceleration of spacetime itself could induce this profile independent of the masses and the charge to mass ratios of the ions. >My original point, though, is that there seems to be a very surprizing >result (to me anyway) in relating the strong nuclear force and electrons >in some way. Amanda Siegfried writes: "Koltick and his colleagues also >determined that the strong nuclear force, which is the "glue" that holds >together elementary particles such as protons, gets weaker closer to the >core charge. Other researchers also have seen this effect in the strong >force." > >I am confused. Is there some link between the strong and weak force >implied here? The strong force is a measure of the interactions between two standing waves that are phase and frequency coherent with their respective resonances and thus couple with as effecient an energy exchange as possible. The weak force is a measure of the phase angle of the component standing waves inside the proton and inside the quark. By exchanging a sort of overcoat of wave energy at a given phase angle, one component of the interior can be bumped from say, a 0 degree resonance relative to a nominal spacetime reference phase angle we call "positive", to either a 90 or a 270 degree phase angle resonance. Neither of those resonances are "Real". Those are what we call, "Imaginary" phase angles, and in the derivations of QM we actually use the phase angles at these imaginary orientations in order to be able to account for all of the possible exchanges of energy. But we are not aware of imaginary phase angles in our measurements because only "imaginary matter" could be used to detect the "charge" (action imposed by) of those phase angles. So the weak force is just a shedding of one internal resonance with outside space in favor of another resonance phase angle. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 11:04:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA12937; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:48:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:48:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:45:49 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: A minute to comprehend? How does this work or not? Heat 'reuse' paradox. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zUW4e1.0.1A3.obyto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3461 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Subscribers, Imagine bubbles made from a semi-permeable membrane pervious to water whose innards are a soluble hygroscopic substance. Water vapour can permeate into the bubbles, condense and flow out. According to thermodynamics, at eqm. the chemical potential of the mobile species (the water) is equal both within and outside the bubbles. This is approximately the same as saying concentration. Do a very simple calulation: relate water concentration within to without by considering the volume of water relative to the total volume of free-water-volume to bubbles (ther're small okay). You get a free-water-volume at least greater than the interstitial volume between the bubbles. Put the system in a tall vessel. Now provided that the vapour pressure at the top of the vessel is sufficent for the hygroscopic process to occur - tell me WHERE DID THE POTENTIAL ENERGY OF THE FREE WATER VOLUME COME FROM? (Heat has done work, but I'm sick of theoretical wrangling and want to do experiments). Also the device acts as a phase changing catalyst (water vapour to liquid spontaneously). Just where does the latent heat go? There is a temperature rise, I've done the calculations. Feel free to view my ftp site (Netscape ftps too, ftp://iesun1 city.ac.uk) at iesun1 city.ac.uk. Logon as ftp, no password. Change to directory /incoming/remi/Remi_Cornwall. You'll find three Word 6/7 docs: 2 papers and 1 short doc of part of the patent; or find them in Postscript .prn format. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 11:49:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24942; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:37:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:37:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:38:02 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"C7rLy2.0.U56.dJzto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3462 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > >>My original point, though, is that there seems to be a very surprizing >>result (to me anyway) in relating the strong nuclear force and electrons >>in some way. Amanda Siegfried writes: "Koltick and his colleagues also >>determined that the strong nuclear force, which is the "glue" that holds >>together elementary particles such as protons, gets weaker closer to the >>core charge. Other researchers also have seen this effect in the strong >>force." >> >>I am confused. Is there some link between the strong and weak force >>implied here? > Not to diminish or discount Ross Tessien's answer, based on his model of the universe, I wish to make my above question more clear, if less diplomatic. As far as I know, electrons are not affected by the strong force, or vice versa, in the standard model. One version of the question is: has such a relationship, outside this experiment been established? The quote appears to assert that it has. It appears one or more of the following is true: Gene Mallove misquoted or misintepreted. Amanda Siegfried misquoted or misintepreted. Somewhere communications got fouled up. The experiment somehow establishes/confirms a link between electrons and the strong force. The experiment conclusions are nonsense, under the standard model. Do you know which it is Gene? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 11:50:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA25411; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:39:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:39:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:36:15 -0800 (PST) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199701171936.LAA16864 ws6.aa.net> X-Sender: knuke pop.aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: knuke aa.net (Michael T Huffman) Subject: Re: non-magnetic balance beam Resent-Message-ID: <"vx5Fg.0.qB6.FLzto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3463 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >In playing with the diamagnetic water dimple, I notice that viewing the >reflected light directly will reveal that certain dust motes collect in >the dimple, repel each other and form small arrays, and refuse to budge >when breathed upon. Could be meteoric dust. Another neat kid's science >demonstration if so! Bill, Instead of vortices being generated, these magnetic fields/superconducting fields may be generating torriod shaped movements in the liquid medium, similar to the experiments performed by Gary Hawkins with his "speaker and beads" arrangement. This also sounds similar to the oscillon phenomena experiments, although I haven't read anything specific about those experiments other than what has been posted to Vortex-l. -Knuke From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 13:44:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA03092; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:14:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:14:37 -0800 From: Xkan aol.com Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:13:50 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970117161349_879377219 emout07.mail.aol.com> To: rmforall rt66.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Update No. 12 Resent-Message-ID: <"b9gNI1.0.Em.yk-to" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3465 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rich Murray wrote: <> I just happen to be doing some literature search on plasmoid and charge clusters. It might explain the nature of microspots. Basically, a charge cluster is a stable configurations of swirling electrons created in a specially desinged electrode. It was discovered by Ken Shoulder. Its size is about a micrometer and containes about 10^8 to 10^11 electrons and possiblly some positive ions inside. When a charge cluster is accelerated towards a metal target, it can vaporize parts of metal and make a pit or even bore a hole through the metal if it is thin. I am no expert in it, but seriously considering work on it, for it is real, and simple in struture, and might point out new directions in electromagnetism and a variety of techologies. Below is an interesting information source: Plasma Injected Transmutation, by Hal Fox et al. at www.padrak.com/ine/TRANSPAPER.html Xiaobo Kan The renegade physicist xkan aol.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 13:47:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA07533; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:33:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:33:18 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:29:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970117162951_1725022486 emout12.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com, hheffner@matsu.ak.net Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"1pstW2.0.cr1.R0_to" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3466 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace ponders the possibility that: <> No, Horace, you were correct in your original take on it. The electron (and other leptons) are not supposed to respond to the strong force in the Standard Model. The statement in the original post simply was pointing out that, like approaching hadrons with hadrons and seeing different coupling strengths as the core (bare mass) shielding was penetrated, a *similar* phenomenon was being reported in the case of the electron; similar not because of seeing the strong force change, but similar because of seeing its force (in this case Coulomb) change. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 15:07:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA25234; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:54:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:54:50 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:55:50 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"vHtXW.0.9A6.uC0uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3468 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Horace ponders the possibility that: > >< the strong force.>> > >No, Horace, you were correct in your original take on it. The electron (and >other leptons) are not supposed to respond to the strong force in the >Standard Model. The statement in the original post simply was pointing out >that, like approaching hadrons with hadrons and seeing different coupling >strengths as the core (bare mass) shielding was penetrated, a *similar* >phenomenon was being reported in the case of the electron; similar not >because of seeing the strong force change, but similar because of seeing its >force (in this case Coulomb) change. > >Hal Puthoff Aha!! That's it. I misinterpreted the remarks. Thanks very much for clearing that up. The significance of the remark: > "Because the electromagnetic charge is in effect becoming stronger as we get >closer and the strong force is getting weaker, there is a possibility that >these >two forces may at some energy be equal," Koltick says. "Many physicists have >speculated that when and if this is determined, an entirely new and unique >physics may be discovered." is that the electrostatic force may, at some distance, be able to overcome the strong force and, for example, an electron might be able to extract a proton from a nucleus. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 15:13:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA27152; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:01:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:01:12 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:56:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199701172256.RAA12932 lux> From: ron dvcorp.com (Ron) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Confirmation of zero point energy at Los Alamos Resent-Message-ID: <"VNBAw.0.1e6.qI0uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3469 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This may have been mentioned here already but the Jan 10, 1997 (Vol 275, Num 5297) issue of Science has an interesting article about a confirmation at Los Alamos of the Casimir force. See: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/275/5297/158a "This is one of those experiments that is going to wind up in all of the textbooks." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 15:15:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA24043; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:49:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:49:18 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:50:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Update No. 12 Resent-Message-ID: <"cMSrw.0.bt5.i70uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3467 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Xiaobo Kan added: >I just happen to be doing some literature search on plasmoid and charge >clusters. It might explain the nature of microspots. Basically, a charge >cluster is a stable configurations of swirling electrons created in a >specially desinged electrode. It was discovered by Ken Shoulder. Its size is >about a micrometer and containes about 10^8 to 10^11 electrons and possiblly >some positive ions inside....... I've heard this 'charge cluster' thing a couple of times, but I do not understand it. Like electric charges repel. In a plasma (and I am a plasma physicist), if there is net negative charge, electrons move out toward some less negative/more positive region, while if there is net positive charge, electrons move toward it. (Ions, being much heavier, move more slowly. Usually electrons do most of the moving.) Furthermore, unless the electrons are dead cold at absolute zero, an electron cluster has pressure, just like a common gas. Given the pressure and mutual repulsion of the electrons, what is the claimed force that holds these clusters together? Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 15:22:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA30045; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:09:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:09:17 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970116100138.006f768c aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:07:50 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"me-km2.0.ML7.RQ0uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3470 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:01 AM 1/16/97 EST, you wrote: > > >A source passed me this intriguing story. Comments from theorists appreciated. >--Gene Mallove > > WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind.-- According to recent measurements by Purdue University >physicists, an electron may not be a simple negative point charge, after all. >"Science and engineering students have learned for years that the electron has a >constant electronic strength, but now we've seen that this may not be the case," >says David Koltick, professor of physics at Purdue. > Koltick says his research shows that the electromagnetic force from the >electron, or its electronic strength, may increase toward the particle's central >core. According to his data, surrounding the electron's core is a fuzzy "cloud" >of virtual particles, which wink in an out of existence in pairs--one particle >in the pair is positively charged, the other negatively charged. > The pairs essentially cancel each other out so that they do not "add" any net >electric charge to the electron, Koltick says, but the cloud plays a key role in >how we perceive the electromagnetic force from the electron. > "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields >the true value of the central core," Koltick explains. "As we probe into the >cloud, getting closer and closer to the core charge, we 'see' less of the >shielding effect and more of the core. This means that the electromagnetic force >from the electron as a whole is not constant, but rather gets stronger as we go >through the cloud and get closer to the core. possibly very interesting, but sounds very interpretive. how are they "seeing" this? the cloud of winking virtual particles has always made me feel very weird indeed. i "believe" in steady state, from top to bottom. i "believe" that winking in and out is just oscillatory movement here and there, nothing virtual (a badly abused word or should I say virtual word). BUT: if he can see fuzziness in the electron itself, he may be onto the Aether. How is he doing it? > "Ordinarily when we look at or study an electron it is from far away and we >don't realize the core is being shielded. We are the first researchers to >actually measure this effect." > Koltick's results appear in the Jan. 20 issue of Physical Review Letters. >>>> just what did they measure??? or rather what was the experiment? > Koltick and his colleagues also determined that the strong nuclear force, >which is the "glue" that holds together elementary particles such as protons, >gets weaker closer to the core charge. Other researchers also have seen this >effect in the strong force. > "Because the electromagnetic charge is in effect becoming stronger as we get >closer and the strong force is getting weaker, there is a possibility that these >two forces may at some energy be equal," Koltick says. "Many physicists have >speculated that when and if this is determined, an entirely new and unique >physics may be discovered." ><<< Interesting. Do you remember vaguely my post about thinking geometrically and one of the major thoughts was that the reason transmutation can work is that the "center" of the atomic complex is much weaker than the repulsive ring which surrounds it and does most of the work of holding it together but with sufficient vigor in compressed flux the ring can be cracked and the "glue" (which is really a complex arrangement of attractive and repulsive geometric vectors) then works to spin everything into a new geometry, ie, new isotope? These guys ought to talk with me. I will give them a lil old non-linear tork on their paradigms and maybe they will see a new angle. > To obtain their results, Koltick and his colleagues, Purdue physics Professor >Edward Shibata and former doctoral students Barry Howell and Ilan Levine, >collided very high-speed beams of particles at a facility at the Japanese >Laboratory for High Energy Physics. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 16:32:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA08687; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:55:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:55:22 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:54:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970117185441_1419464594 emout18.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: nuclear physics Resent-Message-ID: <"0_Md6.0.f72.f51uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3471 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I enrolled in a course in Nuclear physics at the University of Indiana. The first home work problem was to calculate the nuclear decay of a single element. I learned from diff-e q in engineering school how to do that. de/dt = kt e = Ae**kt The next homework problem involved the decay of a sequence of elements. a---> c b--->c c----->.d The instructor offered no explanation of the problem. He talked about spin all period. He does not follow the book. I have forgotton how to solve simultanious diff e q equations. What did I get myself into? Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 16:37:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA15035; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:26:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:26:18 -0800 Date: 17 Jan 97 19:24:30 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: ROthwell-Kennel Message-ID: <970118002430_100433.1541_BHG56-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"AxK0e1.0.ng3.fY1uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3472 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Excuse me if I seem a little slow, but I've been trying to work out what Elliot meant when he wrote this: "Of course I'm aware of Ed's work. But Ed's achievement of a more reproducible excess heat reaction came after retiring from LANL, so it really doesn't address the issue of reproducible excess heat in a mass flow calorimeter with water working fluid. By reproducible, I mean an experiment in which positive results can be achieved, say, ~50% of the time or better." I really don't understand this at all. What has Storms' retirement to do with anything? And what is this about ~50% or better being a criterion of reproducibility? Sheesh, I was once responsible for sorting out "a little local difficulty" we were having in making 20" by 18" 16-layer printed circuit boards with pads at 0.1" pitch, back in the early 1970s. Some of the pads had multiple tracks between them and the whole thing had to be bonded under heat and compression, and then drilled out in a few thousand places and connected up by Au plating through the holes. When I started trying to help, I would have been VERY glad to have seen the bloody things work "~50% of the time or better." All of the explanations of the NHE programme I've seen seem to set absurdly motorised goalposts like that, or say that, "well, it worked, so we had to find a calorimetry regime under which it would not," or say that, "the CETI device calorimetry hasn't been tried out properly." Just for fun, I measured the flow rate and delta-T of my electric shower and calculated the power going into the heater. Curiously enough, the answer was noticeably less than the figure stamped on the baseplate of the gadget. So I put my fancy power meter on it - bingo, it agreed to within a percent or so with my calculations. OK, that was at 7kW, but I reckon that it would have worked OK at 1kW too. AND I used a jug to catch the shower water and find its flow rate. Easy-peasy, and it didn't need Blue's "thermal layering" in the air of the bathroom. My own attitude to something which doesn't often work is to try and find ways of making it work more of the time, not find out new ways of stopping it from working at all. If we had taken the latter approach at to our huge circuit boards at ICL, we would have been out of business very quickly indeed. I suppose I'm missing something here, but I'm damned if I can see what that might be. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 18:42:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA13922 for billb@eskimo.com; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:42:06 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:42:06 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Fri Jan 17 18:42:01 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA13895 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:41:59 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id SAA09474 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:41:55 -0800 Old-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:41:55 -0800 Message-Id: <199701180241.SAA09474 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: > >Horace ponders the possibility that: > >< the strong force.>> > >No, Horace, you were correct in your original take on it. The electron (and >other leptons) are not supposed to respond to the strong force in the >Standard Model. The statement in the original post simply was pointing out >that, like approaching hadrons with hadrons and seeing different coupling >strengths as the core (bare mass) shielding was penetrated, a *similar* >phenomenon was being reported in the case of the electron; similar not >because of seeing the strong force change, but similar because of seeing its >force (in this case Coulomb) change. > >Hal Puthoff Likewise in my theory I do not say that the electron energy density ever reaches that of the interior of a quark structure. As far as I can tell, a quark is a composite of three muon standing waves. The muon is analogous to the electron standing wave in almost all respects. But it is larger and induces a greater convergence of energy and thus energy density in its core. It seems to be a double sized electron if that makes any sense. The convergence ratio for radius seems to be a 2^7 power convergence, but additionally the aether apparently undergoes a change of state to a more dense form, ie aether condensate. The density of the core of muon is tremendous at about E111 eV/m^3 by my calc. But in all standing waves, the intensity of the wave energy grows as you converge spherically. but additionally, as you get closer you are getting into regions of the surrounding spacetime that are increasingly phase and frequency coherent with the oscillations of the standing wave you are approaching. Thus, there arises a non linear increase in the strength of the "force" as you near the convergence. This arises because the standing wave is in essence, ripping the nodal structure of spacetime apart, thus converting it from its normal essentially rectilinear geometry into an Escher like transition into a spherical convergence. A particle like a proton, being composite, has a complex spacetime profile heading into its interior. This is because you have several standing waves trapped and locked together just like you may have read recently about oscillons in a bed of vibrating beads which form into a variety of geometries. Some of those tilings are like what I see as spacetime. And the individual oscillons are pretty close to the notions of a single standing wave like an electron or muon. And as well, the groups of two or three that form naturally are very much like the composite structures of the proton and neutron and quarks (in my model a quark is a set of three muon core standing waves and the entire structure of three quarks is surrounded by a huge complex shaped standing wave that focuses energy into the interior of that composite structure. But I think that as far as my stuff is concerned, the important point is that they are discovering that the electric force is non linear. And note that even in my model the electron is not a strong enough standing wave to get up to nuclear strong force levels. But a muon would be. So if they could shoot muons and repeat the experiment then perhaps they might be able to see the force go all the way to the nuclear strong levels. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 18:42:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA12109; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:29:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:29:11 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:28:59 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: Vortex Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? In-Reply-To: <970116130148_76570.2270_FHU57-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"yamGZ2.0.7z2.rL3uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3473 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 16 Jan 1997, Eugene Mallove wrote: > "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields > the true value of the central core," Koltick explains. This is not right. The cloud of virtual particles has net charge zero, so it should not affect the e-field surrounding the electron. Or from a classical analogy, the cloud of +- particle pairs constitutes an uncharged conductor, since it contains mobile charged particles, and you cannot shield a charged object by placing it within a metal container. Maybe he means that the particle clouds of colliding electrons interact, which distorts the trajectories from that expected if the electrons were true point-particles. Imagine each electron as being surrounded by a tiny droplet of liquid metal, and you get an idea of what might happen when two electrons approach so close that their metal globules interact. Like playing with the ends of bar magnets in a bowl full of ferrofluid. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 20:15:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA00266; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:04:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:04:35 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 19:05:04 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"2sMns1.0.04.Hl4uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3474 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A >On 16 Jan 1997, Eugene Mallove wrote: > >> "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields >> the true value of the central core," Koltick explains. > >This is not right. The cloud of virtual particles has net charge zero, so >it should not affect the e-field surrounding the electron. Or from a >classical analogy, the cloud of +- particle pairs constitutes an uncharged >conductor, since it contains mobile charged particles, and you cannot >shield a charged object by placing it within a metal container. > [snip] >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 Aren't you assuming a 1/R^2 field above? The authors imply the electrostatic field is not 1/R^2 close to the electron. The +- pairs would tend to align with the + side inward giving a -+-+- configuration in cross section. The central minus charge is only a 0 dimensional point so maybe the net effect of the virtual particle distribution is to balance the normally observed field into what has appeared to be a 1/R^2 form. This is really mind boggeling because the normal rules disintegrate. Maxwell's laws no longer apply in the vicinity of the electron, and probably the virtual particles as well. You don't get electrostatic field line conservation, for example. Charge shielding is possible. If this is true the energy generating prospects are enormous. Hard to believe, isn't it? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 20:40:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA03774; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:30:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:30:41 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 04:30:49 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32eb3d89.20624602 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199701171842.KAA23751 oro.net> In-Reply-To: <199701171842.KAA23751 oro.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xm1tW1.0.uw.k75uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3476 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:42:19 -0800, Ross Tessien wrote: [snip] >By exchanging a sort of overcoat of wave energy at a given phase angle, one >component of the interior can be bumped from say, a 0 degree resonance >relative to a nominal spacetime reference phase angle we call "positive", to >either a 90 or a 270 degree phase angle resonance. Neither of those >resonances are "Real". Those are what we call, "Imaginary" phase angles, >and in the derivations of QM we actually use the phase angles at these >imaginary orientations in order to be able to account for all of the >possible exchanges of energy. > >But we are not aware of imaginary phase angles in our measurements because >only "imaginary matter" could be used to detect the "charge" (action imposed >by) of those phase angles. > >So the weak force is just a shedding of one internal resonance with outside >space in favor of another resonance phase angle. > >Ross Tessien Ross, How do you reconcile this picture of fixed phase angles with the inevitable shift in frequency and phase that occurs when two particles are in motion relative to one another? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 20:40:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA03759; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:30:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:30:36 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 04:30:44 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e9366b.18802737 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <3.0.32.19970116234730.00996a98 mail.localaccess.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970116234730.00996a98 mail.localaccess.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"77ZxA1.0.Vw.e75uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3475 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:47:31 -0800, Epitaxy wrote: > >Didn't you confuse division with multiplication ? Where do you think I did that? > >At 03:54 AM 1/17/97 GMT, you wrote: >>I have just been looking at a few natural constants, and came across this: >>"Gyromagnetic ratio of protons in water" =2675215255*radians/(sec*tesla). >>If the Earth's field is 1 gauss, and we divide by 2*PI to get cycles /sec, >>then we get a frequency of 42.58 kHz. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 20:40:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA03842; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:31:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:31:04 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 04:30:46 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32ea38d6.19421347 mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-5JIX3.0.yx.685uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3477 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:26:59 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >You get a magnetometer. There was an amateur scientist article many years >ago about how to build your own magnetometer with a gallon jug of water >wrapped with some coils of wire. It worked by adding/subtracting from the >earth's magnetic field with one coil while exciting with another >perpendicular coil. The exciter coil ran at a set frequency. Energy was >absorbed from the exciter coil as the combined B approached the correct >value for resonance, and added to the exciter coil when the resonant peak >was passed (if long term memory serves.) When you say "absorbed from the exciter coil...", do you mean "by the water"? And if so, then what happens to the water if you just stay at the resonance frequency? Surely it can't keep on absorbing energy forever? Something has to happen to it. What form does it take? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 17 22:59:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA17280 for billb@eskimo.com; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:59:07 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:59:07 -0800 X-Envelope-From: aki ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 17 22:57:28 1997 Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA17060 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:57:15 -0800 Received: from (aki lax-ca23-21.ix.netcom.com [204.31.253.181]) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA23758; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:54:31 -0800 Old-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:54:31 -0800 Message-Id: <199701180654.WAA23758 dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Fwd: Cold Fusion Update No. 12, ICCF-6. To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Cc: kennel nhelab.iae.or.jp Cc: 76570.2270 compuserve.com Cc: 72240.1256 compuserve.com Cc: 100433.1541 compuserve.com Cc: jlogajan skypoint.com Cc: mica world.std.com Cc: Puthoff aol.com Cc: rgeorge hooked.net Cc: rvanspaa netspace.net.au Cc: mac iae.or.jp Cc: little eden.com Cc: mseviot liszt.PH.unimelb.EDU.AU Cc: hheffner anc.ak.net Cc: RMCarrell aol.com X-Diagnostic: Submission size exceeds 40000 bytes X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: January 17. 1997 I did not read of Morrison's ICCF-6 review being posted in the Vortex or being included in Logajan's or Beaty's website or the spf. So I e-mailed him a request on the 16th to please either post a review if he had one, or to send a copy for my reading. He did attend the ICCF-6, sat right up in the front row throughout the Conference, and asked questions of the speakers regularly. His was a full participation affair. I found the e-mail address of Morrison in John Logajan's website where his ICCF-5 Part 1 review was posted. I think Douglas Morrison's review of the ICCF-6 deserves posting. I find that Morrison did post his review on the Sci.physics.fusion today, January 17th, '97. I thank him for it. And I have taken the liberty of cross posting on the Vortex and sending copies to some individuals. My apologies to those that I did not address and to those that regularly read the spf anyway. -AK- ---- Begin Forwarded Message Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion From: DROM vxcern.cern.ch Subject: Cold Fusion Update No. 12, ICCF-6. Reply-To: DROM vxcern.cern.com Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:20:03 GMT Lines: 1131 Oct-Dec. 1996 + Jan. 1997. DM-96-19 COLD FUSION UPDATE No. 12 including A REPORT ON THE SIXTH COLD FUSION CONFERENCE Douglas R.O. Morrison SUMMARY The Sixth International Cold Fusion Conference, ICCF-6 took place! It was generally considered more scientific than its predecessors. It was held in Japan, well supported by Japanese organisations. Reports were given on three major Japanese experiments which were well-funded, technically excellent and carefully carried out - all three gave no indications of cold fusion. This shows once again that Japanese science done seriously with governmental support, does excellent work. It is said that government funding for cold fusion is being wound down. Despite this, the Summary Speakers, Bressani and McKubre, gave encouragement to cold fusion. The new frontier of the conference was transmutations with remarkable results that may have conventional explanations. Despite everything, a Seventh conference is planned. Post-scripts; The Siena experiment that claimed steady heat production, has been repeated but it has not been possible to justify the fusion claims and it is concluded that there is no power production. Two other important experimental results suggesting axions and a high H/D ratio, have been shown to be due to mis-interpretation of data - the way in which the scientists concerned behave is contrasted with some involved in cold fusion. SUBJECTS 1. Introduction 2. Major Japanese Experiments on Excess Heat 3. Japanese Study of D-D Reaction Rates in Metals 4. Summary of Nuclear Products - Bressani 5. Summary of Excess Heat Experiments - McKubre 6. Transmutations 7. Studies of Material Science 8. Who am I? Who Pays me? 9. Court Case - La Repubblica versus Drs. Preparata, Bressani, Del Giudice, Fleischman, and Pons 10. Next ICCF Conference. 11. Short Notes -Preparata experimentalist/London theatre/Texas conf./Glow discharges/CETI/Siena bomb/Tom Droege/Error and fraud 12. Please Can I Have a Cup of Tea? 13. Conclusions Post-scripts; (1) "Siena Bomb" Not Confirmed by New Experiment (2) Other Wrong Results Disproved - Axions, H/D ratio Appendix - Neutron Claims of Bressani et al. Critically Examined 1. INTRODUCTION The conference was sponsored by The New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organisation, NEDO, which was set up by MITI as a branch of the Institute of Applied Energy. They have built a laboratory to study cold fusion in the Techno Park near Sapporo in the northern island of Hokkaido - it is called the New Hydrogen Energy lab, NHE, thus avoiding the words "cold fusion". Some $ 30 million was given by MITI over four years and this is fast running out. The basic research is being carried out by the government together with some 20 private companies (generally major ones), and 11 universities at 13 labs. A second major organisation is IMRA which was set-up by the Toyota car company. They have two labs, one in Hokkaido and the other in the Sophia Antipolis Science Park near Nice where Stan Pons works. This Sixth Conference was again held in a beautiful luxury hotel as in Monte Carlo and in Maui - why? Can only guess. The hotel has a golf course and two ski areas - was told it was only finished four years ago and is now almost bankrupt. Of the 183 participants listed (some 250 actually attended), half, 91, were from Japan and 37 from the USA. Dr. Scaramuzzi once declared that "Cold fusion stops at the Alps", but now it is more accurate for Europe, to say it only appears in Mediterranean countries (Italy had 15 participants, France 6, and Spain one). Cold Fusion Update No. 10 was Part I on the previous conference, ICCF-5. Update No. 11 should have been Part II, but only sections B1 to B5 were written due to lack of time. Section B4 is included here as a Short Note and section B5 is given as an Appendix. 2. MAJOR JAPANESE EXPERIMENTS ON EXCESS HEAT 2.1 Results from the New Hydrogen Energy Lab of The Institute of Applied Energy Dr. K. Matsui, the Conference Organiser, described the Lab and said that faint proof of excess heat was not enough. The aims of the lab were to search for a strong proof of excess heat, to demonstrate the mechanism, and obtain controllable power generation. Dr. Kubota said that previously with a fuel cell-type electrolysis system, 7 to 18% excess heat had been observed but the reproducibility was poor - a problem with this type of cell was that if the parts moved during assembly the calibration was lost. Hence they had adopted the mass flow calorimetry system developed by the McKubre group at SRI. Here water is made to flow through the cell and measurements are made of the input and output water temperatures and of the flow rate - here the calibration was more reliable. It was found that the three sigma limits were between 0.9 and 1.6%. So the limit for declaring a heat excess was taken as 2% which corresponded to 0.2 W out of a total input of 10 Watts. Palladium samples with various treatments were tried including some that had previously given excess heat with the old type of fuel cell. In all ten experiments performed, no excess heat was observed. After the conference, some participants visited the nearby NHE labs - Melvin Miles and some friends, estimated that in the three large research rooms, there was some $10 million worth of equipment. 2.2 Energy Results from IMRA(Japan) Dr. T. Nakata of IMRA (Japan) reported that after their earlier work with closed fuel cells which sometimes showed excess heat, they developed a new type of cell with mass flow. Water flowed through the top of the electrolytic cell and its input and output temperature were measured. An important new feature was that all the apparatus was immersed in a tank of water which was kept at constant temperature. A heater was used so that the total heat input was constant. In other words, the input was always 10 watts and if excess heat had occurred, then the heater's power would be reduced to keep the power at 10 Watts. This is the best and most accident-free type of calorimeter since there is no change in the heat transfer with the outside. Twenty-six experiments were performed with palladium cathodes which had been treated in various systems to try and improve the amount of deuterium in the palladium (the loading). Some of these systems employed various treatments of the surface. In others the current was varied to load and deload the deuterium in the cathode. Distributions of the excess heat observed were shown giving clear Gaussian distributions with three standard deviation values of +/- 0.23 Watts or 2.3% of the input power. In all the 26 experiments, no excess heat was observed. 2.3 Results from IMRA(Europe) The previous conference, ICCF-5, was held in Monte Carlo next door to the IMRA(Europe) lab near Nice. Everyone expected some results from them and a visit to the IMRA laboratory, but to our surprise, it was closed and no results were given. This time Dr. S. Pons reported that a new calorimeter called Icarus 9, had been developed. It was designed to operate at high powers, 300 to 400 Watts, and high temperatures up to the atmospheric boiling point. In three experiments excess power of 101, 73, and 75 Watts (150, 2000, and 80%) were observed while in four experiments no excess power was observed. 2.4 Comparison of the two IMRA Results At the end of Dr. Nakata's talk, I asked why his results were different from those of IMRA Europe - no answer was given by him or by anyone from IMRA Europe. The essential point is that when excess heat has been claimed, the heat loss from the system to the outside is poorly known, as shown by Wilson et al.1. With the IMRA(Japan) calorimeter, the water jacket surrounding the cell is kept at constant temperature so that any heat exchange with the outside is constant. With the IMRA(Europe) calorimeter, as the temperature changes up to boiling point, the heat flow to the outside must vary substantially and the calibration becomes critical. Instead of employing calculations and some doubtful controls, it is good standard experimental technique to use an external water bath at constant temperature, as IMRA(Japan) has done, but IMRA(France) has not. 3. JAPANESE STUDY OF D-D REACTION RATES IN METALS Dr. J. Kasagi et al. of Tohuku University reported important results on what happens when low energy deuterium ions are fired into metals saturated with deuterium. The ion beam could extend down to about 3 keV giving results at lower energies than previously. Excellent experimental technique was employed for the lowest energies where the rate is exceedingly low due to the potential barrier. Three major (and interesting) experiments were performed. Before cold fusion, all experiments (including muon-catalysed fusion at zero energy) had found that the reactions d-d ---> 3He + n and d-d ---> t + p had each 50% of the total rate, while the reaction d-d ---> 4He + gamma was negligible, about 10-7 of the other's rate. Here the charged particle spectrum was measured and peaks corresponding to 3He, tritium and proton emission were observed. As expected the ratio of tritium to 3He production was close to unity, showing that the ratio of tritium to neutron production is one, contrary to claims by cold fusion believers that in metals the ratio was 105 to 108. Secondly, the protons emitted in the dd ----> pt reaction, were measured. After correcting for the potential barrier, the astrophysical S22 factor was obtained. It was found that at the lowest energy, the rate increased, by 10% for Ti metal and about 30% for Yb. Expressing this as an electron screening factor, Ue, values of 19 +/- 12 eV and 60 +/-10 eV were found for titanium and Yb respectively - they said these are higher values than expected - and a CERN expert confirmed these were very high. If confirmed, these results could have importance for the problems of the Standard Solar Model where the screening factors are poorly known and indeed this uncertainty constitutes a major source of error in the determination of the solar neutrino flux which may be different from the measured flux. Thirdly, they investigated claims of abnormally high energy alpha particle emission. Firing energetic deuterium ions at Pd loaded with deuterium they observed an abnormal number of alpha particles with energies between 12 and 17 MeV. They proposed an explanation. First the reaction d + d ---> 3He + n occurs with a Q of 3.27 MeV. The 3He moves a short distance and interacts with another deuterium ion giving an alpha particle according to the reaction d + d ---> alpha + p with a Q of 18.35 MeV. Combining these two reactions together, it would appear as the three-body reaction, d + d + d ---> a + p + n with a Q of 21.6 MeV, but really it is two successive reactions. This experiment was performed with several metals such as Ti, Zr, Au, Pt. These results clearly show that there is no indication of a strong rise in the rate towards zero energy as would be expected from cold fusion claims, but they demonstrate the very steep decrease in the rate as the incident energy decreases as expected from the potential barrier. Further they confirm that the branching ratios of the 3 reactions are constant with decreasing energy and there is no sign of the dramatic reversal claimed from some cold fusion experiments who write that neutron and tritium production are negligible while 4He production is dominant. Normal branching rations have already been found in muon-catalysed fusion which is at close to zero energy. 4. SUMMARY OF NUCLEAR PRODUCTS - BRESSANI 4.1 Bressani Review Talk Dr. Tullio Bressani is a senior and respected figure in his world of low energy particle physics. The summary of the important subject of nuclear products was allocated a 20 minute talk by Dr. Bressani. There was no possibility for questions or comments afterwards. It was a most remarkable talk, so to try and be fair, will give first the main points without comment apart from indices, a, b, c, etc. These indices will then be commented on. Finally, as an Appendix, a note is given about his five standard deviation measurements of neutrons having exactly the right energy, written after ICCF-5. This note was discussed extensively with Tullio. He started by saying there were two problems; (1) Reproducibility, (2) the nuclear origin of the excess heat. At this conference, there had been no solution for the problem of lack of reproducibility but progress had been made on the nuclear origin and it had been shown by different groups at different labs that excess heat did have a nuclear origin(a). Fleischman and Pons(b) had shown that production of neutrons and tritium was lower than expected from the amount of excess heat, by a factor of 108 to 1010. Over a hundred labs had tried to measure neutrons and tritium(c), but the solution has only come lately from measurements of 4He. He listed about 7 experiments which included Isagawa of KEK (d), Yamaguchi(e), Miles(f), and Gozzi(g). He described the experiment by Gozzi et al. as the best of all. Yamaguchi's work at NTT was reported in 1993. Dr. Isagawa at KEK obtained 4He when the Pd was heated - they had doubts but the apparatus was young yet. For neutrons , there was a weak correlation of two standard deviations. He mentioned others (Okamoto) briefly. Dr. Bressani concluded that the energy released is of a nuclear origin(h) from the reaction d + d ----> 4He + g (1) The claims of Fleischman and Pons were correct(b). The future of 4He lies with quadrupole mass spectrometers, QMS. A workshop should be organised on 4He production. 4.2 Comments (a) To say in a hand-waving way that some nuclear products have been detected does not justify claims of watts of excess heat coming from that reaction. In Science it is necessary to have the correct numbers. Thus if the origin of the excess heat is a d-d reaction giving 4He, then from the reaction (1), the gamma must have 24 MeV and for one watt some 1011 gammas of this high energy and 1011 ions of 4He should be produced. But the numbers from the experiments do not give these yields of 4He. Further if 1011 gammas of 24 MeV were produced, they would give a large number of other nuclear products - and Dr. Bressani also did not comment on the absence of such high energy products. (b) Dr. Bressani seems to have forgotten the scandal of the F&P neutron measurements which is well-documented e.g. in Frank Close's book. After the 23rd March 1989 press conference, on the 28th Fleischman gave a talk at Harwell where he showed a plot of gammas produced with a peak at 2.5 MeV as would be expected from simple calculations, the two reactions in series ; d + d ----> 3He + neutron (2.45 MeV) (2) followed by the fast neutron interacting with protons in water bath giving neutron(2.45 MeV) + proton ----> d + g(2.5 MeV) (3) The agreement with this calculation seemed wonderful, but people at Harwell immediately pointed out that such fast neutrons barely interact and that in fact, the neutrons are slowed down, and when at rest are captured by a proton to give the well-known gamma of 2.2 MeV via; neutron(zero MeV) + proton ---> d + g(2.2 MeV) (4) Two and three days later, Fleischman gave talks at Lausanne and CERN resp. where he showed a modified graph with the gamma peak now at the correct value of 2.2 MeV. Later the man who made the measurements wrote to Pons and others saying there was definitely no peak at 2.2 MeV. There was a miserably small one at 2.5 MeV but he thought it was an electronic artefact It is not too clear, but it seems that Fleischman has withdrawn both the neutron and tritium measurements, so it is surprising that Dr. Bressani says that the F&P results are confirmed. (c). In discussing the neutron and tritium results, a neutral reviewer would have said that there are more null results than positive results; and would have added that the positive results disagree numerically with one another. It is surprising that Dr. Bressani did not mention his own results which claimed to observe neutrons with a peak energy near 2.5 MeV in agreement with reaction (2), and further that this effect was very significant - five standard deviations. Could this unusual modesty of a scientist with decisive results have anything to do with my conversations with Dr. Bressani described in the Appendix which showed that his results do not justify his claims? (d). It was a surprise to hear the KEK experiment of Dr. Shigeru Isagawi described as supporting cold fusion as this was not his interpretation. In preliminary experiments it was found that the 4He observed could come from contamination. With improved experimental equipment no 4He was observed from the gas when the Pd was heated to 770 C. When the furnace temperature was increased up to 1180 C, large amounts of 4He were observed but the stainless steel of the furnace body had become permeable to gases so no conclusion could be drawn. It is hard to understand how Dr. Bressani could consider this as satisfactory for evidence for 4He production in cold fusion. An experiment2 has now been performed with new equipment which is leak-proof up to 1200 C. No 4He production was observed although there was boiling several times. This apparatus has very high resolution and can detect down to 7 ppt of 4He. Previously they had also looked for 3He and found none. (e). On the first day of the ICCF-3 conference in 1992 at Nagoya, Nippon Telephone and Telegraph company, NTT, announced that the problem of cold fusion has been solved in their labs by Dr. Yamaguchi. At that time NTT had the largest share capitalisation in the world. Their shares increased in that day by 8 billion dollars, but within a few days had returned to normal. Dr. Yamaguchi's work has been widely criticised because he operated his mass spectrograph outside its working range. In addition at Nagoya he was asked if he had glass in his apparatus and replied "No" - later he retracted and admitted he had glass. Ever since Paneth and Peters claims in 1926, it has been well known that large amounts of 4He are stored in glass but are released when hydrogen is passed over the glass. After Nagoya, Dr. Yamaguchi did not stay long at the NTT laboratories but went to IMRA in the South of France - neither he nor anyone else at NTT has reported at any ICCF meeting any later work supporting the 8 billion dollar share peak. (f). The work of Miles et al. has been very controversial and strongly criticised. From his talk it was not clear if he had done any new experiments to answer his critics - his talk appeared to be a repeat of his controversial results (privately was told that his funding has been stopped). He claimed to be able to answer his critics, but they seemed to be talking of somewhat different aspects of the work. (g). Dr. Gozzi gave the opening talk at the ICCF-6 meeting. Since 1989 his chemistry group at La Sapienza in Rome has been trying to establish a correlation between excess heat and nuclear products. Initially they proved that the neutron and tritium channels are of "very low-probability". At this meeting they claimed to have observed excess heat, 4He and X-rays. The X-rays were observed using an X-ray film and from an analysis of the spots it was deduced that the X-rays had an energy of 89 +/- 1 keV, a remarkably accurate value to derive from spots. Also one expects characteristic X-rays of about 24 keV from Palladium but these were not observed. It was suggested that X-ray film was a poor way to detect and measure the energy of X-rays to which Dr. Gozzi replied that they were a poor group and could not afford modern apparatus, but I replied that Steve Jones had made miniature X-ray detectors which could easily fit inside anyone's apparatus - he had offered it free to anyone but said that Dr. Oriani was the only one to accept his offer. Dr. Gozzi concluded that the 4He channel "is not the principal source of energy being about 0.5% of the energy measured by calorimetry". Dr. Bressani did not mention this very important statement or comment on the continuing mystery which is in contradiction with his conclusion. (h). If the excess heat claimed is of a nuclear origin, then the rate of nuclear reactions should give the same power output - but Dr. Bressani did not make it clear in his review that this essential condition had not been met. Another important aspect that Dr. Bressani did not bring out, was the branching ratios. At this conference, the Tohuku group has shown that the branching ratios are as expected for neutrons, tritium, 3He, and protons contrary to the True Believers claim that they are suppressed relative to 4He. Also from the zero energy muon catalysed fusion data, the branching ratios are normal down to the lowest energy. So the 4He channel is suppressed - by a factor of 10-7 and there is no evidence that it could become dominant. 4.3 Conclusion It is the duty of a reviewer to present all the evidence - this did not happen here. Looking at all the results, the overall conclusion must be that the balance evidence argues strongly against cold fusion giving nuclear products. One might be surprised that a physicist of Dr. Bressani's seniority could give such a talk. At ICCF-5, he had stated very strongly that his Turin experiment had observed a peak of neutrons at exactly the expected energy of 2.5 MeV, and this evidence was significant at the five standard deviation level. For the Cold Fusion Update No. 11, the paper was studied and it was found that the data did not justify this claim - indeed the data suggested that there was something wrong with the experiment. A draft of the Update was written and shown to Tullio and discussed with him. Later there was a second discussion where he concluded essentially, "I do not agree with you but you are free to publish". However he did not disagree with any specific statement in the draft. This draft is now given as an Appendix to this update where it can be seen that there is no clean peak at 2.5 MeV and there are significant deviations at many energies indicating that there was an experimental or analysis problem. 5. SUMMARY OF EXCESS HEAT EXPERIMENTS - MCKUBRE 5.1 McKubre Review Talk Mike McKubre had also 20 minutes to summarise his allocated subject of excess heat. He listed three points; a) He drew a smiley and said he was pleased with the results of the conference b) He said there were a number of positive things - there was a fever of enthusiasm linked to a seriousness of purpose. c) Existence - he listed and awarded ticks to; Nuclear products - two ticks - 4He, 3He and tritium Heat - one tick - more than 20 groups find it Transmutation - one tick - a wild card. If it holds up, it will dominate future work. He said that for tritium, Ed Storms had presented the work of Tim Claytor at Los Alamos. For heat there was a robust mass of observations. d) Reproducibility - has not been achieved. It was "Important but not enabling". For electrochemical heat - for mass flow calorimeters there was a problem(a). The IMRA(Japan) work was probably the most systematic attempt to explore the input variables with 32 experiments - which gave no excess heat. The New Hydrogen Energy, NHE, labs of IAE and MITI, have an exquisite calorimeter, beautifully engineered. My notes show that Mike said they had no results, but their abstract says "10 flow calorimetry experiments have been performed until April 1996. Excess heat is not yet measured by the flow calorimetry system." In Dr. Kuota's talk, no comment was made about any experiments being performed in the period April - October though most people do extra hours before a conference in their home country. For Mike's SRI lab, he said that there had been lots of null results. (Earlier during his talk, Mike had said that during the poster session he had deliberately carried out an experiment to see if people really looked at the posters. He had shown one graph where there was a negative heat pulse and waited to see if anyone noticed it. He said that Morrison was the only one to notice - "You have watch these people, they pay attention". He did not explain how this pronounced negative heat burst could have been produced). Dr. McKubre declared that mass flow calorimeters were the most sluggish of animals(a). It is better to pass series of current pulses through the cell. Fleischman and Pons load a cell, raise the temperature and find excess heat. The electro-migration effect helps loading and should be explored (i.e. also add an electrical field). 5.2 Comments (a). Dr. McKubre and also Dr. Celani, said that the mass flow cell is sluggish - hinting that one needs a dynamic change to obtain cold fusion. This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the mass flow cells of NHE and IMRA(Japan) which found no excess heat. The point is that one can make sudden and dramatic changes to the cells themselves - it is only the outer system which is stabilised, not the inner cell. But if this sudden change causes excess heat, then that will be measured and recorded. To say the cell is sluggish is incorrect - it sounds like an excuse. Mike McKubre has a good reputation among True Believers as a scientist because he occasionally says things that, in the mouth of others would be taken as a criticism of cold fusion. And if asked will answer even if the reply is not in favour of cold fusion - but if one does not ask, one does not learn. For example, he has in the past claimed some 30% excess heat, but if asked, he admits that this is only during a rare burst. Also if one asks what is the excess of "heat out" over "heat in" taking the entire run, he will say that it is of the order of 1%. Now for running a power plant, it is this last figure of 1% which counts, not the 30% burst. This also raises the question of whether there could be a long term drift. When Mike says there is a problem with flow calorimeters, maybe the problem is that they are better than previous ones which used calculation instead of measurement to make corrections for outer heat flows. So his problem with flow calorimeters with stabilised jackets, is that they are good and find no excess heat. But there was a reluctance to draw the obvious conclusion that from the good experiments such as the recent Japanese ones, there is no cold fusion. 6. TRANSMUTATIONS At ICCF-3 in Nagoya, a new front was opened when some people started to claim transmutation of elements. The first to tell me of this was John Bockris who claimed with his associate, to be able to produce gold - the alchemists dream! They had some later legal and academic problems with this. However others claimed publicly to have produced transmutations but the evidence was not taken too seriously by relatively responsible Believers. At this meeting, a sensational paper was presented by George Miley who claimed to have observed "massive transmutations". George is a well-respected fusion physicist who has in recent years, been best known as editor of the journal Fusion Technology. Until 1989 this journal published hot fusion papers but then added cold fusion papers, many of which were quite wild - but the hot fusion people continued to publish in this journal. This paper of 14 pages, is the main item in the glossy journal "Infinite Energy" that is published by Gene Mallove. Mallove, Rothwell and Tinsley describe it in rapturous terms "At least as important as the discovery of nuclear fusion fragments in the 1930's - probably much more so", and "This is a remarkable turning point in the history of cold fusion". That is what happens with non-scientists who do not check. At the University of Illinois, Urbana, they used the Patterson-type cell which is being marketed by the CETI company (Clean Energy Technologies Inc.). This has a large number of very small beads with an exceedingly thin layer of a metal - here nickel - and the electrolyte flows over them. They claim to confirm the observations of Patterson to observe excess heat for long periods. They claim to have observed heavy and light elements deposited on the beads e.g. Si, Mg, Zn, Cu, Ag, Pb by using Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy, SIMS, and Neutron Activation Analysis, NAA. At first sight, it looks impressive. I was asked several times my opinion and said that if there was one unexpected result, then it was worth looking at it, but here there were so many contradictory miracles, that it was hard not to doubt it. Recently Richard Blue has studied Miley's paper and found a large number of obvious discrepancies as soon as you look carefully at the mass spectrum from SIMS and at the table of results. He posted this on the net. I checked by magnifying the spectrum, and agree with him. Essentially the isotopes in the spectrum have possible natural sources. Thus elements in glass such as silicon, have been transferred to the beads; and the titanium isotopes in the spectrum would be expected from the titanium electrodes, etc. In addition some isotopes have been omitted from the table of results although clearly visible in the spectrum. Overall the elements have the natural isotopic abundances contrary to the claims made. It would be polite to say it is simply sloppy work and even worse analysis. The analysis was so poor that it hardly seems worthwhile to add that the experiment was done with light water, H2O and not D2O. Dr. Preparata would not have approved! - see section 11.1. George is such a pleasant character and sounds genuinely puzzled and worried when you talk with him, that when he sits down and studies Dick's comments, I would expect him to retract. Note added later. Have been having an exchange of Email with George and also asked Richard Blue to send him his comments. Regret to say that although I tried to make the issues sharp and clear, do not feel that I have had a satisfactory answer to any question - usually it was another subject or theory that was brought up. Guess that George is now a True Believer. Also his work fulfils several of Irving Langmuir's six criteria for Pathological Science. More recently, further analysis by Richard Murray and Jim Carr have shown further major problems with the results and analysis of Miley. Perhaps the kindest thing would be to quietly ignore this work as one does Bockris's claim to transmute mercury to gold. 7. MATERIALS SCIENCE For many years the irregular and irreproducible results on excess heat and nuclear products have been explained away by saying that there are other unknown factor(s). This could be solved if only the material science of hydrogen isotopes in palladium and other metals was better understood. Further it was said that excess heat only occurred with a high D/Pd ratio (loading). Again at this conference Mike McKubre showed results indicating that a high loading, up to 0.95, had been attained but not for long, often the loading would decrease suddenly, in minutes. He declared that if only they could have high loading, and high current for a long time, then constant excess heat would be possible. This high loading hypothesis has justified a target for many workers and has attracted funding. Many groups have devoted considerable efforts to seek this holy grail or at least, to understand the road to take. This is particularly true of groups who have once claimed to find excess heat, often in large quantities, but who since then, can never repeat their early result - now they study instead material science. Some of the results are very interesting, such as the group that made a transparent cell so that they could study the grain structure on-line. But no new major result has been found. It is surprising that the people holding this philosophy have not studied the experimental results to see if they are consistent with this hypothesis. The highest loadings reported by regular cold fusion explorers is 0.96 obtained by the Senjuh et al. of the Japanese NHE group but they find no excess heat. The Los Alamos group of Tom Claytor used gas at only one atmosphere pressure so the loading was very low, about 0.5 replied Ed Storms - yet they claimed large amounts of tritium, in direct contradiction to the high loading hypothesis. Similarly the first claims of Drs. Fleischman and Pons to very large amounts of excess heat, up to a thousand times input, were obtained at various low current densities where the loading must have been very small. Later some experiments have been done at very high loadings, greater than unity, and no evidence of cold fusion was found - these very high pressures were obtained with a diamond anvil, and by ion implantation. Thus this high loading hypothesis is not supported by the totality of experiments. Let us consider another hypothesis - the "No Cold Fusion Hypothesis". Here two major results are noted. Firstly when palladium is exposed to high currents, it is found that the material changes, becoming black and cracks appear. With electrolysis, the surface becomes covered with "crud" which has been studied by several groups. This surface layer can slow deuterium ions entering or leaving the palladium. Sometimes the surface breaks off and exchange of deuterium with the outside becomes possible. Thus it is not surprising that short term effects occur which can have the appearance of excess heat bursts. In fairly careful experiments, such as those by the SRI group of Mike McKubre, such short bursts give excess heat of about 30% at that instant though the overall excess heat claimed is about 1%. Then there is the question about the stability of the calibration to one percent over a long run (this follows discussions with Mike). Secondly in the history of cold fusion, it is noticeable that when good fail-safe experimental techniques are used, excess heat is not observed. The great problem is that the cell is heated and hence the heat flow out increases and the problem is to measure this outflow. Sometimes this is done by calculation using a variety of assumptions, as Fleischman and Pons4 did, and their analysis was severely criticised by Wilson et al1. Most make some attempt to insulate the cell, but the only good technique is that used by the IMRA(Japan) group who plunge the entire experiment in a water bath and compensate the variations of the temperature in the closed cell by varying the current to a heater in the bath so as to keep the temperature of the bath constant. Thus the outside world sees only the walls of the bath which are at constant temperature - this is a fail-safe system as any errors in calculations of heat flow and balance are not important. Note that this system has been used before, e.g. by the Harwell group in one of their many experiments. 8. WHO ARE YOU? WHO PAYS YOU? In previous ICCF meetings, have often been approached by participants asking curious questions about myself. But at this meeting many asked me and I formed the impression that they believed that I was an agent of some mysterious rich organisation which was anti-Cold Fusion. And that I must be well paid to make such clear statements about the quality of the cold fusion studies reported and their inconsistencies. Usually I simply explain that I am a physicist with an interest in astrophysics. Finally was forced to explain that I have been spokesman of international collaborations for over thirty years and have just come from a meeting of our E632 collaboration at Fermilab which has eight European groups, seven US groups, two Indian groups and three Russian groups. When I retired two years ago, was given the finest present I have ever received - for 7 months before my retirement party, three friends had searched the literature and selecting only collaboration papers, some 280 of them, they listed each author - over 800 of them - and then wrote to as many as they could find and asked them to contribute something for a book to be presented. The book contains the first page of each of the 280 collaboration papers. For each co-author the number of papers with shared authorship was calculated and listed and the number of the first shared paper is given. The contribution of each co-author has been inserted on a page near that first shared paper. It is quite a book. The other point is that I love good science and dislike bad science. 9. COURT CASE - LA REPUBBLICA VERSUS DRS. PREPARATA, BRESSANI, DEL GIUDICE, FLEISCHMAN, AND PONS In 1991 the Science Editor of the Repubblica mentioned in a book review, that cold fusion was similar to scientific fraud. Drs. Preparata, Bressani and Del Giudice protested in letters but the Science Editor, Giovanni Maria Pace, was unrepentant. This allowed them to sue together with Drs. Fleischman and Pons for some $5 million. Dr. Gozzi was asked to be their expert and I was asked to help La Repubblica. This year the judges made a carefully written judgement5 which said that there was such confusion and doubts that Dr. Pace was entitled to make his statements. They particularly noted that in 1989, Dr. Pons had claimed to have a cold fusion boiler which was capable of making a cup of tea. They wrote that the plaintiffs had lost touch with reality. Costs were given against Drs. Preparata, Bressani, Del Giudice, Fleischman, and Pons. In a letter6 to Nature, Drs. Preparata and Del Giudice (why not also Dr. Bressani?) attacked Nature and "the widespread innuendo, defamation, and vituperation" they have suffered. They said they were going to appeal the court judgement. It is a remarkable letter. I replied7 to it adding some facts that had been inadvertently omitted and ended by mentioning that ICCF-6 would be held and "Those attending will be delighted if Pons can bring his boiler and use it to make us all a cup of tea." 10. NEXT ICCF CONFERENCE It was previously suggested in the journal "Infinite Energy" that the next international cold fusion conference, ICCF-7, would be held in the autumn-winter of 1997 in the US. However at ICCF-6 it was announced it would be held in the spring of 1998 in Vancouver (the losing bidder was Italy). It was not said who would sponsor the next conference. From conversations with people who did not wish to be quoted, there did not seem to be any rush by the Japanese agencies who had funded this present conference, to fund the next. It was said that the funding will be basically from ENECO - the business organisation who hold most of the cold fusion patents or patent claims, of Fleischmann, Pons and others and who advertise themselves as "an intellectual property clearing house. Will the meeting be early enough in the spring for some skiing? Hope a cup of tea will be provided. 11. SHORT NOTES 11.1 Preparata Does an Experiment! Dr. Preparata continues to be a very firm Believer in cold fusion. Apparently not discouraged by strong criticism8 of his theory of cold fusion at ICCF-4 by Drs. M. Rabbinowich, Y.E. Kim, V.A. Chechin, and V.A. Tsarev, he and some theoretical colleagues have set up a small experiment. He described it and said they had suffered from a power failure - I tried to tell him that was normal, but he brushed aside my comment and seemed unaware that experimentalists take precautions against power failures. The experiment was a typical True Believers one of an electrolytic cell and a minuscule palladium cathode and D2O. It was poorly designed for calorimetry and was quite different from the MITI/NEDO and IMRA(Japan) designs which measure all heat flows and do not rely on doubtful assumptions. Dr. Preparata claimed9 "Remarkable quantities of excess heat" of some 200%. He said it was related to the g-phase of Pd-D, a phase which others cannot find. When I asked if his theory predicted excess heat also with light water, H2O, he replied it did not. It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on the many True Believers who claim to do find cold fusion effects with H20. 11.2 London Theatre Play "Blinded by the Sun" The Journal Nature does not often review theatre plays, but it reviewed two in its Sept. 1996 edition. One was "Blinded by the Sun" and as one might guess it is about a scientist with a good reputation who succeeds in obtaining hydrogen from water and it will solve all the World's energy problems. He decides it is so important he will not wait for peer review and publication in a scientific journal, but instead will first hold a press conference - "sounds familiar" as Nature comments. The play is by an experienced playwright, Stephen Poliakoff, and is well-recommended by non-scientific critics - when I went all the seats were sold and I had to wait an hour for a returned ticket - but is was well worth it. The theatre programme is interesting as it contains a long article by David Jones who writes the marvellous Daedalus column in Nature. He compares the events in "Blinded By the Sun" with "the recent famous scientific scandal which came close to fraud in its pure form" - he writes carefully to avoid being sued! I would recommend it as a good play about the interplay of scientists confronted with a difficult situation. When I told Martin about it he said he would definitely go. 11.3 Second International Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Conference, ILENR2 This is an impressive title and no one would expect that it was a cold fusion conference organised by John Bockris of Texas A&M. Indeed the Texas A&M authorities did not realise it and last year approved holding the first meeting on campus. However when a second meeting was proposed this year, "a 12-person Chemistry Department advisory committee voted unanimously to ban the meeting" according to "Infinite Energy", so it was held off campus. 11.4 Glow Discharge and Sputtering experiments There are a number of experiments which do not use electrolysis or gas pressure as Fleischman and Pons and Steve Jones initially proposed. In particular there are many which use electrical discharges. Unfortunately it is not clear whether they are zero-energy (cold) fusion or are intermediate energy (lukewarm) fusion. The point is that in so-called glow discharges, quite high energies can be occasionally created by sparking and as Dr. Kasagi showed deuteron ions of about 3000 eV can cause nuclear interactions giving low levels of nuclear products such as n, p, t, and 3He. An example of this is the work of Kucherov et al. from the "Luch" labs near Moscow, which made such an impression on some at ICCF-3 in Nagoya. Hence it would be unsafe to consider experimental claims to have observed such levels until a proper detailed study has been made of the energy distribution of the incident ions. 11.5. About the Conference The conference was held in the Apex Toya hotel which is about 2 hours from Sapporo in the northern island of Hokkaido. It is high on a ridge with ski lifts going down to the Pacific on one side and on the other side are ski lifts going down to a large volcanic crater lake with steep islands in it. Must be nice in good weather but it finally snowed towards the end of the week. The hotel was very luxurious and the Chinese restaurant was one of the best I have visited. The only sponsor named was the government organisation, New Energy and Industrial Development Organisation, NEDO. However others contributed, for example, heard of a major Japanese car company looking after four Russian delegates. Participants generally considered it by far the most scientific conference in the series. There were three probable reasons. Firstly, out of the 50 talks, there were only two theory talks (by Chubb and Chubb, and by Kim et al. of Purdue University) and no theory summary talk. Secondly, major Japanese laboratories presented serious experiments with carefully controls and calibrations - and they gave believable errors. Thirdly, the conference Chairman, Prof. Okamoto said that some 40 papers had been excluded (not quite enough). Media interest has declined steadily - from the feverish atmosphere with official and private press conferences of the first meeting - this time was not aware of any outside media interest whatsoever. Analysis of the official lists (slightly different from reality) gave 170 participants, 50 talks, and 77 posters - i.e. 170-50-77. The corresponding numbers for the major countries are; Japan 91-22-19; USA 32-11-16; Italy 15-6-4; Russia 8-4-15; China 4-1-15; France 6 -2-1 11.6. CETI - The Patterson Power Cell Dr. James Patterson and Jim Redding have been making large claims of continuous excess heat from the Patterson power cells and they have set up a company called Clean Energy Technologies Inc., CETI, to sell them. Their cells have been propagandised by Mr. Rothwell on the net but he withdrew after he was severely attacked (e.g. he said it could produce for hours 1300 watts out for one watt in, but it was pointed out that this would boil all the water away and end the experiment quickly, so he changed his story). There should have been a CETI session, but this disappeared apart from a talk by George Miley mainly about transmutations. After ICCF-6, Gene Mallove posted that CETI had a stall at the American Nuclear Society meeting in Washington DC on the 11 and 12 November. They were selling kits at $3,750 each and claimed to have sold 40 of which some 15 were sold at the ANS meeting!. They supplied a number of things including two research cells and a monthly newsletter edited by Prof. George Miley and mandatory on-site training in the use of the cells at the University of Illinois - suppose the university approves? At their stall, they had a cell running at 5 watts out for 1.5 watt in - much more modest than their previous claims of over 1000 watts out - are they going backwards? They also claim to reduce the radioactivity of heavy elements such as uranium or thorium by "conservatively" 50%. Amazing! Apparently people are very interested in Miley's transmutation paper (according to Mallove) and he has been invited to present his latest work at the American Nuclear Society meeting in June. Mallove says the US Patent Office has allowed them a patent (suspect it does not contain the words "cold fusion"). Mallove writes "according to CEO Redding" an organisation has already purchased the 'exclusive world rights' to licence and sub-licence this patent. The organisation has paid CETI $1 million ($1,000,000) for this. The organisation's identity, for now, is private'. Well we have already heard this before about mysterious buyers putting up a million - think the last was hinted to be Motorola but equally discrete word was that Motorola was not putting up a million dollars. Seems like a case that might interest the Regulators. 11.7 The Siena Bomb In January 1994, the Italian press was full of a great discovery at Siena of a cell that produced 50 watts by cold fusion - and this was followed by a paper10 by S. Focardi et al. . They heated a nickel wire to about 500 C in a hydrogen gas and got out much more heat than they would have expected - the calibration being done in vacuum. I have suggested many times to Prof. Focardi that it was a question of either fusion or of heat transfer - for hydrogen gas is the second best material to transfer heat. A quick way to settle the matter would be to run the experiment with helium gas which transfers heat efficiently but cannot give fusion. Despite urgings, they have always refused to do this simple but decisive experiment. Two things have happened since - they have been funded by a major company and they have stopped talking to any audience which might ask probing questions, though I did manage to attend one. It was most disappointing as it hardly discussed the experiment or the results - it was mainly a superficial account of the World's energy problems. They did not talk at ICCF-5 and did not appear at ICCF-6. Although Prof. Focardi has been an experienced scientific administrator for many years, he seems to have lost touch with experimental Science and its code of conduct. See Post-script below for later official information. 11.8 Tom Droege Recently some people have been asking what has become of Tom Droege who made a good reputation for himself by carry out experiments to check cold fusion claims and reporting the results on-line. As he used good experimental technique and scientific methods, he could not verify any claim mentioned. When I was at the E632 Collaboration meeting in Fermilab, met Tom. He is very busy working on cosmic ray detectors for Jim Cronin's big experiment - has developed some interesting new techniques. He was interested in my new theory for the production of ultra-high energy cosmic rays, > 1019 eV, from micro-quasers in our galaxy which were discovered by Felix Mirabel. Tom has put cold fusion completely behind him. 11.9 Macmillan Encyclopaedia of Physics Have just received the four handsomely bound volumes of the new Macmillan Encyclopaedia of Physics. Some might be interested in the section on "Error and Fraud", pages 316 to 320. 12. Please Can I Have a Cup of Tea? In July 1989, Stan Pons gave an interview11 where he is photographed with a cell that he claims is a boiler of which he said "It wouldn't take care of the family's electrical needs, but it certainly could provide them with hot water year round" and later "Simply put, in its current state it could provide boiling water for a cup of tea." Now seven years later we went to ICCF-6 hoping for this boiler to provide us with a cup of tea, but there still seems to be a problem - wonder what it could possibly be? 13. CONCLUSIONS 1. Japanese government and major Japanese companies have done good and careful experiments to confirm and to test cold fusion. Their experiments show no evidence in favour of cold fusion even though they had the advice of the leading cold fusion experimentalists. 2. In all experiments except those performed by cold fusion Believers in metals, the branching ratios of n, p, t, 3He are equal and 107 times larger that for 4He. The True Believers find many different ratios often disagreeing, and say that the 4He channel is dominant instead of being minor. Now new and careful experimentalists with deuteron beams fired into metals, find the normal branching ratios. Further they studied the variation of rate down to very low energies and found no anomaly such as the very sharp rise in the rate at low energies which would be required by cold fusion claims. Note these experiments were carried out in the metal lattice itself. 3. All this strong evidence against cold fusion claims, seem to have had little effect on the summary speakers who kept smiling. 4. In the past there have been weak claims of transmutation of elements. At ICCF-6 George Miley made extravagant claims that from nickel he can produce many elements all the way up to lead. Critics say that his data can be interpreted without transmutations. 5. Considerable data has been obtained on the structure of materials. It is noted that with time the metal can have cracks and be covered with crud. This may help to explain why after long periods, bursts of excess heat are observed - this in experiments which are not well-designed and which do not have an outer bath maintained at a constant temperature. 6. In the law suit brought against La Repubblica by Fleischman, Pons, Preparata, Bressani and Del Giudice, the judges refused it and awarded costs against the five. They are appealing 7. Despite all the failures to reproduce cold fusion in careful experiments by Japanese researchers, a seventh conference is planned for 1998 - but probably with little Japanese money. POST-SCRIPTS; (1) "SIENA BOMB" NOT CONFIRMED BY NEW EXPERIMENT (2) OTHER WRONG RESULTS DISPROVED - AXIONS, H/D RATIO The claim by Focardi et al.10, to have maintain 44 Watts of power production over 24 days, and which they claim to have repeated, has been checked by an independent group. This was the LAA project who performed their experiment on the CERN site - note they are independent of CERN, also I was not involved. This major paper by E. Cerron-Zeballos et al., will be published in Nuovo Cimento soon - it was submitted 3 July 1996 and approved 18 November 1996. The Abstract reads; "Anomalous heat production in a nickel rod loaded with hydrogen has been reported by Focardi et al. (Nuovo Cimento A, 107(1994)163). We have investigated this phenomenon by repeating the experiment. We found the results to be consistent with our observations. : namely we measured higher temperatures for the same input power when hydrogen is absorbed during a heating cycle. Nevertheless this temperature rise does not appear to correspond to an increase an heat production. We have added a temperature sensor to the container of the experiment. The temperature of the container follows the same temperature with input power curve irrespective of whether there is an anomalous absorption of hydrogen or not: therefore we have no evidence of that this temperature increase corresponds to another source of heat. In conclusion, we have observed all the effects discovered by Focardi et al., but our results imply that there is no production of power associated with the absorption of hydrogen by nuclei." Thus there is are strange effects, but the experiment is complicated and not easy to interpret. Essentially they say, in a very polite way, that the interpretation of Focardi et al. was rather enthusiastic. This confirmed what I had been trying to suggest to Prof. Focardi, that before having press conferences and arrangements with industry, he should repeat the experiments with more instrumentation and should vary the conditions to try and prove himself wrong, e.g. by trying helium. There is no blame for making a mistake - the question is how you react afterwards. This is beautifully illustrated in the current 10th January issue of Science in two cases described. Gary Taubes (author of Bad Science - the Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion" recounts the history of the claim to have discovered the axion at Darmstadt. In 1969 Walter Greiner proposed that when two heavy ions e.g. Uranium, touched they could form a "quasi-atom" which could generate enormous electrical charge which could produce electrons and positrons giving new particles. In 1983 -87 two experiments observed peaks in the positron spectrum of six standard deviations which was sometimes interpreted as being axions which are a serious candidate for the missing Dark Matter of the Universe. However the results were not reproducible and the position of the peaks shifted. Jack Greenberg of Yale and Tom Cowen of Livermore strongly supported the existence of peaks and criticised those who disagreed. It was said that the conditions had to be just right to observe the peaks, and if you did not find them, it was because your target was too thick or the energy resolution was not quite right. Berndt Muller at a nuclear physics meeting in 1986, compared the work and ideas with Irving Langmuir's six criteria of Pathological Science and showed great similarity - he was not popular with some. Now three major second generation experiments have been done with ten times the statistics and almost all the authors consider that the erratic peaks are not real. Rudi Ganz of Illinois, showed that by making careful selections (cuts) of random data, it was possible to generate similar peaks. However Greenberg and Cowan insist that the peaks are real and even that if they re-analyse the data, they can find peaks. - they have become True Believers. Observers of Cold Fusion may find some similarity between this case history and that of cold fusion. In contrast is the case of the Hydrogen to deuterium ratio, H/D. measured by astrophysicists. The H/D ratio is a crucial ingredient of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis which is a key evidence in favour of the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe. This ratio was for long thought to be 10-5 and this allowed the numbers of neutrino families to be about three as found by LEP (2.998 +/- 0.004). Then measurements from the Keck telescope gave a ratio ten times higher, 10-4. Many measurements were made and they formed two groups about the two values. At the biannual Texas conference on astrophysics held in Chicago in December which I attended. David Tytler gave a new long analysis of his and the other results which showed that the higher ratio values came from a subtle mis-interpretation of the data and 10-5 was the best value. One of the leaders of the higher ratio, Craig Hogan, was scheduled to speak before the new analysis was known. It was a difficult situation, but fortunately Craig is an excellent astrophysicist as well as a responsible scientist and he acknowledged that David Tytler's data were "clearly superior and his arguments were real. How different from cold fusion - here there is no True Believer to continue arguing. So this is the message for people like Profs. Focardi, Miley etc. - it is no crime to make a mistake, but it is irresponsible to continue when the evidence against accumulates - a good responsible scientist tries to prove himself wrong. In the same issue of Science, there is third analysis which may be wrong, (though the experiment is correct) but as I am a member of the small, though growing minority who thinks so, it is better to wait. References 1. J. Wilson et al., J. Electroanal. Chem. 332(1992)1. 2. S. Isagawa and Y. Kanda, KEK preprint 96-138 (1996). 3. S, Isagawa, Vacuum, 47(1996)497-499. 4. M. Fleischman and S. Pons, J. Electroanal. Chem. 261(1989)1, 5. Nature, 363(1993)107. 6. E. Del Giudice and G. Preparata, Nature 381 (1996) 729. 7. D.R.O. Morrison, Nature 382(1996)572. 8. M. Rabbinowich, . Kim, V.A. Chechin, and V.A. Tsarev, ICCF-4, pages 3 to 13, 1993. 9. G. Preparata, J. Electroanal. Chem. 411(1996)9-18. 10. S. Focardi, R. Habel and F. Piantelli, Il Nuovo Cimento, 1897(1994)163-167. 11. Deseret News, Salt Lake City, 8 July 1989. APPENDIX - was Cold Fusion Update No. 11 Neutron Claims of Bressani et al. Critically Examined. B5. Bressani et al., Turin The group of Tullio Bressani et al. in Turin, has published1 an important result based on experiments where they claimed to have observed neutrons emitted from Titanium in deuterium gas. What was particularly striking about these measurements, was their claim that the energy of each neutron was measured and a peak was obtained near the value of 2.45 MeV which would be expected if the neutrons came directly from the reaction; d + d ---> 3He + n(2.45 MeV) Previously F&P in their 23 March 1989 press conference and in the original version of their first paper, claimed that they had established this as they observe a sharp peak of gammas at 2.5 MeV from the reaction of these energetic neutrons with the protons of the water n(2.45 MeV) + p ---> d + g(2.5 MeV) But it was pointed out to Fleischmann at Harwell on the 28th March 1989, that this was impossible as the neutrons slowed down before interacting and were thermal when captured by the protons of the water, so that the reaction should have been; n(0 MeV) + p ---> d + g(2.2 MeV) giving the well-known gammas of 2.2 MeV. Two days later at Lausanne, Fleischmann showed almost the same graph of gammas with the peak at 2.2 MeV - this disturbing change is discussed in detail in Frank Close's book2. It can be seen why the result of Bressani et al. excited such great interest. In 1991 Bressani et al.3 used 3 grams of Titanium shavings which they temperature cycled from 25 C up to 540 C, called "UP", and back down again, "DOWN". A very broad peak can be observed centred near 2.45 MeV which they say is about 2.5 standard deviations. They say no enhancement was observed with hydrogen instead of deuterium, but they do not use the hydrogen data as a background as might be expected, but surprisingly use the "DOWN" distribution. No real explanation for this choice is given except that the shape is better - there are problems with the background which is mainly instrumental and not natural. The loading was D/Ti = 0.32 which is surprisingly low and almost all True Believers declare that to obtain cold fusion effects one needs the loading to be > 0.8, or > 0.9, or >1.0. A more complete experiment was performed in 1992 and reported1 by Botta et al. Three experiments were performed, Ti with D2 gas, Ti with H2 gas and Pd with D2 gas for times of 13933, 4631 and 2820 minutes (a total time of less than 15 days - short for such a crucial experiment). This time the background was taken as the hydrogen run. It is claimed that all the events above background in the bin from 2 to 3 MeV are neutrons corresponding to a 2.45 MeV peak and a significance of 5 standard deviations claimed - this statement is really sensational - clean, convincing statistically significant evidence for cold fusion! However there is a major problem for there is not a clear peak at 2.45 MeV as claimed, but rather a sharp rise at 2 MeV and a slow fall-off above the 2 to 3 MeV bin going out to 6 MeV. It is essential to understand the asymmetry and the origin of these high energy neutrons before any claim can be made for a single symmetric peak of 2.45 MeV neutrons. If one takes fig. 2 of the ICCF-3 paper, then measuring this figure, the statistical significance of the excess in the bins, 2 to 3, 3 to 4, 4 to 5, and 5 to 6 MeV is resp., about 5.3, 4.7, 3.7, and 2.8 standard deviations. Thus anyone who wishes to claim that the excess counts in the 2 to 3 MeV bin means something, has also to explain the overall more significant excesses in the neighbouring bins (Note their resolution, FWHM was about 1 MeV). It must be concluded that any claim to observe 2.45 MeV neutrons is not justified. At ICCF5, Tullio4 presented their results entitled "Search for 4He production in Pd/D2 systems in a Gas phase". He said they decided to improve their experiment but rather than increase the number of neutron detectors, they decided to improve their helium detector system since there had been several claims of large amounts of helium, and in particular the amount of helium was sometimes almost commensurate with being the sole source of excess heat (e.g. Miles). He said that most of their experiments gave no helium but perhaps there were indications of helium in one experiment4. They now found no neutrons of 2.45 MeV, more precisely, the rate was less than 0.4 neutrons/second per gram of Pd at the one sigma level. They consider this result to be compatible with their earlier result of 0.02 +/- 0.01 neutrons/s/gram of Pd because the older experiment used 54 grams of Pd while the new one used 0.5 grams. Well. maybe. There is a major assumption here that the rate depends on the volume of the palladium. And if one has made this assumption, then why reduce the volume of palladium by a factor of 100 since one expects then to reduce the neutron signal also by a factor of 100? To use 0.5 grams is poor experimental design. Very often scientists who have to report that an improved experiment does not explain their earlier published results, tend not to announce them too loudly, so it was very commendable of Tullio to say in public that their important new experiment did not confirm their claim of neutrons of 2.45 MeV which had made such an impression previously. It must have been difficult for him as he was, with Preparata and Del Giudice, author of a theory of cold fusion5 which was presented again at this ICCF-5 conference by Dr. Preparata; also after La Repubblica wrote that cold fusion was scientific fraud, he, together with Drs. Fleischmann, Pons, Preparata and Del Guidice, sued the newspaper for some $5million6 but had costs awarded against them7. It is the hallmark of a serious scientist to present all results even if they do not confirm previous results. In this Tullio resembles most of the scientists who had been very strongly presenting data which they claimed showed evidence for the existence of a new neutrino of 17 keV mass. Some of them had been attacking those experiments which did not find it (just as some True Believers in cold fusion attack the Harwell, MIT and CalTech experiments). It may be remembered8 that when the weight of null experiments against the proposed new 17 keV neutrino became too great, they realised that their own experiments must be mistaken and hence carefully checked them for error and sometimes even repeated their experiments, to try to find the error and to prove themselves wrong - this is how good scientists follow the scientific method they try to prove themselves wrong. The question of whether neutrons of 2.45 MeV are emitted or not, is a very important one. It is to be hoped that the Turin group will also do a good decisive experiment on this subject and it is to be expected that the neutron system will be improved, that the volume of metal will be increased by a factor of 100 and not reduced by a factor of 100, and the run will be long enough, some months, to give good statistics with D2 and H2. Also with their very low efficiency of 2.5x10-4, the counting rates are very low, so it would be wise to perform the experiment deep underground. Finally it is essential that an explanation is given of the asymmetric shape of the neutron spectrum, explaining or removing the large number of high energy neutrons so that a clear peak at 2.45 MeV can be seen - if it exists. Below is given a more detailed discussion of the work and analysis of the Turin group since Tullio has stated4 "Since the start of the debate about the occurrence of D-D fusion phenomena in the lattice of some metals like Pd and Ti, the detection of neutrons, in particular 2.5 MeV neutrons, has been considered the most reliable signature of the effect" Description of Experiments and Analysis of the Turin Group of Bressani et al. The technique that allows the energy of the neutron to be measured at emission, is to use two sets of scintillation counters and time of flight. The neutron scatters in the first set giving a "start" signal, and the "stop" signal is given by the second set. However the price to be paid is low efficiency, measured to be 2.5x10-4. Thus any counting rate quoted, has to be multiplied by this small number to find out the actual counting rate per gram of metal. As the amount of metal is small, the counting rates are very low so this must be considered a difficult low-counting experiment of the type that should best be performed deep underground. Three sets of runs have been made. 1991. Deuterium gas was used with 3 grams of Titanium shavings. The loading ratio, D/Ti atoms, was only 0.32 which is very low - one can obtain 1.8 fairly easily with a higher D2 gas pressure. Generally True Believers say that the reason null results are obtained is because the loading was too low. However a signal of about 2.5 standard deviations was claimed. This would correspond to 1.3 +/- 0.5 neutrons/second/gram of Ti. However the analysis was rather curious and merits study. Normally one compares the energy spectrum obtained with deuterium with that from hydrogen(as blank) and hopes to find a peak near 2.45 MeV, but the paper3 says that the event distribution showed some systematic effect. Instead the energy spectrum during the temperature increases, "UP", was compared with that during the decreases, "DOWN", and on subtracting, a broad peak near 2.5 MeV was shown. However no justification of such a curious choice of background was made since one might have expected the deuterium concentrations to be somewhat similar during the UP and the DOWN phases. 1992. Experiments were performed with 20 grams of titanium, this time in the form of a sponge which greatly increased the surface area, and with 54 grams of palladium in the form of small cylinders. The loading, D/Ti, was 0.7 for 20% of the data and the standard 1.8 for the other 80%. For the palladium, the loading was about 0.7 - it is surprising that they tried to run with such a low loading as most True Believers, e.g. Mike McKubre, insist that with palladium, high loadings, above about 0.9, are necessary. This time the raw data are given for H and for D resp., in fig 3 and 4 of ref. 1. There are less than a 100 counts in the 0 to 1 MeV bin but about 3600 counts in both cases for the neighbouring 1 to 2 MeV bin - this is hard to understand if the resolution has a FWHM of 1 MeV. Subtracting the two graphs, fig. 5a, gives about 380 counts in the 2 to 3 MeV bin but a small negative number of counts in the 1 to 2 MeV bin - it is again hard to understand why there is not more counts in the 1 to 2 MeV bin from smearing when the resolution is 1 MeV Full Width at Half Maximum, FWHM. The subsequent bins give about 280, 180, 140, and 60 counts for 3 to 4, 4 to 5, 5 to 6, and 6 to 7 MeV bins resp., which are too high numbers for a single peak at 2.45 MeV and a resolution of about +/- 0.5 MeV. Clearly there is something wrong with this analysis or with the data. The above analysis gave 3.9 sigma. A second analysis gave 5.3 sigma. The neutron emission was given as 0.11 +/- 0.03 neutrons/second /gram of titanium, suggesting a 3.7 sigma result, so the first analysis seems preferred. It is noted that this rate is a factor of ten less than the rate of 1.3 +/- 0.5 n/s/g found in 1991 and this is explained as being due to the titanium having a greater surface area as it was now in the form of a sponge - but this reason seems unreasonable as the rate is quoted as per gram of titanium and hence the rate with the Ti sponge should have been much higher not ten times lower. If the rate had been quoted per unit of surface, the discrepancy would have been greater, not less. Yet the authors also say that a bulk phenomenon is preferred by the theoretical model of Bressani, Del Guidice and Preparata5 - but these data seem to contradict this model? Could the model possibly be incorrect? It may be noted that the 1991 analysis technique of subtracting DOWN from UP was not used - not surprisingly since it is shown that for the 80% of runs with a loading D/Ti of 1.8, the deuterium was shown to stay in the metal for the whole cycle so that such a subtraction would be inappropriate. With the 54 grams of palladium, only a small signal of 70 counts was observed which would correspond to 2 sigma - it would give a rate of 0.02 +/- 0.01 neutrons/s/gram. 1995. At ICCF5, Tullio Bressani reported4 on an experiment using the same neutron detector, using 0.5 grams of palladium and said that the emission rate of 2.5 MeV neutrons was less than 0.4 n/s/gram. He later explained that this was fully consistent with the 1992 result of 0.02 +/- 0.01 n/s/g which was obtained using 54 grams of palladium. It is correct that they are not inconsistent, but it does not explain why if the first result was inconclusive, it was decided to run with the mass of palladium reduced by a factor of 100? Normally to solve a low counting problem, one increases the mass of palladium substantially, not decreases it. Conclusions Overall, there are so many internal contradictions that it is hard to believe that neutrons of 2.45 MeV have been observed. It would be good Science if each of the authors were to revisit these papers. References for Appendix only. 1. Botta et al. NC 105A(1992)1663 and in ICCF3, page 433 2. F. Close, "Too Hot to Handle" 3. Bressani et al., Nuovo Cimento 104A(1991)1413 4. T. Bressani, ICCF-5, Monte Carlo, 1995 5. T. Bressani, G. Del Giudice, and G. Preparata, Nuovo Cim. 101A(1989)865 and G. Preparata, ICCF-5, page 65 (1995). 6. Nature 363(1993)107. 7. Nature 380(1996) 8. D.R.O. Morrison, Nature 366(1993)29-32. (c) Douglas R.O. Morrison. Address for correspondance; CH-1296 Coppet, Switzerland Tel. 41 22 767 35 32 drom vxcern.cern.ch Fax 41 22 767 90 75. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 00:42:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA29627; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:32:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:32:42 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 23:33:49 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"uWX463.0.oE7.eg8uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3478 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >When you say "absorbed from the exciter coil...", do you mean "by the >water"? And if so, then what happens to the water if you just stay at the >resonance frequency? Surely it can't keep on absorbing energy forever? >Something has to happen to it. What form does it take? >[snip] > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk It takes the form of the precession of (some) of the nucleii (protons) which are aligned with the major (earth) magnetic field. Yes, only a very limited amount of energy is absorbed and then released to the exciter coil as the major field changes past the resonance point. Leavbing it at resonance achieves nothing more than broadcasting at the resonant frequency. Odd, but you do then have a "nuclear transmitter". You can also get a similar effect by using a permanent magnet on the y axis, an exciter coil on the x axis, and a pickup coil on the z axis. Vary the excitation frequency about the resonance point. Energy is absorbed from the exciter coil as the peak is approached, and absorbed by both the exciter coil and pickup coil when the excitation frequency moves away from resonance. If you can tune the pickup coil receiver, and scan across a frequency range on both the oscillator and pickup amp, you can do NMR spectra. Yes, the effects are small but readily measured and calibrated - even though all that is somewhat of an art. There must be *somebody* on this list familiar with NMR that can answer your questions much better. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 03:07:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA18146; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:39:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:39:30 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:39:48 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"IJ0XT2.0.XQ4.k7fto" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3440 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:12 AM 1/16/97, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: [snip] >The Standard Theory >says that e- should be made of quarks, and most, if not all of them have >been found. I don't know what the Standard Theory says about the >'pointness' of electrons nor where Koltick's work fits into all of this. > >Michael J. Schaffer Let me properly qualify my remarks (unusual) by saying I am not a physicist a particle physicst, or physicist at all. However, I am fairly sure that the leptons (the electron, muon, tauon and related neutinos: electron-neutrino, muon-neutrino, and tauon-neutrino) are fundamental particles, as are the messenger particles of the four fources: photon (electromagnetism), graviton (gravity), weak (W+-, Z), and strong (gluon). The hadrons are made of quark-anit-quark pairs (the mesons) or in trios of quarks (the baryons, which include the proton and neutron). As far as I know, quarks are held together by gluons carrying the strong (color) force. Interactions of leptons and quarks (weak transmutations) require the W or Z messenger interaction. Having the space about fundamental particles filled with borrowed energy (virtual particles) helps make more sense (to me anyway) of the famous Feynman diagram in that if space is filled with stuff the messenger particles don't have to be endowed with some clarivoyant power to know when there is an approaching particle, i.e. when to jump into the act and do the force exchange. An interresting question: if electrons are clouds, what are orbitals? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 03:17:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA12862; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 03:07:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 03:07:20 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 05:06:13 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701181106.FAA26493 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Charge clusters - Schaffer Resent-Message-ID: <"7oXwW1.0.b83.TxAuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3479 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:50 PM 1/17/97 -0800, Mike S wrote: >Given the pressure and mutual repulsion of the electrons, what is the >claimed force that holds these clusters together? The Casimir force. When the electrons get close together in space as they do just off tip of the cathode during a spark, Puthoff theorizes that they can shield out the ZPF and thus experience a compressive force just like the Casimir plates are pushed together by the ZPF. This compressive force varies more-or-less as 1/r^4 but the Coulomb repulsion varies as 1/r^2. Thus there is expected to be a critical radius of this electron cloud below which it "snaps" down into a tight ball or cylinder or something. Despite the common lore about these charge clusters, preached mainly by Shoulders, I do not know of any definitive replication experiments that show that they even exist. On the other hand, I have studied Shoulders' work and he made some VERY convincing demonstrations... - Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com (email) http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 06:28:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA09504; Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:52:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:52:03 -0800 X-Sender: josephnewman earthlink.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:52:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Speaking of Torriods/Spirals/Gryons .... Resent-Message-ID: <"pFdT1.0.IK2.kP-to" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3464 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>In playing with the diamagnetic water dimple, I notice that viewing the >>reflected light directly will reveal that certain dust motes collect in >>the dimple, repel each other and form small arrays, and refuse to budge >>when breathed upon. Could be meteoric dust. Another neat kid's science >>demonstration if so! >Bill, > > Instead of vortices being generated, these magnetic fields/superconducting >fields may be generating *torriod* shaped movements in the liquid medium, >similar to the experiments performed by Gary Hawkins with his "speaker and >beads" arrangement. This also sounds similar to the oscillon phenomena >experiments, although I haven't read anything specific about those >experiments other than what has been posted to Vortex-l. >-Knuke Evan Soule' wrote: > Now, as my interpretation of what I believe Joseph Newman would say: 'the > input voltage catalytically causes the atoms of the copper coil to become > aligned and to therefore "release" their gyroscopic particles beyond the > boundaries of the individual copper atoms. And the greater the number of > copper atoms in the system's configuration (coil) the greater the (kinetic) > release of gyroscopic particles (Gyrons) to form the resultant magnetic > field.' Robert Matherne writes: No problem here. If those gyros are tiny vortices of energy that are like tiny tornadoes spun off of a big tornado due to a crosswind (gross analogy), then we have begun to bridge the gap of explaining how mass can be turned into energy by a magnetic field. It's not mass coming off the copper atoms, but energy vortices that flow in a toroidal shape out one side of the coil of wire and into the other side. Oh, and by the way: just like every magnetic field is a toroidal (donut) shape, so is every gyroscopic particle. That was a new insight that came to me since our last post. It's toroids all the way down. That's why when you place one bar magnetic on top of another it becomes one magnetic field. The torus just continues out the end of the top magnet into the bottom of the bottom magnet. A tornado on top of another tornado becomes one big tornado. Evan Soule': > Regarding your discussion of the composition of the gyroscopic particle: > for me, this represents a "next frontier" of knowledge regarding Joe's > Theory. Robert Matherne: Yes, exactly why I wanted you to hear it first. Evan Soule': > Bobby, bearing in mind Ehrenhaft's microphotographs re his photophoresis > experiments (which I believe you've seen) ..... one hypothesis I've had Robert Matherne: I'll need some refresher on that. > concerning the 'structure' of the gyroscopic particle is that it could be > mechanically conceived as "an infinite regression of spirals." While the Robert Matherne: You started me thinking of spirals and that solved another problem for me. It's like a tornado coming out of the toroid shape on one side and going into it on the other side. It's like the whitewall tire in my first metaphor was rotating as the whitewalls flowed into the center of the tire and back out the other side. That would create the spiraling effect and the gyroscopic effect, as well! I was well aware when I first stated the concept that there was nothing necessarily gyroscopic, but now, thanks to you, there is. Evan Soule': > An alternative(?) view is that, as Einstein stated mass and energy's > equivalence, they are indeed one and the same. The concept of "mass" and > the concept of "energy" exists in _our_ minds for _our_ cognitive benefit. > From the 'universe's perspective', there is simply 'masergy' which could > mechanically consist of such an infinite regression of such 'masergies' > tracing out trajectories of spirals within spirals..... Robert Matherne: The quantum facts indicates exactly that must be the case. There is no mass, only energy that we have called mass for convenience of discussion, up until now. What is it that moves in these spiraling donuts? I haven't the foggiest notion, well that's not true, I have only a foggy notion. Let's call them imaginary donuts, to indicate where our model stops. Evan Soule': > For me, the above are hypothetical conjectures ... I simply don't know. > But what I DO KNOW is that we (as a species) can create a useful > operational construct --- the Gryon (setting aside for the moment ITS > structure) --- to build a technology which can harness > its mechanical motions to benefit humanity. spinning away, I remain Bobby -- Copyright 1996 by Robert Matherne, Physicist New Orleans, Louisiana From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 10:32:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA04626; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:11:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:11:46 -0800 Message-ID: <32E0F1BF.CE2 lcia.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:32 -0500 From: HAMILTON lcia.com (DANNY HAMILTON) Reply-To: hamilton lcia.com Organization: The Hamilton Group X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aitGE1.0.c51.w7Huo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3482 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > >On 16 Jan 1997, Eugene Mallove wrote: > > > >> "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields [snip] > Horace Heffner Interesting patterns, "It seems that nature not only abhors a vacuum, it doesn't allow one to exist. It is not just that space is filled with cosmic dust. According to quantum theory, the vacuum we once thought was empty actually seethes with energy, constantly creating pairs of "virtual particles" -- matter and antimatter -- that jump out and flash their tails for an instant before annihilating one another and returning to the void. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle guarantees that this energy is untappable: a particle's timespan and energy, like its position and momentum, are reciprocally related. So any particles that the vacuum creates will be either so low in energy or so short in duration that they will go undetected." From: http://www.santafe.edu/~johnson/fire.ch3.html Danny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 10:36:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA02672; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:03:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:03:51 -0800 Message-Id: <199701181700.JAA29413 mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 09:00:13 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Charge clusters - Little Reply-to: rgeorge hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"81EnY2.0.wc.51Huo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3480 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I agree Shoulder's work looks neat but as you point out no one else has seen it. It seems that Shoulder's work/apparatus is neither expensive nor difficult to reproduce. Have you tried to replicate it and failed? You and Hal of all people ought to have the know how. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 10:36:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA03888; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:08:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:08:22 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970118160245.008ddac8 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:02:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"Al-ax.0.nv.j4Huo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3481 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:39 AM 1/16/97 -0900, Horace Heffner wrote: >Let me properly qualify my remarks (unusual) by saying I am not a physicist >a particle physicst, or physicist at all. However, I am fairly sure that >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > Given your knowledge of physics as expressed in Vortex-L and the large number of ideas proposed here in the area of physics, you are a physicist. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 11:09:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA13313; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:47:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:47:00 -0800 Message-Id: <199701181824.LAA10596 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Dan York" , "Non-Moderated WhiteGold" , "Moderated WhiteGold" , "Larry Wharton" , "Vortex-L" , "Jim Uban" , "Joe Thomas" , "Sandra [IBM System] Stehl's" , "William Stehl" , "Omega Technologies, L.L.C." , "Barry Merriman" , "Michael Mandeville" , "Alan Loiben" , "Scott Little" , "Jon Horton" , "Joe Champion" , "David Econopouly" , "Anthony Joe Champion" , "Cohen Cenright" , "Bear" , "John O'M Bockris" , "Bill Beaty" , "\"Alchemy discussion group\" <" Subject: New Site -- http://www.transmutation.com Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:37:37 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"C9NE_.0.-C3.yeHuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3483 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a general announcement to all who have bookmarks to my previous page. Reference links will appear for the next six months from: http://www.netzone.com/~discpub ==> http://www.transmutation.com This new site contains the basic papers as before with many new additions, but since it is resting at the end of two T-3's speed has been improved. Also, if you register in the guest book you will automatically be notified of changes and updates to the site. Respectfully, ___________________________ Joe Champion JChampion transmutation.com http://www.transmutation.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 11:11:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA14461; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:06 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:46:50 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance In-Reply-To: <32e4baf3.12843497 mail.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hX9Mt3.0.7V3.vjHuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3484 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > I have just been looking at a few natural constants, and came across this: > "Gyromagnetic ratio of protons in water" =2675215255*radians/(sec*tesla). > If the Earth's field is 1 gauss, and we divide by 2*PI to get cycles /sec, > then we get a frequency of 42.58 kHz. A slight variation in the local > strength of the Earth's field will move this around a bit :). You should be > able to taylor it at will pretty much by using your own magnetic field. > Perhaps someone here could tell me the consequences of stimulating this > resonance? I recall an old SciAm construction article on this, under "Proton Precession Magnetometer". The SAS index says Feb 1968 for a magnetometer article, so that may be it. Try searching Altavista for those keywords too. If I recall, the precession frequency of that device was 2.5KHz, not 43. However, the precession freq is altered by the chemical environment, so combining the proton with an electron and chemical bonding into water might affect the proton response. MRI machines are based upon the effect, using narrowly tuned receiver to interrogate a tiny patch of protons in water molecules, and complex b-fields place a single particular field strength only at the desired small spot. I always though this was incredibly weird, having an unmoving coil and a magnet which can silently reach out and examine the chemistry of a tiny water volume in one particular spot! The SciAm project was a polyethelene pill bottle filled with degassed distilled water (O2 is said to spoil the effect,) and wound with a big coil of fairly large wire. The bottle is held transverse to the earth's field, a battery is applied momentarily, then a switch is used to instantly collapse the field and to connect the coil to an audio amp. If the earth's field is very uniform, a decaying audio tone is heard for a couple of seconds. Small gradients, like those in a building, make the audio tone decay extremely fast. The coil field must be snapped off to generate detectable precession signal. The precession actually is supposed to last for a very long time, but if the b-field is nonuniform, the protons quickly get out of synch and the net signal goes away, then reappears very weakly, goes away again, etc. I think this is called "spin echoes." Speculation: all the Keely stuff places great emphasis on acoustics and water. Perhaps there are conventional keys to his work: if microscopic b-fields of electrons and protons interact, and particle precession can be stimulated through resonance with physical motion of molecules, then there may be significant molecular forces created via acoustic resonance with particle precession frequencies. So, the question is, does proton precession (and precession of other nucleii) affect chemical reactions? If so, Keely's stuff is not crackpottery. And maybe we should not ridicule medical treatments via permanent magnets, Mesmer's stuff, etc. Chemical/magnetic devices may not be impossible (water softeners via permanent magnets.) And perhaps sonoluminescence results might vary if the drive frequency and resonator size are varied together until some magic frequency is hit. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 13:02:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA13795 for billb@eskimo.com; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:02:08 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:02:08 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Sat Jan 18 13:02:01 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA13755 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:01:58 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id NAA27478 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:01:44 -0800 Old-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:01:44 -0800 Message-Id: <199701182101.NAA27478 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: >On Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:42:19 -0800, Ross Tessien wrote: >[snip] >>By exchanging a sort of overcoat of wave energy at a given phase angle, one >>component of the interior can be bumped from say, a 0 degree resonance >>relative to a nominal spacetime reference phase angle we call "positive", to >>either a 90 or a 270 degree phase angle resonance. Neither of those >>resonances are "Real". Those are what we call, "Imaginary" phase angles, >>and in the derivations of QM we actually use the phase angles at these >>imaginary orientations in order to be able to account for all of the >>possible exchanges of energy. >> >>But we are not aware of imaginary phase angles in our measurements because >>only "imaginary matter" could be used to detect the "charge" (action imposed >>by) of those phase angles. >> >>So the weak force is just a shedding of one internal resonance with outside >>space in favor of another resonance phase angle. >> >>Ross Tessien >Ross, > >How do you reconcile this picture of fixed phase angles with the inevitable >shift in frequency and phase that occurs when two particles are in motion >relative to one another? The short answer is, because both particles are coupled to the one and only spacetime nodal structure. Thus, they are both pumped, underdamped oscillators driven by acoustic wave energy in the ocean of aether. Just imagine a huge ocean permeated by a sort of checkerboard of black and white nodes where each is expanding and contracting at the same frequency, but in phase opposition (one expands when the other is contracting). That is the energy that is pumping the matter standing waves. Because matter is a bunch of underdamped oscillators, they sort of rip that structure apart in an Escher like morphing, and the convert it into a spherical convergence. Any wave energy conducted from one particle to the other will do so by propogating across the spacetime manifold from one to the other. But because both are phase angle locked to that same manifold, when the energy arrives, it will still be in phase match to a good degree. To the degree that the energy is out of phase match, the intensity of the interactions between the standing waves will be altered. If they were in perfect phase and frequency match, the force would be what we call "nuclear strong". But if they are farther apart, it will become apparent that if you lay out the nodal structure and then look at the communication across that structure, there will be phase angle errors due to the directions through the manifold the wave energy must be communicated, but not due to the relative velocities (SR effects not dealt with in this description). A longer answer below goes into some of the details of the structures and effects of relative velocities. This is difficult to describe in ascii, so I hope my off the head answer gets you to grasp some of the difficulties, and some of the beauty, of dealing with standing waves. And another article that is extremely enlightening is the one on oscillons as I have said in the past. When you read that, what you are seeing is one dimension of spacetime oscillations in the vertical axis. The spacetime manifold of acoustic energy I am working with has that sort of compressive energy in all three dimensions, and so you wind up with a 3D structure of standing wave nodes. The spacings of the nodes is "space", and the period of the oscillation of the standing waves of space is "time". All matter standing waves are thus coupled to "spacetime" which simply means they are pumped by that spacetime energy permeating the universe and left over from the big bang. The longer answer; To play with particles like peas is easy. You have a location, a velocity, and you can determine a Doppler shift of any emitted energies. But to play with standing waves is slippery. It is just as slippery as is GR which is a non linear theory, but then this is because my theory works in basically the same manners as does GR, once you invert your logic from gravitational attractions to there only being one force mechanism, that of aether pressure and expansion from regions of high density into regions of low density. But to your question, with the caution in mind; If you study the article in Sci Am in 2/95 on sonoluminescence, you will find that the graph shows you ringing of the bubble following collapse. That ringing is in the form of a damped sinusiod, which is the natural form of attenuation of any resonance that is **underdamped**. If you calculate the amplification factor for that wave form it is about 3 to 5 if I recall. What that means is that if you input a certain periodic energy to that system, over a period of one cycle the waveform will attain a certain amplitude. If you apply that energy periodically to any underdamped oscillator for an indefinite period of time, the waveform will amplify to some level where the losses balance the input of energy. Thus, the amplification factor in the case of the SL bubble means that with a given amount of energy incident on it, it will amplify to about 3 to 5 times the amplitude it would have had from a single "push". We tend to understand this better if the resonating underdamped system is a child on a swing, where we periodically input energy. So to get to your question, what is slippery is that in my model, a particle of matter is instead modelled as a standing wave that is in a perfect or nearly so, fluid called aether. And I have put forward that the aether has the property of a change of state, such that the universes vacuum or quantum vacuum is the vapor, and in the interior of the standing waves of matter there exists a tiny droplet of the condensate, and as well in the interior of black holes there exists a large core of the condensate. This isn't that important to your question, but I want to be clear on the structure I envisage. That droplet constitutes a non linearity in the conduction of wave energy into and out of the matter standing wave and as well, it occurs down at the Planck scale of about E-35 meters, way below the size of the nucleus. Now, the important thing to note is that the matter I work with is not something that is like a pea, ie, self contained and omnipotent. It is a standing wave and as such, it requires a source of wave energy to drive its oscillations. That source is "spacetime". Two different "particles" can have two different velocities through our universe, but they must both be coupled to the structure of nodes or the manifold we know as spacetime. This is a dynamic structure that is oscillating continuously. It is the remaining buzzing energy from the big bang boiling of a huge black hole core of aether condensate, and it is continuously maintained in that buzzing by the continuing vaporization of that aether condensate, ie, the liquid aether droplets that got trapped in the acoustic nodes that came into being during that boiling. The fusion of matter in stars is continuing to drive the buzzing of spacetime because the emissions of aether from those standing waves can only take place during the low pressure part of the cycle. OK, to the point. It doesn't matter if one particle is moving or not, it must still receive its energy to amplify its standing wave from the surrounding spacetime resonances. Thus, both particles will be Doppler frequency shifted in the rate of their oscillations. This is because if they are moving relative to some fixed frame of reference, then the rate of passage of spacetime nodes is altered based on their motion. It is very wierd to get this and you really need to lay out a sine wave on a piece of paper and imagine that to be a standing wave that is oscillating. If you send a sine wave down a transmission line to a short at the far end, it will 100 percent reflect and constructively and destructively interfere with the incident waveform. Thus, you will get a standing wave pattern. Then, if you put some little surfer on top of that wave structure, he will need to extend and contract his legs in cadence with the standing wave. But if he begins to move longitudinally with the axis of the motion of the waveform, he will need to alter the frequency that he extends and contracts his legs in order to remain coupled and in cadence with the bumps he encounters. The standing wave must do the same thing. Because it is driven by the standing wave energy (spacetime), it will remain coupled to that energy. But notice that the standing wave and the surrounding ocean of aether with the acoustic spacetime energy, are both made up of the identical substance. And notice too, that the standing wave has internal momentum. Thus, the shape and geometry of the spacetime around the standing wave is altered by the presence of the standing wave itself. And as well, two different standing waves that are coupled to the identical spacetime will, from some other frame of reference, appear to be beating at the identical frequency. This is because the information of the beating of each of the standing waves must be propogated at the acoustic velocity of the medium from the standing wave in question to the frame of reference from where you will make the observation. Thus, it doesn't matter what inertial state of motion the frame of reference is in, because the matter in that frame of reference is also connected to and powered by the same spacetime acoustic manifold of resonances, the wave energy from the translating standing waves will arrive Doppler shifted for their velocities, and as a first approximation, exactly in time with the regular arrivals of the spacetime manifolds own acoustic energy. I could go into the slipping of that energy which brings on SR and then later GR effects, but until you get how the coupling to the spacetime manifold works, that more complicated set of geometries and interactions will confuse the issue. For the above, it is sufficient to say that the variously moving standing waves will all be perfectly coupled to the spacetime oscillations so long as their velocities are small by comparison to the velocity of light. This condition leads to one being able to assume that the individual standing waves are approximately frozen is space as compared to the transmission of the acoustic wave energy of their oscillations and of spacetimes manifold. Thus, even though we think of a baseball as moving very fast, or a bullet or whatever in our common experience, the fact of the matter is that all of those ions are essentially frozen in the structure of the aether. And when you come to think in terms of the velocity of light, you come to realize that matter standing waves really are just that, **standing** in the spacetime acoustic manifold and coupled to all other standing waves nearby and far away due to the emissions of energy from all of them. This leads to a very simple result. In order to determine the direction of acceleration that an input of wave energy will impose on a given standing wave, all you need to do is to look at the relative phase angles and the relative frequencies of the energy. The above leads to the relative frequencies of nearby matter being approximately the same as viewed from any single standing wave. But, you have Hubble shifted wave energy arriving from deep space. This is your first inkling as to what gravitation is all about. And nearby you have phase angle errors for the transmission of that wave energy, which is your first inkling of what the EM forces are all about. And very nearby you have both phase and frequency coherency to a high degree and that is what the nuclear strong force is all about. The drop from strong to EM occurs due to diagonal conduction of wave energy through the spacetime nodal structure of standing waves driving the matter standing waves which are underdamped convergent resonances pumped by the spacetime motions. The net force ought to drop to zero, except that it is possible to pack more energy into the spacetime manifold if it has a helical curvature to it. So the EM energy is the result of that curvature which leads to the spacetime manifold not being perfectly rectilinear. Helicity in 3 dimensions is a very interesting thing. After rotating a manifold about all three axis', you wind up with a rectilinear structure again! It is very interesting. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 13:49:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA21300; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:39:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:39:01 -0800 Message-ID: <32E1B2E2.1E39 netcomuk.co.uk> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:36:34 -0800 From: Rob King X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-NC260 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Adams Motor, Bifillar Coils, etc. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xKzDy3.0.aC5.lBKuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3485 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Date: 18th Jan, 1997 Time 20:19 GMT Dear All, Word of warning: I had my car battery on charge for 24 hrs last weekend, I checked the terminal voltage and then decided to short the terminals with a hacksaw blade to discharge it a little. There was a big spark and then an almighty bang! The battery detonated in front of me, I was splashed with sulfuric acid and hit in the face by a large piece of flying plastic. I still have a small graze on my face that has nearly healed up. I can only summize that the build up of hydrogen and oxygen in the top of the cell must have ignited and shattered the entire upper half of the battery casing, leaving just the terminals sticking out from the plates, and plastic casing scattered around the room. Remember, never allow sparks near a battery that has been charging, this time I was lucky. :-) Wes, Please post the construction details for the Bifillar coil you mentioned. I suspect this may be a basket weave type coil, although the number of turns will be very limited by the very nature of the construction method. Maybe this could be used in the Adams Motor. I took 2 magnets out of a full height 5.25 HD (IBM) and they are very very powerful. They may be ALNICO and I intend to use these in my next Adams motor. Greg Watson may have something with this ferrite rod idea. I did not use ferrite rod as the coil core in my first Adams motor because it produced a flux density 50% less than a soft iron core. I now have 2 magnets that produce over 4Kg of repulsive thrust between each other (this is about 10 times more than the small circular PMs I used before). I had a go at re-building and testing the JOSEPH TATE ANTENNA circuit. I used a 3M x 0.5M sheet of aluminum foil for the antenna and the central heating pipe for the earth. With no coil in the circuit I got a small amount of power and then I realised that the fluorescent light was very close to the antenna and when I turned the light off the power was very small less than 1uW. I you wrap foil around the light fitting the power is enough to drive an LED dimly, with no LED connected the voltage rises to over 250 volts DC. Adding the coil between the antenna and the circuit made no difference to the power output. This is interesting but not worth pursuing any further. As regards Einstein's special relativity, I am surprised the man had time for his “theories”. I think he was a womaniser with a few half con-cocked ideas about gravity, time travel and the universe in general. “Time slows down for you relative to a stationary object when you are moving”, rubbish! I think time is effected by the density of the ether around us. The more dense the ether the faster time appears to move relative to point in space where the ether is less dense. I also think the ether density is determined by gravity, electric fields and possibly magnetic fields. But what do I know, I am just a lowly computer programmer not a scientist. Best regards Rob King Email address: ROBK netcomuk.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 14:49:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA27558; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:38:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:38:32 -0800 Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:09:51 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-CUdf2.0.rj6.T3Luo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3486 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Horace Heffner wrote: > >On 16 Jan 1997, Eugene Mallove wrote: > > > >> "The cloud of virtual particles acts like a screen or curtain that shields > >> the true value of the central core," Koltick explains. > > > >This is not right. The cloud of virtual particles has net charge zero, so > >it should not affect the e-field surrounding the electron. Or from a > >classical analogy, the cloud of +- particle pairs constitutes an uncharged > >conductor, since it contains mobile charged particles, and you cannot > >shield a charged object by placing it within a metal container. > > > [snip] > >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 > > > Aren't you assuming a 1/R^2 field above? The authors imply the > electrostatic field is not 1/R^2 close to the electron. The +- pairs would > tend to align with the + side inward giving a -+-+- configuration in cross > section. But still this would not change the field at a distance, it would not shield the central electron from the outside world, it would only alter the 1/R^2 field inside the cloud, and distort the forces experienced by another charge while inside the cloud. Suppose the point electron is surrounded by a shell of positive virtual particles with a larger shell of negative. IF BOTH POLARITIES ARE EQUAL IN QUANTITY, the shells of virtual particles do not shield the field at all. However, they *would* act to smear the central electron point-charge out in space, and an invading electron or positron would no longer feel an 1/R^2 field when it was inside the cloud. > The central minus charge is only a 0 dimensional point so maybe > the net effect of the virtual particle distribution is to balance the > normally observed field into what has appeared to be a 1/R^2 form. This is > really mind boggeling because the normal rules disintegrate. Maxwell's > laws no longer apply in the vicinity of the electron, and probably the > virtual particles as well. You don't get electrostatic field line > conservation, for example. Right, because the "lines" can end on virtual particles. But if the population of + and - virtual particles are equal, then the distant field is caused by the real charge of the electron. Hmmm, another thought. If the central electron swallows virtual positrons, its charge is reduced, and virtual electrons are left behind, hence the smearing-out of the electrons negative charge. This could be seen as "shielding," since as far as an invading particle is concerned, the central electron has been partially cancelled by close-in cloud of virtual positrons. But as far as the outside world is concerned, the electron field has not been shielded at all, only its charge has been smeared out in spatial extent. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 15:58:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA08976; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 15:48:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 15:48:21 -0800 Date: 18 Jan 97 18:47:06 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: water resonance Message-ID: <970118234705_100060.173_JHB82-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"uZQtX2.0.8C2.45Muo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3487 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, >> Vary the excitation frequency about the resonance point. Energy is absorbed from the exciter coil as the peak is approached, and absorbed by both the exciter coil and pickup coil when the excitation frequency moves away from resonance. << You may feel that your approach is dangerously close to Stan Meyer's He talks about pulsed batches of excitation of water at resonance, but uses high voltage DC across electrodes with water as the dielectric to break up the H2O molecules more efficiently that current electrolysis. The frequency he suggests is between 16kHz and 20kHz, pulsed in amplitude ramped groups of 4 or 5 with a resting gap of the same time span. It seems to me that this would only work, if it works at all, in low conductivity water, otherwise the dielectric would short out the circuit and become an electrolyte. This would explain how the court was convinced that his water fuel cell didn't work as he described, when the experts added salt to the water in his demo cell. Of course I could be wrong! Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 18:35:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA08886; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:25:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:25:38 -0800 Message-ID: <32E1849F.169F mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:49:11 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, josephnewman earthlink.net, epitaxy@LocalAccess.com, Stefan Hartmann Subject: Re: Gwatsonīs test to DNMEC Over Unity ?? References: <199701182320.AAA20201 mail.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hHS1a1.0.VA2.UOOuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3488 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > >>If we open the connection from the battery to the coil, how can the > >>energy flow from the coil to the battery? The connection is OPEN. > > >Yes, try to better capture the energy from the pulses > >as we spoke about it a few month ago > >in a capture circuit with rectifier diodes and caps ! > > > > >>I have always worked on an understanding of Newman's work based > >>on the reverse, charging current happening when the coil is CONNECTED > >>to the battery. > > >No, this only works via the spark, when the coil is going just to be > >connected and the huge voltage builds up, so the spark > > > Should have read: > > ...just to be OPENED ! > > Sorry for the confusion. Was just on the phone, > when I answered this email ! > > >occurs at the commutator and also pushes still energy back to the battery, > >but this only works via the sparking commutator gap ! > >That is why there is a spark ! Because the coil is opened ! > > If you use a neon tube across the coil, the sparking is reduced > or at all suppressed, but then also the negative current pulses > back to the battery are suppressed ! > > Do you understand it now ? Is different to my current work. Will try to rearrange my thought so as to "see" this operation and how it relates to all the other effects. > > Wanted still to add: > > Ask Evan Soule and he will validate these facts ! > > He just sent me again a few Gifs, which show this > huge current pulses, as the commutator opens... > Hi Stephan, Me as well. I recently spoke to Evan about the following : If an Over Unity device works by generation a large reverse current flow into the power source, then it will not work in a closed loop of motor & generator. This is because if you apply a larger EMF to a generator than the generator is producing, you will force reverse current into the generator and turn it into a motor. That motor will attempt to reverse its rotation and oppose the motor driving it. Therefore, if a Newman motor produces excess reverse current, it CAN NOT run in a closed loop of motor & generator. The excess current would actually increase the load on the rotation motor. This lack of closing the loop has caused many.....many, including me, to doubt the validity of the Newman motor. It is as I said before, Overunity devices will exhibit reverse effects to existing power generation devices. If we are to fully understand the effects necessary to build Over Unity devices, we must look for these reverse effects in nature and be careful that when we try to apply them in practice that these reverse characteristics don't hide the desired Over Unity effect. Or in reality are not used to show that this device doesn't or can't work. I have sent this post to freenrg, vortex & newman as I believe an understanding of the above is critical to the search for Over Unity. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 19:12:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA16325; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:54:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:54:11 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Update No. 12 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 02:54:23 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e175bd.417160 mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fk3FK2.0._-3.HpOuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3489 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:50:21 -0800, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: [snip] >I've heard this 'charge cluster' thing a couple of times, but I do not >understand it. Like electric charges repel. In a plasma (and I am a >plasma physicist), if there is net negative charge, electrons move out >toward some less negative/more positive region, while if there is net >positive charge, electrons move toward it. (Ions, being much heavier, move >more slowly. Usually electrons do most of the moving.) > >Furthermore, unless the electrons are dead cold at absolute zero, an >electron cluster has pressure, just like a common gas. I presume that the temperature dependence implies that the De Broglie wavelength needs to be long enough to ensure that the cluster hangs together. This temperature dependence is however based on the unstated assumption that the electron motion is random in direction, and increases in magnitude with a rise in temperature. If some mechanism could be found where electrons move in a coordinated rather than random fashion, then their *relative* motion could remain small (large De Broglie wavelengths), while the absolute magnitude of their velocity (in out frame of reference i.e. temperature) increased. In short I would expect the electrons in such a cluster to display coordinated motion. Perhaps the intrinsic magnetic field of the electron plays a role in this, such that the cluster is composed *at least* of anti-spin pairs. [snip] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 20:18:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA31212; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:08:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:08:52 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 19:10:05 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"dswzd.0.cd7.IvPuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3490 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman writes: [snip] > >You may feel that your approach is dangerously close to Stan Meyer's Sorry to say it's not my approach. NMR has been around about as long as I have. > >He talks about pulsed batches of excitation of water at resonance, but >uses high >voltage DC across electrodes with water as the dielectric to break up the H2O >molecules more efficiently that current electrolysis. The frequency he >suggests >is between 16kHz and 20kHz, pulsed in amplitude ramped groups of 4 or 5 with a >resting gap of the same time span. If there is anything to his work, and it is related to NMR, then he should increase the magnetic field to a reliable and fixed 2 gauss or more, and raise the frequency to match. > >It seems to me that this would only work, if it works at all, in low >conductivity water, otherwise the dielectric would short out the circuit and >become an electrolyte. This would explain how the court was convinced that his >water fuel cell didn't work as he described, when the experts added salt to the >water in his demo cell. > >Of course I could be wrong! > >Norman Sounds good to me. A great way to botch an o-u device: short it out. However, other behavior seems to indicate more than one short has occurred. 8) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 23:07:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA24654; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 22:48:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 22:48:49 -0800 X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:49:53 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrons are Clouds? Resent-Message-ID: <"Rno121.0.716.FFSuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3491 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:02 AM 1/18/97, Edwin Strojny wrote: [snip] >>Horace Heffner >> >Given your knowledge of physics as expressed in Vortex-L and the large >number of ideas proposed here in the area of physics, you are a physicist. > >Ed Strojny Thanks Ed, you made my day. OK, amateur physicist it is. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 18 23:10:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA27027; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:01:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:01:01 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 02:00:21 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970119020020_1045874661 emout17.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: great idea Robin Resent-Message-ID: <"GX0jO.0.8c6.gQSuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3492 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If some mechanism could be found where electrons move in a coordinated rather than random fashion, then their *relative* motion could remain small .............................................................................. .................................. I suggested the same thing some years ago. When Frank Stenger calculated the thermal velocities of electrons in a cool plasma we found that the velocity was much to high to form any type of condensation. Ke = 3/2 Kt If the electrons were slowed down by cooling, woops, the plasma deionized. The only answer seemed to be to keep the electron velocity high and the relative velocity low. So Frank S. and I arrived at the same solution as you. We also considered inelastic collsions were the electron would stick to a slower moving ion for a bit and then break loose at low velocity. This solution appeared to be unworkable. I'm not sure why any more. Is that not correct Mr. Stenger? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 03:21:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA32387; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:09:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:09:31 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:08:19 -0800 Message-Id: <199701191108.DAA20218 dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Morrison's ICCF-6 review, Part 1 of 3 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Resent-Message-ID: <"1Zcak3.0.zv7.g3Wuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3493 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Morrison ICCF-6 review, Part 1 of 3 Date: January 19, 1997 I noticed the original Vortex posting of January 17, 1997 did not appear. I also believe the fowarded review might not have been received by some individuals that have a word limit on their e-mail processors. The non-appearance in the Vortex was attributable to Beaty's 40K content limit. Therefore I have split Morrison's report into three parts. I also noticed that Logajan's website has included the Morrison ICCF-6 review on Januar 18, 1997. January 17. 1997 I did not read of Morrison's ICCF-6 review being posted in the Vortex or being included in Logajan's or Beaty's website or the spf. So I e-mailed him a request on the 16th to please either post a review if he had one, or to send a copy for my reading. He did attend the ICCF-6, sat right up in the front row throughout the Conference, and asked questions of the speakers regularly. His was a full participation affair. I found the e-mail address of Morrison in John Logajan's website where his ICCF-5 Part 1 review was posted. I think Douglas Morrison's review of the ICCF-6 deserves posting. I find that Morrison did post his review on the Sci.physics.fusion today, January 17th, '97. I thank him for it. And I have taken the liberty of cross posting on the Vortex and sending copies to some individuals. My apologies to those that I did not address and to those that regularly read the spf anyway. -AK- ---- Begin Forwarded Message Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion From: DROM vxcern.cern.ch Subject: Cold Fusion Update No. 12, ICCF-6. Reply-To: DROM vxcern.cern.com Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:20:03 GMT Lines: 1131 Oct-Dec. 1996 + Jan. 1997. DM-96-19 COLD FUSION UPDATE No. 12 including A REPORT ON THE SIXTH COLD FUSION CONFERENCE Douglas R.O. Morrison SUMMARY The Sixth International Cold Fusion Conference, ICCF-6 took place! It was generally considered more scientific than its predecessors. It was held in Japan, well supported by Japanese organisations. Reports were given on three major Japanese experiments which were well-funded, technically excellent and carefully carried out - all three gave no indications of cold fusion. This shows once again that Japanese science done seriously with governmental support, does excellent work. It is said that government funding for cold fusion is being wound down. Despite this, the Summary Speakers, Bressani and McKubre, gave encouragement to cold fusion. The new frontier of the conference was transmutations with remarkable results that may have conventional explanations. Despite everything, a Seventh conference is planned. Post-scripts; The Siena experiment that claimed steady heat production, has been repeated but it has not been possible to justify the fusion claims and it is concluded that there is no power production. Two other important experimental results suggesting axions and a high H/D ratio, have been shown to be due to mis-interpretation of data - the way in which the scientists concerned behave is contrasted with some involved in cold fusion. SUBJECTS 1. Introduction 2. Major Japanese Experiments on Excess Heat 3. Japanese Study of D-D Reaction Rates in Metals 4. Summary of Nuclear Products - Bressani 5. Summary of Excess Heat Experiments - McKubre 6. Transmutations 7. Studies of Material Science 8. Who am I? Who Pays me? 9. Court Case - La Repubblica versus Drs. Preparata, Bressani, Del Giudice, Fleischman, and Pons 10. Next ICCF Conference. 11. Short Notes -Preparata experimentalist/London theatre/Texas conf./Glow discharges/CETI/Siena bomb/Tom Droege/Error and fraud 12. Please Can I Have a Cup of Tea? 13. Conclusions Post-scripts; (1) "Siena Bomb" Not Confirmed by New Experiment (2) Other Wrong Results Disproved - Axions, H/D ratio Appendix - Neutron Claims of Bressani et al. Critically Examined 1. INTRODUCTION The conference was sponsored by The New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organisation, NEDO, which was set up by MITI as a branch of the Institute of Applied Energy. They have built a laboratory to study cold fusion in the Techno Park near Sapporo in the northern island of Hokkaido - it is called the New Hydrogen Energy lab, NHE, thus avoiding the words "cold fusion". Some $ 30 million was given by MITI over four years and this is fast running out. The basic research is being carried out by the government together with some 20 private companies (generally major ones), and 11 universities at 13 labs. A second major organisation is IMRA which was set-up by the Toyota car company. They have two labs, one in Hokkaido and the other in the Sophia Antipolis Science Park near Nice where Stan Pons works. This Sixth Conference was again held in a beautiful luxury hotel as in Monte Carlo and in Maui - why? Can only guess. The hotel has a golf course and two ski areas - was told it was only finished four years ago and is now almost bankrupt. Of the 183 participants listed (some 250 actually attended), half, 91, were from Japan and 37 from the USA. Dr. Scaramuzzi once declared that "Cold fusion stops at the Alps", but now it is more accurate for Europe, to say it only appears in Mediterranean countries (Italy had 15 participants, France 6, and Spain one). Cold Fusion Update No. 10 was Part I on the previous conference, ICCF-5. Update No. 11 should have been Part II, but only sections B1 to B5 were written due to lack of time. Section B4 is included here as a Short Note and section B5 is given as an Appendix. 2. MAJOR JAPANESE EXPERIMENTS ON EXCESS HEAT 2.1 Results from the New Hydrogen Energy Lab of The Institute of Applied Energy Dr. K. Matsui, the Conference Organiser, described the Lab and said that faint proof of excess heat was not enough. The aims of the lab were to search for a strong proof of excess heat, to demonstrate the mechanism, and obtain controllable power generation. Dr. Kubota said that previously with a fuel cell-type electrolysis system, 7 to 18% excess heat had been observed but the reproducibility was poor - a problem with this type of cell was that if the parts moved during assembly the calibration was lost. Hence they had adopted the mass flow calorimetry system developed by the McKubre group at SRI. Here water is made to flow through the cell and measurements are made of the input and output water temperatures and of the flow rate - here the calibration was more reliable. It was found that the three sigma limits were between 0.9 and 1.6%. So the limit for declaring a heat excess was taken as 2% which corresponded to 0.2 W out of a total input of 10 Watts. Palladium samples with various treatments were tried including some that had previously given excess heat with the old type of fuel cell. In all ten experiments performed, no excess heat was observed. After the conference, some participants visited the nearby NHE labs - Melvin Miles and some friends, estimated that in the three large research rooms, there was some $10 million worth of equipment. 2.2 Energy Results from IMRA(Japan) Dr. T. Nakata of IMRA (Japan) reported that after their earlier work with closed fuel cells which sometimes showed excess heat, they developed a new type of cell with mass flow. Water flowed through the top of the electrolytic cell and its input and output temperature were measured. An important new feature was that all the apparatus was immersed in a tank of water which was kept at constant temperature. A heater was used so that the total heat input was constant. In other words, the input was always 10 watts and if excess heat had occurred, then the heater's power would be reduced to keep the power at 10 Watts. This is the best and most accident-free type of calorimeter since there is no change in the heat transfer with the outside. Twenty-six experiments were performed with palladium cathodes which had been treated in various systems to try and improve the amount of deuterium in the palladium (the loading). Some of these systems employed various treatments of the surface. In others the current was varied to load and deload the deuterium in the cathode. Distributions of the excess heat observed were shown giving clear Gaussian distributions with three standard deviation values of +/- 0.23 Watts or 2.3% of the input power. In all the 26 experiments, no excess heat was observed. 2.3 Results from IMRA(Europe) The previous conference, ICCF-5, was held in Monte Carlo next door to the IMRA(Europe) lab near Nice. Everyone expected some results from them and a visit to the IMRA laboratory, but to our surprise, it was closed and no results were given. This time Dr. S. Pons reported that a new calorimeter called Icarus 9, had been developed. It was designed to operate at high powers, 300 to 400 Watts, and high temperatures up to the atmospheric boiling point. In three experiments excess power of 101, 73, and 75 Watts (150, 2000, and 80%) were observed while in four experiments no excess power was observed. 2.4 Comparison of the two IMRA Results At the end of Dr. Nakata's talk, I asked why his results were different from those of IMRA Europe - no answer was given by him or by anyone from IMRA Europe. The essential point is that when excess heat has been claimed, the heat loss from the system to the outside is poorly known, as shown by Wilson et al.1. With the IMRA(Japan) calorimeter, the water jacket surrounding the cell is kept at constant temperature so that any heat exchange with the outside is constant. With the IMRA(Europe) calorimeter, as the temperature changes up to boiling point, the heat flow to the outside must vary substantially and the calibration becomes critical. Instead of employing calculations and some doubtful controls, it is good standard experimental technique to use an external water bath at constant temperature, as IMRA(Japan) has done, but IMRA(France) has not. 3. JAPANESE STUDY OF D-D REACTION RATES IN METALS Dr. J. Kasagi et al. of Tohuku University reported important results on what happens when low energy deuterium ions are fired into metals saturated with deuterium. The ion beam could extend down to about 3 keV giving results at lower energies than previously. Excellent experimental technique was employed for the lowest energies where the rate is exceedingly low due to the potential barrier. Three major (and interesting) experiments were performed. Before cold fusion, all experiments (including muon-catalysed fusion at zero energy) had found that the reactions d-d ---> 3He + n and d-d ---> t + p had each 50% of the total rate, while the reaction d-d ---> 4He + gamma was negligible, about 10-7 of the other's rate. Here the charged particle spectrum was measured and peaks corresponding to 3He, tritium and proton emission were observed. As expected the ratio of tritium to 3He production was close to unity, showing that the ratio of tritium to neutron production is one, contrary to claims by cold fusion believers that in metals the ratio was 105 to 108. Secondly, the protons emitted in the dd ----> pt reaction, were measured. After correcting for the potential barrier, the astrophysical S22 factor was obtained. It was found that at the lowest energy, the rate increased, by 10% for Ti metal and about 30% for Yb. Expressing this as an electron screening factor, Ue, values of 19 +/- 12 eV and 60 +/-10 eV were found for titanium and Yb respectively - they said these are higher values than expected - and a CERN expert confirmed these were very high. If confirmed, these results could have importance for the problems of the Standard Solar Model where the screening factors are poorly known and indeed this uncertainty constitutes a major source of error in the determination of the solar neutrino flux which may be different from the measured flux. Thirdly, they investigated claims of abnormally high energy alpha particle emission. Firing energetic deuterium ions at Pd loaded with deuterium they observed an abnormal number of alpha particles with energies between 12 and 17 MeV. They proposed an explanation. First the reaction d + d ---> 3He + n occurs with a Q of 3.27 MeV. The 3He moves a short distance and interacts with another deuterium ion giving an alpha particle according to the reaction d + d ---> alpha + p with a Q of 18.35 MeV. Combining these two reactions together, it would appear as the three-body reaction, d + d + d ---> a + p + n with a Q of 21.6 MeV, but really it is two successive reactions. This experiment was performed with several metals such as Ti, Zr, Au, Pt. These results clearly show that there is no indication of a strong rise in the rate towards zero energy as would be expected from cold fusion claims, but they demonstrate the very steep decrease in the rate as the incident energy decreases as expected from the potential barrier. Further they confirm that the branching ratios of the 3 reactions are constant with decreasing energy and there is no sign of the dramatic reversal claimed from some cold fusion experiments who write that neutron and tritium production are negligible while 4He production is dominant. Normal branching rations have already been found in muon-catalysed fusion which is at close to zero energy. 4. SUMMARY OF NUCLEAR PRODUCTS - BRESSANI 4.1 Bressani Review Talk Dr. Tullio Bressani is a senior and respected figure in his world of low energy particle physics. The summary of the important subject of nuclear products was allocated a 20 minute talk by Dr. Bressani. There was no possibility for questions or comments afterwards. It was a most remarkable talk, so to try and be fair, will give first the main points without comment apart from indices, a, b, c, etc. These indices will then be commented on. Finally, as an Appendix, a note is given about his five standard deviation measurements of neutrons having exactly the right energy, written after ICCF-5. This note was discussed extensively with Tullio. He started by saying there were two problems; (1) Reproducibility, (2) the nuclear origin of the excess heat. At this conference, there had been no solution for the problem of lack of reproducibility but progress had been made on the nuclear origin and it had been shown by different groups at different labs that excess heat did have a nuclear origin(a). Fleischman and Pons(b) had shown that production of neutrons and tritium was lower than expected from the amount of excess heat, by a factor of 108 to 1010. Over a hundred labs had tried to measure neutrons and tritium(c), but the solution has only come lately from measurements of 4He. He listed about 7 experiments which included Isagawa of KEK (d), Yamaguchi(e), Miles(f), and Gozzi(g). He described the experiment by Gozzi et al. as the best of all. Yamaguchi's work at NTT was reported in 1993. Dr. Isagawa at KEK obtained 4He when the Pd was heated - they had doubts but the apparatus was young yet. For neutrons , there was a weak correlation of two standard deviations. He mentioned others (Okamoto) briefly. Dr. Bressani concluded that the energy released is of a nuclear origin(h) from the reaction d + d ----> 4He + g (1) The claims of Fleischman and Pons were correct(b). The future of 4He lies with quadrupole mass spectrometers, QMS. A workshop should be organised on 4He production. 4.2 Comments (a) To say in a hand-waving way that some nuclear products have been detected does not justify claims of watts of excess heat coming from that reaction. In Science it is necessary to have the correct numbers. Thus if the origin of the excess heat is a d-d reaction giving 4He, then from the reaction (1), the gamma must have 24 MeV and for one watt some 1011 gammas of this high energy and 1011 ions of 4He should be produced. But the numbers from the experiments do not give these yields of 4He. Further if 1011 gammas of 24 MeV were produced, they would give a large number of other nuclear products - and Dr. Bressani also did not comment on the absence of such high energy products. (b) Dr. Bressani seems to have forgotten the scandal of the F&P neutron measurements which is well-documented e.g. in Frank Close's book. After the 23rd March 1989 press conference, on the 28th Fleischman gave a talk at Harwell where he showed a plot of gammas produced with a peak at 2.5 MeV as would be expected from simple calculations, the two reactions in series ; d + d ----> 3He + neutron (2.45 MeV) (2) followed by the fast neutron interacting with protons in water bath giving neutron(2.45 MeV) + proton ----> d + g(2.5 MeV) (3) The agreement with this calculation seemed wonderful, but people at Harwell immediately pointed out that such fast neutrons barely interact and that in fact, the neutrons are slowed down, and when at rest are captured by a proton to give the well-known gamma of 2.2 MeV via; neutron(zero MeV) + proton ---> d + g(2.2 MeV) (4) Two and three days later, Fleischman gave talks at Lausanne and CERN resp. where he showed a modified graph with the gamma peak now at the correct value of 2.2 MeV. Later the man who made the measurements wrote to Pons and others saying there was definitely no peak at 2.2 MeV. There was a miserably small one at 2.5 MeV but he thought it was an electronic artefact It is not too clear, but it seems that Fleischman has withdrawn both the neutron and tritium measurements, so it is surprising that Dr. Bressani says that the F&P results are confirmed. (c). In discussing the neutron and tritium results, a neutral reviewer would have said that there are more null results than positive results; and would have added that the positive results disagree numerically with one another. It is surprising that Dr. Bressani did not mention his own results which claimed to observe neutrons with a peak energy near 2.5 MeV in agreement with reaction (2), and further that this effect was very significant - five standard deviations. Could this unusual modesty of a scientist with decisive results have anything to do with my conversations with Dr. Bressani described in the Appendix which showed that his results do not justify his claims? (d). It was a surprise to hear the KEK experiment of Dr. Shigeru Isagawi described as supporting cold fusion as this was not his interpretation. In preliminary experiments it was found that the 4He observed could come from contamination. With improved experimental equipment no 4He was observed from the gas when the Pd was heated to 770 C. When the furnace temperature was increased up to 1180 C, large amounts of 4He were observed but the stainless steel of the furnace body had become permeable to gases so no conclusion could be drawn. It is hard to understand how Dr. Bressani could consider this as satisfactory for evidence for 4He production in cold fusion. An experiment2 has now been performed with new equipment which is leak-proof up to 1200 C. No 4He production was observed although there was boiling several times. This apparatus has very high resolution and can detect down to 7 ppt of 4He. Previously they had also looked for 3He and found none. (e). On the first day of the ICCF-3 conference in 1992 at Nagoya, Nippon Telephone and Telegraph company, NTT, announced that the problem of cold fusion has been solved in their labs by Dr. Yamaguchi. At that time NTT had the largest share capitalisation in the world. Their shares increased in that day by 8 billion dollars, but within a few days had returned to normal. Dr. Yamaguchi's work has been widely criticised because he operated his mass spectrograph outside its working range. In addition at Nagoya he was asked if he had glass in his apparatus and replied "No" - later he retracted and admitted he had glass. Ever since Paneth and Peters claims in 1926, it has been well known that large amounts of 4He are stored in glass but are released when hydrogen is passed over the glass. After Nagoya, Dr. Yamaguchi did not stay long at the NTT laboratories but went to IMRA in the South of France - neither he nor anyone else at NTT has reported at any ICCF meeting any later work supporting the 8 billion dollar share peak. (f). The work of Miles et al. has been very controversial and strongly criticised. From his talk it was not clear if he had done any new experiments to answer his critics - his talk appeared to be a repeat of his controversial results (privately was told that his funding has been stopped). He claimed to be able to answer his critics, but they seemed to be talking of somewhat different aspects of the work. (g). Dr. Gozzi gave the opening talk at the ICCF-6 meeting. Since 1989 his chemistry group at La Sapienza in Rome has been trying to establish a correlation between excess heat and nuclear products. Initially they proved that the neutron and tritium channels are of "very low-probability". At this meeting they claimed to have observed excess heat, 4He and X-rays. The X-rays were observed using an X-ray film and from an analysis of the spots it was deduced that the X-rays had an energy of 89 +/- 1 keV, a remarkably accurate value to derive from spots. Also one expects characteristic X-rays of about 24 keV from Palladium but these were not observed. It was suggested that X-ray film was a poor way to detect and measure the energy of X-rays to which Dr. Gozzi replied that they were a poor group and could not afford modern apparatus, but I replied that Steve Jones had made miniature X-ray detectors which could easily fit inside anyone's apparatus - he had offered it free to anyone but said that Dr. Oriani was the only one to accept his offer. Dr. Gozzi concluded that the 4He channel "is not the principal source of energy being about 0.5% of the energy measured by calorimetry". Dr. Bressani did not mention this very important statement or comment on the continuing mystery which is in contradiction with his conclusion. (h). If the excess heat claimed is of a nuclear origin, then the rate of nuclear reactions should give the same power output - but Dr. Bressani did not make it clear in his review that this essential condition had not been met. Another important aspect that Dr. Bressani did not bring out, was the branching ratios. At this conference, the Tohuku group has shown that the branching ratios are as expected for neutrons, tritium, 3He, and protons contrary to the True Believers claim that they are suppressed relative to 4He. Also from the zero energy muon catalysed fusion data, the branching ratios are normal down to the lowest energy. So the 4He channel is suppressed - by a factor of 10-7 and there is no evidence that it could become dominant. 4.3 Conclusion It is the duty of a reviewer to present all the evidence - this did not happen here. Looking at all the results, the overall conclusion must be that the balance evidence argues strongly against cold fusion giving nuclear products. One might be surprised that a physicist of Dr. Bressani's seniority could give such a talk. At ICCF-5, he had stated very strongly that his Turin experiment had observed a peak of neutrons at exactly the expected energy of 2.5 MeV, and this evidence was significant at the five standard deviation level. For the Cold Fusion Update No. 11, the paper was studied and it was found that the data did not justify this claim - indeed the data suggested that there was something wrong with the experiment. A draft of the Update was written and shown to Tullio and discussed with him. Later there was a second discussion where he concluded essentially, "I do not agree with you but you are free to publish". However he did not disagree with any specific statement in the draft. This draft is now given as an Appendix to this update where it can be seen that there is no clean peak at 2.5 MeV and there are significant deviations at many energies indicating that there was an experimental or analysis problem. 5. SUMMARY OF EXCESS HEAT EXPERIMENTS - MCKUBRE 5.1 McKubre Review Talk Mike McKubre had also 20 minutes to summarise his allocated subject of excess heat. He listed three points; a) He drew a smiley and said he was pleased with the results of the conference b) He said there were a number of positive things - there was a fever of enthusiasm linked to a seriousness of purpose. c) Existence - he listed and awarded ticks to; Nuclear products - two ticks - 4He, 3He and tritium Heat - one tick - more than 20 groups find it Transmutation - one tick - a wild card. If it holds up, it will dominate future work. He said that for tritium, Ed Storms had presented the work of Tim Claytor at Los Alamos. For heat there was a robust mass of observations. d) Reproducibility - has not been achieved. It was "Important but not enabling". For electrochemical heat - for mass flow calorimeters there was a problem(a). The IMRA(Japan) work was probably the most systematic attempt to explore the input variables with 32 experiments - which gave no excess heat. The New Hydrogen Energy, NHE, labs of IAE and MITI, have an exquisite calorimeter, beautifully engineered. My notes show that Mike said they had no results, but their abstract says "10 flow calorimetry experiments have been performed until April 1996. Excess heat is not yet measured by the flow calorimetry system." In Dr. Kuota's talk, no comment was made about any experiments being performed in the period April - October though most people do extra hours before a conference in their home country. For Mike's SRI lab, he said that there had been lots of null results. (Earlier during his talk, Mike had said that during the poster session he had deliberately carried out an experiment to see if people really looked at the posters. He had shown one graph where there was a negative heat pulse and waited to see if anyone noticed it. He said that Morrison was the only one to notice - "You have watch these people, they pay attention". He did not explain how this pronounced negative heat burst could have been produced). Dr. McKubre declared that mass flow calorimeters were the most sluggish of animals(a). It is better to pass series of current pulses through the cell. Fleischman and Pons load a cell, raise the temperature and find excess heat. The electro-migration effect helps loading and should be explored (i.e. also add an electrical field). 5.2 Comments (a). Dr. McKubre and also Dr. Celani, said that the mass flow cell is sluggish - hinting that one needs a dynamic change to obtain cold fusion. This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the mass flow cells of NHE and IMRA(Japan) which found no excess heat. The point is that one can make sudden and dramatic changes to the cells themselves - it is only the outer system which is stabilised, not the inner cell. But if this sudden change causes excess heat, then that will be measured and recorded. To say the cell is sluggish is incorrect - it sounds like an excuse. Mike McKubre has a good reputation among True Believers as a scientist because he occasionally says things that, in the mouth of others would be taken as a criticism of cold fusion. And if asked will answer even if the reply is not in favour of cold fusion - but if one does not ask, one does not learn. For example, he has in the past claimed some 30% excess heat, but if asked, he admits that this is only during a rare burst. Also if one asks what is the excess of "heat out" over "heat in" taking the entire run, he will say that it is of the order of 1%. Now for running a power plant, it is this last figure of 1% which counts, not the 30% burst. This also raises the question of whether there could be a long term drift. When Mike says there is a problem with flow calorimeters, maybe the problem is that they are better than previous ones which used calculation instead of measurement to make corrections for outer heat flows. So his problem with flow calorimeters with stabilised jackets, is that they are good and find no excess heat. But there was a reluctance to draw the obvious conclusion that from the good experiments such as the recent Japanese ones, there is no cold fusion. 6. TRANSMUTATIONS At ICCF-3 in Nagoya, a new front was opened when some people started to claim transmutation of elements. The first to tell me of this was John Bockris who claimed with his associate, to be able to produce gold - the alchemists dream! They had some later legal and academic problems with this. However others claimed publicly to have produced transmutations but the evidence was not taken too seriously by relatively responsible Believers. At this meeting, a sensational paper was presented by George Miley who claimed to have observed "massive transmutations". George is a well-respected fusion physicist who has in recent years, been best known as editor of the journal Fusion Technology. Until 1989 this journal published hot fusion papers but then added cold fusion papers, many of which were quite wild - but the hot fusion people continued to publish in this journal. This paper of 14 pages, is the main item in the glossy journal "Infinite Energy" that is published by Gene Mallove. Mallove, Rothwell and Tinsley describe it in rapturous terms "At least as important as the discovery of nuclear fusion fragments in the 1930's - probably much more so", and "This is a remarkable turning point in the history of cold fusion". That is what happens with non-scientists who do not check. At the University of Illinois, Urbana, they used the Patterson-type cell which is being marketed by the CETI company (Clean Energy Technologies Inc.). From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 03:22:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA32482; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:11:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:11:39 -0800 Message-Id: <199701191110.DAA07499 dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Morrison ICCF-6 review, Part 2 of 3 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Date: January 19, 1997 Resent-Message-ID: <"LowXu.0.Ox7.g5Wuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3494 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ICCF-6 Morrison review, part 2 of 3 parts (continued) This has a large number of very small beads with an exceedingly thin layer of a metal - here nickel - and the electrolyte flows over them. They claim to confirm the observations of Patterson to observe excess heat for long periods. They claim to have observed heavy and light elements deposited on the beads e.g. Si, Mg, Zn, Cu, Ag, Pb by using Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy, SIMS, and Neutron Activation Analysis, NAA. At first sight, it looks impressive. I was asked several times my opinion and said that if there was one unexpected result, then it was worth looking at it, but here there were so many contradictory miracles, that it was hard not to doubt it. Recently Richard Blue has studied Miley's paper and found a large number of obvious discrepancies as soon as you look carefully at the mass spectrum from SIMS and at the table of results. He posted this on the net. I checked by magnifying the spectrum, and agree with him. Essentially the isotopes in the spectrum have possible natural sources. Thus elements in glass such as silicon, have been transferred to the beads; and the titanium isotopes in the spectrum would be expected from the titanium electrodes, etc. In addition some isotopes have been omitted from the table of results although clearly visible in the spectrum. Overall the elements have the natural isotopic abundances contrary to the claims made. It would be polite to say it is simply sloppy work and even worse analysis. The analysis was so poor that it hardly seems worthwhile to add that the experiment was done with light water, H2O and not D2O. Dr. Preparata would not have approved! - see section 11.1. George is such a pleasant character and sounds genuinely puzzled and worried when you talk with him, that when he sits down and studies Dick's comments, I would expect him to retract. Note added later. Have been having an exchange of Email with George and also asked Richard Blue to send him his comments. Regret to say that although I tried to make the issues sharp and clear, do not feel that I have had a satisfactory answer to any question - usually it was another subject or theory that was brought up. Guess that George is now a True Believer. Also his work fulfils several of Irving Langmuir's six criteria for Pathological Science. More recently, further analysis by Richard Murray and Jim Carr have shown further major problems with the results and analysis of Miley. Perhaps the kindest thing would be to quietly ignore this work as one does Bockris's claim to transmute mercury to gold. 7. MATERIALS SCIENCE For many years the irregular and irreproducible results on excess heat and nuclear products have been explained away by saying that there are other unknown factor(s). This could be solved if only the material science of hydrogen isotopes in palladium and other metals was better understood. Further it was said that excess heat only occurred with a high D/Pd ratio (loading). Again at this conference Mike McKubre showed results indicating that a high loading, up to 0.95, had been attained but not for long, often the loading would decrease suddenly, in minutes. He declared that if only they could have high loading, and high current for a long time, then constant excess heat would be possible. This high loading hypothesis has justified a target for many workers and has attracted funding. Many groups have devoted considerable efforts to seek this holy grail or at least, to understand the road to take. This is particularly true of groups who have once claimed to find excess heat, often in large quantities, but who since then, can never repeat their early result - now they study instead material science. Some of the results are very interesting, such as the group that made a transparent cell so that they could study the grain structure on-line. But no new major result has been found. It is surprising that the people holding this philosophy have not studied the experimental results to see if they are consistent with this hypothesis. The highest loadings reported by regular cold fusion explorers is 0.96 obtained by the Senjuh et al. of the Japanese NHE group but they find no excess heat. The Los Alamos group of Tom Claytor used gas at only one atmosphere pressure so the loading was very low, about 0.5 replied Ed Storms - yet they claimed large amounts of tritium, in direct contradiction to the high loading hypothesis. Similarly the first claims of Drs. Fleischman and Pons to very large amounts of excess heat, up to a thousand times input, were obtained at various low current densities where the loading must have been very small. Later some experiments have been done at very high loadings, greater than unity, and no evidence of cold fusion was found - these very high pressures were obtained with a diamond anvil, and by ion implantation. Thus this high loading hypothesis is not supported by the totality of experiments. Let us consider another hypothesis - the "No Cold Fusion Hypothesis". Here two major results are noted. Firstly when palladium is exposed to high currents, it is found that the material changes, becoming black and cracks appear. With electrolysis, the surface becomes covered with "crud" which has been studied by several groups. This surface layer can slow deuterium ions entering or leaving the palladium. Sometimes the surface breaks off and exchange of deuterium with the outside becomes possible. Thus it is not surprising that short term effects occur which can have the appearance of excess heat bursts. In fairly careful experiments, such as those by the SRI group of Mike McKubre, such short bursts give excess heat of about 30% at that instant though the overall excess heat claimed is about 1%. Then there is the question about the stability of the calibration to one percent over a long run (this follows discussions with Mike). Secondly in the history of cold fusion, it is noticeable that when good fail-safe experimental techniques are used, excess heat is not observed. The great problem is that the cell is heated and hence the heat flow out increases and the problem is to measure this outflow. Sometimes this is done by calculation using a variety of assumptions, as Fleischman and Pons4 did, and their analysis was severely criticised by Wilson et al1. Most make some attempt to insulate the cell, but the only good technique is that used by the IMRA(Japan) group who plunge the entire experiment in a water bath and compensate the variations of the temperature in the closed cell by varying the current to a heater in the bath so as to keep the temperature of the bath constant. Thus the outside world sees only the walls of the bath which are at constant temperature - this is a fail-safe system as any errors in calculations of heat flow and balance are not important. Note that this system has been used before, e.g. by the Harwell group in one of their many experiments. 8. WHO ARE YOU? WHO PAYS YOU? In previous ICCF meetings, have often been approached by participants asking curious questions about myself. But at this meeting many asked me and I formed the impression that they believed that I was an agent of some mysterious rich organisation which was anti-Cold Fusion. And that I must be well paid to make such clear statements about the quality of the cold fusion studies reported and their inconsistencies. Usually I simply explain that I am a physicist with an interest in astrophysics. Finally was forced to explain that I have been spokesman of international collaborations for over thirty years and have just come from a meeting of our E632 collaboration at Fermilab which has eight European groups, seven US groups, two Indian groups and three Russian groups. When I retired two years ago, was given the finest present I have ever received - for 7 months before my retirement party, three friends had searched the literature and selecting only collaboration papers, some 280 of them, they listed each author - over 800 of them - and then wrote to as many as they could find and asked them to contribute something for a book to be presented. The book contains the first page of each of the 280 collaboration papers. For each co-author the number of papers with shared authorship was calculated and listed and the number of the first shared paper is given. The contribution of each co-author has been inserted on a page near that first shared paper. It is quite a book. The other point is that I love good science and dislike bad science. 9. COURT CASE - LA REPUBBLICA VERSUS DRS. PREPARATA, BRESSANI, DEL GIUDICE, FLEISCHMAN, AND PONS In 1991 the Science Editor of the Repubblica mentioned in a book review, that cold fusion was similar to scientific fraud. Drs. Preparata, Bressani and Del Giudice protested in letters but the Science Editor, Giovanni Maria Pace, was unrepentant. This allowed them to sue together with Drs. Fleischman and Pons for some $5 million. Dr. Gozzi was asked to be their expert and I was asked to help La Repubblica. This year the judges made a carefully written judgement5 which said that there was such confusion and doubts that Dr. Pace was entitled to make his statements. They particularly noted that in 1989, Dr. Pons had claimed to have a cold fusion boiler which was capable of making a cup of tea. They wrote that the plaintiffs had lost touch with reality. Costs were given against Drs. Preparata, Bressani, Del Giudice, Fleischman, and Pons. In a letter6 to Nature, Drs. Preparata and Del Giudice (why not also Dr. Bressani?) attacked Nature and "the widespread innuendo, defamation, and vituperation" they have suffered. They said they were going to appeal the court judgement. It is a remarkable letter. I replied7 to it adding some facts that had been inadvertently omitted and ended by mentioning that ICCF-6 would be held and "Those attending will be delighted if Pons can bring his boiler and use it to make us all a cup of tea." 10. NEXT ICCF CONFERENCE It was previously suggested in the journal "Infinite Energy" that the next international cold fusion conference, ICCF-7, would be held in the autumn-winter of 1997 in the US. However at ICCF-6 it was announced it would be held in the spring of 1998 in Vancouver (the losing bidder was Italy). It was not said who would sponsor the next conference. From conversations with people who did not wish to be quoted, there did not seem to be any rush by the Japanese agencies who had funded this present conference, to fund the next. It was said that the funding will be basically from ENECO - the business organisation who hold most of the cold fusion patents or patent claims, of Fleischmann, Pons and others and who advertise themselves as "an intellectual property clearing house. Will the meeting be early enough in the spring for some skiing? Hope a cup of tea will be provided. 11. SHORT NOTES 11.1 Preparata Does an Experiment! Dr. Preparata continues to be a very firm Believer in cold fusion. Apparently not discouraged by strong criticism8 of his theory of cold fusion at ICCF-4 by Drs. M. Rabbinowich, Y.E. Kim, V.A. Chechin, and V.A. Tsarev, he and some theoretical colleagues have set up a small experiment. He described it and said they had suffered from a power failure - I tried to tell him that was normal, but he brushed aside my comment and seemed unaware that experimentalists take precautions against power failures. The experiment was a typical True Believers one of an electrolytic cell and a minuscule palladium cathode and D2O. It was poorly designed for calorimetry and was quite different from the MITI/NEDO and IMRA(Japan) designs which measure all heat flows and do not rely on doubtful assumptions. Dr. Preparata claimed9 "Remarkable quantities of excess heat" of some 200%. He said it was related to the g-phase of Pd-D, a phase which others cannot find. When I asked if his theory predicted excess heat also with light water, H2O, he replied it did not. It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on the many True Believers who claim to do find cold fusion effects with H20. 11.2 London Theatre Play "Blinded by the Sun" The Journal Nature does not often review theatre plays, but it reviewed two in its Sept. 1996 edition. One was "Blinded by the Sun" and as one might guess it is about a scientist with a good reputation who succeeds in obtaining hydrogen from water and it will solve all the World's energy problems. He decides it is so important he will not wait for peer review and publication in a scientific journal, but instead will first hold a press conference - "sounds familiar" as Nature comments. The play is by an experienced playwright, Stephen Poliakoff, and is well-recommended by non-scientific critics - when I went all the seats were sold and I had to wait an hour for a returned ticket - but is was well worth it. The theatre programme is interesting as it contains a long article by David Jones who writes the marvellous Daedalus column in Nature. He compares the events in "Blinded By the Sun" with "the recent famous scientific scandal which came close to fraud in its pure form" - he writes carefully to avoid being sued! I would recommend it as a good play about the interplay of scientists confronted with a difficult situation. When I told Martin about it he said he would definitely go. 11.3 Second International Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Conference, ILENR2 This is an impressive title and no one would expect that it was a cold fusion conference organised by John Bockris of Texas A&M. Indeed the Texas A&M authorities did not realise it and last year approved holding the first meeting on campus. However when a second meeting was proposed this year, "a 12-person Chemistry Department advisory committee voted unanimously to ban the meeting" according to "Infinite Energy", so it was held off campus. 11.4 Glow Discharge and Sputtering experiments There are a number of experiments which do not use electrolysis or gas pressure as Fleischman and Pons and Steve Jones initially proposed. In particular there are many which use electrical discharges. Unfortunately it is not clear whether they are zero-energy (cold) fusion or are intermediate energy (lukewarm) fusion. The point is that in so-called glow discharges, quite high energies can be occasionally created by sparking and as Dr. Kasagi showed deuteron ions of about 3000 eV can cause nuclear interactions giving low levels of nuclear products such as n, p, t, and 3He. An example of this is the work of Kucherov et al. from the "Luch" labs near Moscow, which made such an impression on some at ICCF-3 in Nagoya. Hence it would be unsafe to consider experimental claims to have observed such levels until a proper detailed study has been made of the energy distribution of the incident ions. 11.5. About the Conference The conference was held in the Apex Toya hotel which is about 2 hours from Sapporo in the northern island of Hokkaido. It is high on a ridge with ski lifts going down to the Pacific on one side and on the other side are ski lifts going down to a large volcanic crater lake with steep islands in it. Must be nice in good weather but it finally snowed towards the end of the week. The hotel was very luxurious and the Chinese restaurant was one of the best I have visited. The only sponsor named was the government organisation, New Energy and Industrial Development Organisation, NEDO. However others contributed, for example, heard of a major Japanese car company looking after four Russian delegates. Participants generally considered it by far the most scientific conference in the series. There were three probable reasons. Firstly, out of the 50 talks, there were only two theory talks (by Chubb and Chubb, and by Kim et al. of Purdue University) and no theory summary talk. Secondly, major Japanese laboratories presented serious experiments with carefully controls and calibrations - and they gave believable errors. Thirdly, the conference Chairman, Prof. Okamoto said that some 40 papers had been excluded (not quite enough). Media interest has declined steadily - from the feverish atmosphere with official and private press conferences of the first meeting - this time was not aware of any outside media interest whatsoever. Analysis of the official lists (slightly different from reality) gave 170 participants, 50 talks, and 77 posters - i.e. 170-50-77. The corresponding numbers for the major countries are; Japan 91-22-19; USA 32-11-16; Italy 15-6-4; Russia 8-4-15; China 4-1-15; France 6 -2-1 11.6. CETI - The Patterson Power Cell Dr. James Patterson and Jim Redding have been making large claims of continuous excess heat from the Patterson power cells and they have set up a company called Clean Energy Technologies Inc., CETI, to sell them. Their cells have been propagandised by Mr. Rothwell on the net but he withdrew after he was severely attacked (e.g. he said it could produce for hours 1300 watts out for one watt in, but it was pointed out that this would boil all the water away and end the experiment quickly, so he changed his story). There should have been a CETI session, but this disappeared apart from a talk by George Miley mainly about transmutations. After ICCF-6, Gene Mallove posted that CETI had a stall at the American Nuclear Society meeting in Washington DC on the 11 and 12 November. They were selling kits at $3,750 each and claimed to have sold 40 of which some 15 were sold at the ANS meeting!. They supplied a number of things including two research cells and a monthly newsletter edited by Prof. George Miley and mandatory on-site training in the use of the cells at the University of Illinois - suppose the university approves? At their stall, they had a cell running at 5 watts out for 1.5 watt in - much more modest than their previous claims of over 1000 watts out - are they going backwards? They also claim to reduce the radioactivity of heavy elements such as uranium or thorium by "conservatively" 50%. Amazing! Apparently people are very interested in Miley's transmutation paper (according to Mallove) and he has been invited to present his latest work at the American Nuclear Society meeting in June. Mallove says the US Patent Office has allowed them a patent (suspect it does not contain the words "cold fusion"). Mallove writes "according to CEO Redding" an organisation has already purchased the 'exclusive world rights' to licence and sub-licence this patent. The organisation has paid CETI $1 million ($1,000,000) for this. The organisation's identity, for now, is private'. Well we have already heard this before about mysterious buyers putting up a million - think the last was hinted to be Motorola but equally discrete word was that Motorola was not putting up a million dollars. Seems like a case that might interest the Regulators. 11.7 The Siena Bomb In January 1994, the Italian press was full of a great discovery at Siena of a cell that produced 50 watts by cold fusion - and this was followed by a paper10 by S. Focardi et al. . They heated a nickel wire to about 500 C in a hydrogen gas and got out much more heat than they would have expected - the calibration being done in vacuum. I have suggested many times to Prof. Focardi that it was a question of either fusion or of heat transfer - for hydrogen gas is the second best material to transfer heat. A quick way to settle the matter would be to run the experiment with helium gas which transfers heat efficiently but cannot give fusion. Despite urgings, they have always refused to do this simple but decisive experiment. Two things have happened since - they have been funded by a major company and they have stopped talking to any audience which might ask probing questions, though I did manage to attend one. It was most disappointing as it hardly discussed the experiment or the results - it was mainly a superficial account of the World's energy problems. They did not talk at ICCF-5 and did not appear at ICCF-6. Although Prof. Focardi has been an experienced scientific administrator for many years, he seems to have lost touch with experimental Science and its code of conduct. See Post-script below for later official information. 11.8 Tom Droege Recently some people have been asking what has become of Tom Droege who made a good reputation for himself by carry out experiments to check cold fusion claims and reporting the results on-line. As he used good experimental technique and scientific methods, he could not verify any claim mentioned. When I was at the E632 Collaboration meeting in Fermilab, met Tom. He is very busy working on cosmic ray detectors for Jim Cronin's big experiment - has developed some interesting new techniques. He was interested in my new theory for the production of ultra-high energy cosmic rays, > 1019 eV, from micro-quasers in our galaxy which were discovered by Felix Mirabel. Tom has put cold fusion completely behind him. 11.9 Macmillan Encyclopaedia of Physics Have just received the four handsomely bound volumes of the new Macmillan Encyclopaedia of Physics. Some might be interested in the section on "Error and Fraud", pages 316 to 320. 12. Please Can I Have a Cup of Tea? In July 1989, Stan Pons gave an interview11 where he is photographed with a cell that he claims is a boiler of which he said "It wouldn't take care of the family's electrical needs, but it certainly could provide them with hot water year round" and later "Simply put, in its current state it could provide boiling water for a cup of tea." Now seven years later we went to ICCF-6 hoping for this boiler to provide us with a cup of tea, but there still seems to be a problem - wonder what it could possibly be? 13. CONCLUSIONS 1. Japanese government and major Japanese companies have done good and careful experiments to confirm and to test cold fusion. Their experiments show no evidence in favour of cold fusion even though they had the advice of the leading cold fusion experimentalists. 2. In all experiments except those performed by cold fusion Believers in From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 03:25:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA32568; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:13:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:13:38 -0800 Message-Id: <199701191112.DAA27968 dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Morrison ICCF-6 review, part 3 of 3 To: vortex-l eskimo.com To: aki ix.netcom.com Date: January 19, 1997 Resent-Message-ID: <"2H40h3.0.oy7.W7Wuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3495 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Morrison ICCF-6 review, part 3 of 3 (final) metals, the branching ratios of n, p, t, 3He are equal and 107 times larger that for 4He. The True Believers find many different ratios often disagreeing, and say that the 4He channel is dominant instead of being minor. Now new and careful experimentalists with deuteron beams fired into metals, find the normal branching ratios. Further they studied the variation of rate down to very low energies and found no anomaly such as the very sharp rise in the rate at low energies which would be required by cold fusion claims. Note these experiments were carried out in the metal lattice itself. 3. All this strong evidence against cold fusion claims, seem to have had little effect on the summary speakers who kept smiling. 4. In the past there have been weak claims of transmutation of elements. At ICCF-6 George Miley made extravagant claims that from nickel he can produce many elements all the way up to lead. Critics say that his data can be interpreted without transmutations. 5. Considerable data has been obtained on the structure of materials. It is noted that with time the metal can have cracks and be covered with crud. This may help to explain why after long periods, bursts of excess heat are observed - this in experiments which are not well-designed and which do not have an outer bath maintained at a constant temperature. 6. In the law suit brought against La Repubblica by Fleischman, Pons, Preparata, Bressani and Del Giudice, the judges refused it and awarded costs against the five. They are appealing 7. Despite all the failures to reproduce cold fusion in careful experiments by Japanese researchers, a seventh conference is planned for 1998 - but probably with little Japanese money. POST-SCRIPTS; (1) "SIENA BOMB" NOT CONFIRMED BY NEW EXPERIMENT (2) OTHER WRONG RESULTS DISPROVED - AXIONS, H/D RATIO The claim by Focardi et al.10, to have maintain 44 Watts of power production over 24 days, and which they claim to have repeated, has been checked by an independent group. This was the LAA project who performed their experiment on the CERN site - note they are independent of CERN, also I was not involved. This major paper by E. Cerron-Zeballos et al., will be published in Nuovo Cimento soon - it was submitted 3 July 1996 and approved 18 November 1996. The Abstract reads; "Anomalous heat production in a nickel rod loaded with hydrogen has been reported by Focardi et al. (Nuovo Cimento A, 107(1994)163). We have investigated this phenomenon by repeating the experiment. We found the results to be consistent with our observations. : namely we measured higher temperatures for the same input power when hydrogen is absorbed during a heating cycle. Nevertheless this temperature rise does not appear to correspond to an increase an heat production. We have added a temperature sensor to the container of the experiment. The temperature of the container follows the same temperature with input power curve irrespective of whether there is an anomalous absorption of hydrogen or not: therefore we have no evidence of that this temperature increase corresponds to another source of heat. In conclusion, we have observed all the effects discovered by Focardi et al., but our results imply that there is no production of power associated with the absorption of hydrogen by nuclei." Thus there is are strange effects, but the experiment is complicated and not easy to interpret. Essentially they say, in a very polite way, that the interpretation of Focardi et al. was rather enthusiastic. This confirmed what I had been trying to suggest to Prof. Focardi, that before having press conferences and arrangements with industry, he should repeat the experiments with more instrumentation and should vary the conditions to try and prove himself wrong, e.g. by trying helium. There is no blame for making a mistake - the question is how you react afterwards. This is beautifully illustrated in the current 10th January issue of Science in two cases described. Gary Taubes (author of Bad Science - the Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion" recounts the history of the claim to have discovered the axion at Darmstadt. In 1969 Walter Greiner proposed that when two heavy ions e.g. Uranium, touched they could form a "quasi-atom" which could generate enormous electrical charge which could produce electrons and positrons giving new particles. In 1983 -87 two experiments observed peaks in the positron spectrum of six standard deviations which was sometimes interpreted as being axions which are a serious candidate for the missing Dark Matter of the Universe. However the results were not reproducible and the position of the peaks shifted. Jack Greenberg of Yale and Tom Cowen of Livermore strongly supported the existence of peaks and criticised those who disagreed. It was said that the conditions had to be just right to observe the peaks, and if you did not find them, it was because your target was too thick or the energy resolution was not quite right. Berndt Muller at a nuclear physics meeting in 1986, compared the work and ideas with Irving Langmuir's six criteria of Pathological Science and showed great similarity - he was not popular with some. Now three major second generation experiments have been done with ten times the statistics and almost all the authors consider that the erratic peaks are not real. Rudi Ganz of Illinois, showed that by making careful selections (cuts) of random data, it was possible to generate similar peaks. However Greenberg and Cowan insist that the peaks are real and even that if they re-analyse the data, they can find peaks. - they have become True Believers. Observers of Cold Fusion may find some similarity between this case history and that of cold fusion. In contrast is the case of the Hydrogen to deuterium ratio, H/D. measured by astrophysicists. The H/D ratio is a crucial ingredient of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis which is a key evidence in favour of the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe. This ratio was for long thought to be 10-5 and this allowed the numbers of neutrino families to be about three as found by LEP (2.998 +/- 0.004). Then measurements from the Keck telescope gave a ratio ten times higher, 10-4. Many measurements were made and they formed two groups about the two values. At the biannual Texas conference on astrophysics held in Chicago in December which I attended. David Tytler gave a new long analysis of his and the other results which showed that the higher ratio values came from a subtle mis-interpretation of the data and 10-5 was the best value. One of the leaders of the higher ratio, Craig Hogan, was scheduled to speak before the new analysis was known. It was a difficult situation, but fortunately Craig is an excellent astrophysicist as well as a responsible scientist and he acknowledged that David Tytler's data were "clearly superior and his arguments were real. How different from cold fusion - here there is no True Believer to continue arguing. So this is the message for people like Profs. Focardi, Miley etc. - it is no crime to make a mistake, but it is irresponsible to continue when the evidence against accumulates - a good responsible scientist tries to prove himself wrong. In the same issue of Science, there is third analysis which may be wrong, (though the experiment is correct) but as I am a member of the small, though growing minority who thinks so, it is better to wait. References 1. J. Wilson et al., J. Electroanal. Chem. 332(1992)1. 2. S. Isagawa and Y. Kanda, KEK preprint 96-138 (1996). 3. S, Isagawa, Vacuum, 47(1996)497-499. 4. M. Fleischman and S. Pons, J. Electroanal. Chem. 261(1989)1, 5. Nature, 363(1993)107. 6. E. Del Giudice and G. Preparata, Nature 381 (1996) 729. 7. D.R.O. Morrison, Nature 382(1996)572. 8. M. Rabbinowich, . Kim, V.A. Chechin, and V.A. Tsarev, ICCF-4, pages 3 to 13, 1993. 9. G. Preparata, J. Electroanal. Chem. 411(1996)9-18. 10. S. Focardi, R. Habel and F. Piantelli, Il Nuovo Cimento, 1897(1994)163-167. 11. Deseret News, Salt Lake City, 8 July 1989. APPENDIX - was Cold Fusion Update No. 11 Neutron Claims of Bressani et al. Critically Examined. B5. Bressani et al., Turin The group of Tullio Bressani et al. in Turin, has published1 an important result based on experiments where they claimed to have observed neutrons emitted from Titanium in deuterium gas. What was particularly striking about these measurements, was their claim that the energy of each neutron was measured and a peak was obtained near the value of 2.45 MeV which would be expected if the neutrons came directly from the reaction; d + d ---> 3He + n(2.45 MeV) Previously F&P in their 23 March 1989 press conference and in the original version of their first paper, claimed that they had established this as they observe a sharp peak of gammas at 2.5 MeV from the reaction of these energetic neutrons with the protons of the water n(2.45 MeV) + p ---> d + g(2.5 MeV) But it was pointed out to Fleischmann at Harwell on the 28th March 1989, that this was impossible as the neutrons slowed down before interacting and were thermal when captured by the protons of the water, so that the reaction should have been; n(0 MeV) + p ---> d + g(2.2 MeV) giving the well-known gammas of 2.2 MeV. Two days later at Lausanne, Fleischmann showed almost the same graph of gammas with the peak at 2.2 MeV - this disturbing change is discussed in detail in Frank Close's book2. It can be seen why the result of Bressani et al. excited such great interest. In 1991 Bressani et al.3 used 3 grams of Titanium shavings which they temperature cycled from 25 C up to 540 C, called "UP", and back down again, "DOWN". A very broad peak can be observed centred near 2.45 MeV which they say is about 2.5 standard deviations. They say no enhancement was observed with hydrogen instead of deuterium, but they do not use the hydrogen data as a background as might be expected, but surprisingly use the "DOWN" distribution. No real explanation for this choice is given except that the shape is better - there are problems with the background which is mainly instrumental and not natural. The loading was D/Ti = 0.32 which is surprisingly low and almost all True Believers declare that to obtain cold fusion effects one needs the loading to be > 0.8, or > 0.9, or >1.0. A more complete experiment was performed in 1992 and reported1 by Botta et al. Three experiments were performed, Ti with D2 gas, Ti with H2 gas and Pd with D2 gas for times of 13933, 4631 and 2820 minutes (a total time of less than 15 days - short for such a crucial experiment). This time the background was taken as the hydrogen run. It is claimed that all the events above background in the bin from 2 to 3 MeV are neutrons corresponding to a 2.45 MeV peak and a significance of 5 standard deviations claimed - this statement is really sensational - clean, convincing statistically significant evidence for cold fusion! However there is a major problem for there is not a clear peak at 2.45 MeV as claimed, but rather a sharp rise at 2 MeV and a slow fall-off above the 2 to 3 MeV bin going out to 6 MeV. It is essential to understand the asymmetry and the origin of these high energy neutrons before any claim can be made for a single symmetric peak of 2.45 MeV neutrons. If one takes fig. 2 of the ICCF-3 paper, then measuring this figure, the statistical significance of the excess in the bins, 2 to 3, 3 to 4, 4 to 5, and 5 to 6 MeV is resp., about 5.3, 4.7, 3.7, and 2.8 standard deviations. Thus anyone who wishes to claim that the excess counts in the 2 to 3 MeV bin means something, has also to explain the overall more significant excesses in the neighbouring bins (Note their resolution, FWHM was about 1 MeV). It must be concluded that any claim to observe 2.45 MeV neutrons is not justified. At ICCF5, Tullio4 presented their results entitled "Search for 4He production in Pd/D2 systems in a Gas phase". He said they decided to improve their experiment but rather than increase the number of neutron detectors, they decided to improve their helium detector system since there had been several claims of large amounts of helium, and in particular the amount of helium was sometimes almost commensurate with being the sole source of excess heat (e.g. Miles). He said that most of their experiments gave no helium but perhaps there were indications of helium in one experiment4. They now found no neutrons of 2.45 MeV, more precisely, the rate was less than 0.4 neutrons/second per gram of Pd at the one sigma level. They consider this result to be compatible with their earlier result of 0.02 +/- 0.01 neutrons/s/gram of Pd because the older experiment used 54 grams of Pd while the new one used 0.5 grams. Well. maybe. There is a major assumption here that the rate depends on the volume of the palladium. And if one has made this assumption, then why reduce the volume of palladium by a factor of 100 since one expects then to reduce the neutron signal also by a factor of 100? To use 0.5 grams is poor experimental design. Very often scientists who have to report that an improved experiment does not explain their earlier published results, tend not to announce them too loudly, so it was very commendable of Tullio to say in public that their important new experiment did not confirm their claim of neutrons of 2.45 MeV which had made such an impression previously. It must have been difficult for him as he was, with Preparata and Del Giudice, author of a theory of cold fusion5 which was presented again at this ICCF-5 conference by Dr. Preparata; also after La Repubblica wrote that cold fusion was scientific fraud, he, together with Drs. Fleischmann, Pons, Preparata and Del Guidice, sued the newspaper for some $5million6 but had costs awarded against them7. It is the hallmark of a serious scientist to present all results even if they do not confirm previous results. In this Tullio resembles most of the scientists who had been very strongly presenting data which they claimed showed evidence for the existence of a new neutrino of 17 keV mass. Some of them had been attacking those experiments which did not find it (just as some True Believers in cold fusion attack the Harwell, MIT and CalTech experiments). It may be remembered8 that when the weight of null experiments against the proposed new 17 keV neutrino became too great, they realised that their own experiments must be mistaken and hence carefully checked them for error and sometimes even repeated their experiments, to try to find the error and to prove themselves wrong - this is how good scientists follow the scientific method they try to prove themselves wrong. The question of whether neutrons of 2.45 MeV are emitted or not, is a very important one. It is to be hoped that the Turin group will also do a good decisive experiment on this subject and it is to be expected that the neutron system will be improved, that the volume of metal will be increased by a factor of 100 and not reduced by a factor of 100, and the run will be long enough, some months, to give good statistics with D2 and H2. Also with their very low efficiency of 2.5x10-4, the counting rates are very low, so it would be wise to perform the experiment deep underground. Finally it is essential that an explanation is given of the asymmetric shape of the neutron spectrum, explaining or removing the large number of high energy neutrons so that a clear peak at 2.45 MeV can be seen - if it exists. Below is given a more detailed discussion of the work and analysis of the Turin group since Tullio has stated4 "Since the start of the debate about the occurrence of D-D fusion phenomena in the lattice of some metals like Pd and Ti, the detection of neutrons, in particular 2.5 MeV neutrons, has been considered the most reliable signature of the effect" Description of Experiments and Analysis of the Turin Group of Bressani et al. The technique that allows the energy of the neutron to be measured at emission, is to use two sets of scintillation counters and time of flight. The neutron scatters in the first set giving a "start" signal, and the "stop" signal is given by the second set. However the price to be paid is low efficiency, measured to be 2.5x10-4. Thus any counting rate quoted, has to be multiplied by this small number to find out the actual counting rate per gram of metal. As the amount of metal is small, the counting rates are very low so this must be considered a difficult low-counting experiment of the type that should best be performed deep underground. Three sets of runs have been made. 1991. Deuterium gas was used with 3 grams of Titanium shavings. The loading ratio, D/Ti atoms, was only 0.32 which is very low - one can obtain 1.8 fairly easily with a higher D2 gas pressure. Generally True Believers say that the reason null results are obtained is because the loading was too low. However a signal of about 2.5 standard deviations was claimed. This would correspond to 1.3 +/- 0.5 neutrons/second/gram of Ti. However the analysis was rather curious and merits study. Normally one compares the energy spectrum obtained with deuterium with that from hydrogen(as blank) and hopes to find a peak near 2.45 MeV, but the paper3 says that the event distribution showed some systematic effect. Instead the energy spectrum during the temperature increases, "UP", was compared with that during the decreases, "DOWN", and on subtracting, a broad peak near 2.5 MeV was shown. However no justification of such a curious choice of background was made since one might have expected the deuterium concentrations to be somewhat similar during the UP and the DOWN phases. 1992. Experiments were performed with 20 grams of titanium, this time in the form of a sponge which greatly increased the surface area, and with 54 grams of palladium in the form of small cylinders. The loading, D/Ti, was 0.7 for 20% of the data and the standard 1.8 for the other 80%. For the palladium, the loading was about 0.7 - it is surprising that they tried to run with such a low loading as most True Believers, e.g. Mike McKubre, insist that with palladium, high loadings, above about 0.9, are necessary. This time the raw data are given for H and for D resp., in fig 3 and 4 of ref. 1. There are less than a 100 counts in the 0 to 1 MeV bin but about 3600 counts in both cases for the neighbouring 1 to 2 MeV bin - this is hard to understand if the resolution has a FWHM of 1 MeV. Subtracting the two graphs, fig. 5a, gives about 380 counts in the 2 to 3 MeV bin but a small negative number of counts in the 1 to 2 MeV bin - it is again hard to understand why there is not more counts in the 1 to 2 MeV bin from smearing when the resolution is 1 MeV Full Width at Half Maximum, FWHM. The subsequent bins give about 280, 180, 140, and 60 counts for 3 to 4, 4 to 5, 5 to 6, and 6 to 7 MeV bins resp., which are too high numbers for a single peak at 2.45 MeV and a resolution of about +/- 0.5 MeV. Clearly there is something wrong with this analysis or with the data. The above analysis gave 3.9 sigma. A second analysis gave 5.3 sigma. The neutron emission was given as 0.11 +/- 0.03 neutrons/second /gram of titanium, suggesting a 3.7 sigma result, so the first analysis seems preferred. It is noted that this rate is a factor of ten less than the rate of 1.3 +/- 0.5 n/s/g found in 1991 and this is explained as being due to the titanium having a greater surface area as it was now in the form of a sponge - but this reason seems unreasonable as the rate is quoted as per gram of titanium and hence the rate with the Ti sponge should have been much higher not ten times lower. If the rate had been quoted per unit of surface, the discrepancy would have been greater, not less. Yet the authors also say that a bulk phenomenon is preferred by the theoretical model of Bressani, Del Guidice and Preparata5 - but these data seem to contradict this model? Could the model possibly be incorrect? It may be noted that the 1991 analysis technique of subtracting DOWN from UP was not used - not surprisingly since it is shown that for the 80% of runs with a loading D/Ti of 1.8, the deuterium was shown to stay in the metal for the whole cycle so that such a subtraction would be inappropriate. With the 54 grams of palladium, only a small signal of 70 counts was observed which would correspond to 2 sigma - it would give a rate of 0.02 +/- 0.01 neutrons/s/gram. 1995. At ICCF5, Tullio Bressani reported4 on an experiment using the same neutron detector, using 0.5 grams of palladium and said that the emission rate of 2.5 MeV neutrons was less than 0.4 n/s/gram. He later explained that this was fully consistent with the 1992 result of 0.02 +/- 0.01 n/s/g which was obtained using 54 grams of palladium. It is correct that they are not inconsistent, but it does not explain why if the first result was inconclusive, it was decided to run with the mass of palladium reduced by a factor of 100? Normally to solve a low counting problem, one increases the mass of palladium substantially, not decreases it. Conclusions Overall, there are so many internal contradictions that it is hard to believe that neutrons of 2.45 MeV have been observed. It would be good Science if each of the authors were to revisit these papers. References for Appendix only. 1. Botta et al. NC 105A(1992)1663 and in ICCF3, page 433 2. F. Close, "Too Hot to Handle" 3. Bressani et al., Nuovo Cimento 104A(1991)1413 4. T. Bressani, ICCF-5, Monte Carlo, 1995 5. T. Bressani, G. Del Giudice, and G. Preparata, Nuovo Cim. 101A(1989)865 and G. Preparata, ICCF-5, page 65 (1995). 6. Nature 363(1993)107. 7. Nature 380(1996) 8. D.R.O. Morrison, Nature 366(1993)29-32. (c) Douglas R.O. Morrison. Address for correspondance; CH-1296 Coppet, Switzerland Tel. 41 22 767 35 32 drom vxcern.cern.ch Fax 41 22 767 90 75. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 04:53:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA07612; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 04:42:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 04:42:51 -0800 From: "John Kent" To: Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:40:16 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <12412506700692 andover.co.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <"JWU5t.0.ss1.9RXuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3496 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: water resonance > Date: Sunday, January 19, 1997 4:10 AM > > [snip] > >It seems to me that this would only work, if it works at all, in low > >conductivity water, otherwise the dielectric would short out the circuit and > >become an electrolyte. This would explain how the court was convinced that his > >water fuel cell didn't work as he described, when the experts added salt to the > >water in his demo cell. > > > >Of course I could be wrong! > > > >Norman > > Sounds good to me. A great way to botch an o-u device: short it out. > snip.... > > Horace Heffner I built four Meyer type cells, before the court case. After the court case I started on number five. The Electronic driver circuitry, in his patents, cannot work as he described. The turns ratios etc., are wildly out. The key problem, is the resistance of the tapwater electrolyte. It effectively, shorts out the capacitor formed by the plates, lowers the Q of the tuned circuit and the capacitor never charges up to the peak voltages he claims.> We should remember that the purpose of the plates is to form a capacitance. The question I am asking myself, is what happens if one covers one, or both of the plates, with a very thin skin of insulation. The capacitor now becomes an idealised capacitor. No resistive leakage and the capacitor can now charge up to the peak voltages that he claims and a Hi Q tank circuit is now possible. Removing the resistance of the water and hence the circuit loading, reduces the input power to the cell, to a fraction of what it is, with uninsulated plates. I will continue if there is any interest. john kent. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 06:45:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA20085; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:34:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:34:19 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:33:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970119093340_1691687373 emout16.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: great idea Robin Resent-Message-ID: <"cBYh13.0.lv4.f3Zuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3497 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If some mechanism could be found where electrons move in a coordinated rather than random fashion, then their *relative* motion could remain small .............................................................................. ....................... That was the idea of the microwave experiments that I talked Frank Stenger into helping me with. I wanted to sheepherd electrons into moving clusters. These moving clusters would not deionize and they would experience the Casimir force that Puthoff developed. Good work Hal. The Casimir force is proving to be right on the money. Back to the microwaves, how can sheephear electrons? My thought was to use mechanical sound waves. These sound waves would have to be of a very high frequency. Thats why I injected microwaves, mechanical and electrical waves interact directly in a charged plasma. The injected micorwaves would then establish mechanical waves within the plasma. The experiments failed, perhaps because I was using the wrong frequency of injection perhaps the amplitude of the induced waves was not sufficient . I don't know. .............................................................................. ........................................ The second method question that comes to mind about my madness is, why do I want to make electron clusters anyway? This is where Puthoff and I differ a bit, our ideas are similar but not the same. Puthoff is trying to extract energy from the force of the cluster collapse. I am not. I have said for years, and now it is published (ie The Journal of New Energy Sept 1996) that the nature of the interaction between the forces changes within systems containing condensed electrons. When I first explained this to Miley his eyes lit up. He has been my friend ever since. Take this Bill B has posted this paper years ago now. Cut and paste it into your browser and take a look. http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/znidr2.txt Here is the graph that is the basis of my thoughts. The-zero-point-interaction PICK_ME What has happen that is proving me correct? One The Tempere experiment has found a short range gravitation force can be induced with rotating superconductors. The length of the gravitational interaction has decreased to meters. Two Miley has found "multi-body reactions" implying that the length of the nuclear force has increased. (from 10 -13 cm to > .1 cm) Then for my 1985 patent on a two disk antigraviational flux converter. I just sent S. Little a copy. I going out to see Miley at his invitation. Perhaps we will build the device. The principles that the device were designed upon are proving to be sound. Miley knows much and seems to understand this. How may other people has he invited out to see him? Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 07:20:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA24194; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 07:09:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 07:09:51 -0800 Message-ID: <32E2394C.7370 interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:10:04 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: great idea Robin References: <970119020020_1045874661 emout17.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sOZTD3.0.qv5.zaZuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3498 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > Is that not > correct Mr. Stenger? > > Frank Znidarsic Frank, there's way too much quantum mechanics between me and a deep understanding of atomic-level physics. I'll leave these "subtle" approaches to physics to you and Horace. Trying to herd electrons like a flock of sheep escapes me. If I wanted to pack many electrons together, I would use high magnetic fields, high electric fields, or plenty of nearby positive charges. Experiment! What happens if you bury an electrolytically etched needle point in a huge block of acrylic plastic - the needle being at the end of a tapered conductor which exits the cast plastic to form the (-) electrode of a VERY high voltage source? What if the needle-point is centered in a small spherical cavity in the plastic? Replace the acrylic with a composite, spherical winding of kevlar + resin. What happens when the plastic starts to ionize? Too bad positronium has such a short half-life. Liquid positronium - now there's a neat fuel -------. If the CETI bead kits don't work out, I think I'll go back to full-time nurturing of the channel catfish in my farm pond! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 07:31:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA25531; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 07:20:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 07:20:40 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970119072137.00aa8e28 mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 07:21:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, ROBK@netcomuk.co.uk From: Epitaxy Subject: Re: Adams Motor, Bifillar Coils, etc. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"KdUBc.0.rE6.7lZuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3499 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rob These 2 magnets should be neodymium. How old and what capacity was the drive you took them out of. Did it have voice coil type of the head actuator. At 09:36 PM 1/18/97 -0800, you wrote: >Date: 18th Jan, 1997 Time 20:19 GMT >I took 2 magnets out of a full height 5.25 HD (IBM) and they are very very powerful. >They may be ALNICO and I intend to use these in my next Adams motor. >Greg Watson may have something with this ferrite rod idea. I did not use ferrite rod as >the coil core in my first Adams motor because it produced a flux density 50% less than a >soft iron core. I now have 2 magnets that produce over 4Kg of repulsive thrust between >each other (this is about 10 times more than the small circular PMs I used before). > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 08:38:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA04059; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:27:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:27:08 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:26:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970119112631_1378053824 emout03.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: great idea robin Resent-Message-ID: <"jX2B71.0.K_.Rjauo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3501 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If some mechanism could be found where electrons move in a coordinated rather than random fashion, then their *relative* motion could remain small .............................................................................. ......................... Robin you have got me going. You have found the same train of thought that I did. After completing the experiments at Frank Stenger's with microwaves, that did not work, I realized that the forces within a singing arc are not strong enough to sheepherd electrons. How they can we do this? I thought, "If I could only hit the plasma with a sludge hammer!" Then I read about Yury Potapov and Griggs and went nutz. That's what they were doing!!! I don't believe for a minute that the forces produced were strong enough to push nuclei together..but I do believe that they are strong enought to shepherd electrons ...yes.. And that is why I still have great faith in Yury Potapov's technologies. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-digest-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 08:59:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA10850 for billb@eskimo.com; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:59:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:59:27 -0800 X-Envelope-From: dtmiller dsmnet.com Sun Jan 19 08:59:21 1997 Received: from dsm7.dsmnet.com (dsm7.dsmnet.com [205.217.160.39]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id IAA10826; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:59:20 -0800 Received: by dsm7.dsmnet.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA05541; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:59:13 -0600 Old-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:59:13 -0600 Message-Id: <9701191659.AA05541 dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-digest@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: vortex-digest Digest V97 #31 X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-digest Status: RO X-Status: Rob King wrote: > >Word of warning: I had my car battery on charge for 24 hrs last weekend, I checked the >terminal voltage and then decided to short the terminals with a hacksaw blade to >discharge it a little. There was a big spark and then an almighty bang! >The battery detonated in front of me, I was splashed with sulfuric acid and hit in the >face by a large piece of flying plastic. I still have a small graze on my face that has >nearly healed up. I can only summize that the build up of hydrogen and oxygen in the >top of the cell must have ignited and shattered the entire upper half of the battery >casing, leaving just the terminals sticking out from the plates, and plastic casing >scattered around the room. >Remember, never allow sparks near a battery that has been charging, this time I was >lucky. :-) You shorted the terminals of a modern, 'sealed' car battery???? No spark is needed to cause an explosion -- just the rapid generation of gasses internally. You asked the battery to supply a few thousand amps, which is possible because of the much lower battery resistance in current batteries -- needed for the batteries to supply the 'cold starting' current the manufacturers like to advertise. As a result, shorting the terminals will generate a large amount of internal heat which vaporizes the electrolyte. Modern batteries have a vent hole small enought to not allow the quick release of the gaseous electrolyte, so the pressure builds and pops the plastic case (older cases would have simply bulged and cracked, venting the gases). It wasn't a H2 O2 explosion, just a pressure release. (Sparks around a battery aren't a good idea anyway, but won't cause the battery to explode.) Dean -- from Des Moines From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 13:53:57 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA13480; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:44:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:44:18 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:44:05 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970119164243.467fea46 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: great idea Robin Resent-Message-ID: <"L7d9m2.0.WI3.kMfuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3505 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:33 AM 1/19/97 -0500, Frank Znidarsic wrote: > >Two >Miley has found "multi-body reactions" implying that the length of the >nuclear force has increased. (from 10 -13 cm to > .1 cm) > Frank: Could you please explain how you obtained/derived/calculated the numbers for this, presumably from his preprint, or paper? Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 13:54:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA13416; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:43:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:43:47 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:43:32 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970119164210.467fe864 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"dCvpy1.0.UH3.IMfuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3504 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:47 PM 1/18/97 EST, Norman wrote: >>> Vary the excitation frequency about the resonance point. Energy is absorbed >from the exciter coil as the peak is approached, and absorbed by both the >exciter coil and pickup coil when the excitation frequency moves away from >resonance. << > >You may feel that your approach is dangerously close to Stan Meyer's > >He talks about pulsed batches of excitation of water at resonance, but uses high >voltage DC across electrodes with water as the dielectric to break up the H2O >molecules more efficiently that current electrolysis. The frequency he suggests >is between 16kHz and 20kHz, pulsed in amplitude ramped groups of 4 or 5 with a >resting gap of the same time span. > There has been switch from magnetostatic to electrostatics. In the electrostatic regime, this does not involve resonance. Although some may speak of "resonance" with high voltage DC electrode systems and water, FYI dielectric techniques use RELAXATION and not RESONANCE. The absorption curves are totally different, as are the effects. For some background information on the differences between magetostatic and electrostatic systems, cf. J. R. MELCHER, "Continuum Electromechanics", MIT Press, Cambridge, (1981). For some background information on the differences between the molecular bases of relaxation and resonance confer A. VON HIPPEL, D.B. KNOLL, W.B. WESTPHAL, "TRANSFER OF PROTONS THROUGH 'Pure' ICE Ih SINGLE CRYSTALS", J. Chem. Phys., 54, 134, (also 145),(1971), or A. VON HIPPEL, "Dielectric Materials and Applications", MIT Press,(1954). Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 16:27:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA01706; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:10:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:10:53 -0800 Date: 19 Jan 97 18:52:20 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: water resonance Message-ID: <970119235219_100060.173_JHB78-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"SWns5.0.YQ.BWhuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3506 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John, >> The key problem, is the resistance of the tapwater electrolyte. It effectively, shorts out the capacitor formed by the plates, << Precisely! That's why Meyer lost his case - his patent spec. doesn't work as written. >> what happens if one covers one, or both of the plates, with a very thin skin of insulation. The capacitor now becomes an idealised capacitor. << >> I will continue if there is any interest. << Have you got the pulse production ramping etc as he specifies? If so then a skin of insulation on the plates would be interesting if the effort and cost is not too outlandish. However, there is too much evidence of a flakey mind behind all this to be optimistic!! Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 17:39:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA19891; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:30:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:30:09 -0800 Message-ID: <32E2D983.2FBE gorge.net> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:33:39 -0800 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) Reply-To: tom gorge.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water Resonance References: <199701192154.NAA15445 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PY0JC2.0.fs4.Vgiuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3508 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: TO: John Kent: This sounds a lot like "Pulsed Dielectric Shielded Corona Discharge." It is being investigated as a means of removing Nox etc. in waste streams. It is sometimes called "cold plasma." They typically use a copper coil around a glass tube, then reactant space, then a small glass tube with a wire in it. The corona will ionize various substances, including water vapor. My opinion is that this type of corona discharge has much potential as a method of ionizing or dissociating water, to make Brown's Gas, or Hydrogen, economically. The key issues seem to be: 1. The dielectric material keeps water and conductors from interacting chemically. 2. The pulses need to be "square waves," and carefully controlled to prevent current flow through the ionized water. 3. The gases need to be moved from the reaction zone, so they do not immedately re-form into water. Downstream electrodes probably would work, but I think a strong magnetic field would work better (as in MHD) to keep the charged particles (H and O) apart. The monatomic form (Brown's Gas) seems to have much more potential energy. Please keep us posted. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 17:39:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA19750; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:29:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:29:17 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:45:35 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: diamagnetic water Resent-Message-ID: <"19HDY.0.Vq4.hfiuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3507 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I numbly wrote: "However, It occurred to me that oxygen is diamagnetic. Oxygen could slowly accumulate above the magnet and depress the water. Then what of the magnetic properties of the O and H in the water itself? Is the bump supposed to be convex or concave. What I (maybe) saw was concave." I should have woken up a bit before writing, as Bill Beatey originally wrote: >The magnet repels the water slightly, which creates the >concavity. Add more water and the dimple remains, even with a large >obvious layer of water over the magnet. Also, oxygen is not "diamagnetic" it is "paramagnetic", and thus attracted to the magnet, as I mentioned. I wonder if the bump shows up as visibly in a neutral atmosphere? There must be a better way to see the bump too, like using Morriere patterns or something? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 17:41:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA20033; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:31:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:31:15 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:36:27 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: great idea Robin Resent-Message-ID: <"hkP0H3.0.vu4.Whiuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3509 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >If some mechanism could be found where electrons move in a coordinated >rather than random fashion, then their *relative* motion could remain small >.............................................................................. >.................................. >I suggested the same thing some years ago. When Frank Stenger calculated the >thermal velocities of electrons in a cool plasma we found that the velocity >was much to high to form any type of condensation. > >Ke = 3/2 Kt 1 eV = 11,600 deg. K > >If the electrons were slowed down by cooling, woops, the plasma deionized. >The only answer seemed to be to keep the electron velocity high and the >relative velocity low. So Frank S. and I arrived at the same solution as >you. > >We also considered inelastic collsions were the electron would stick to a >slower moving ion for a bit and then break loose at low velocity. This >solution appeared to be unworkable. I'm not sure why any more. Is that not >correct Mr. Stenger? > >Frank Znidarsic The formation point, an extended conduction band protruding into space at the needle tip, would coordinate the relative motion of the electrons forming a condensed charge. There are maybe several interresting consequences to the virtual cloud, though. Such a cloud should not be about electrons in a conduction band or orbital, at least to anywhere the degree about a free electron, as the field gradient is not anywhere near as large. The cloud would form at the time the electrons accumulate to leave the conduction band to form the condensed charge. One of the difficulties relating to ZPE, assuming a cubic frequency distribution as theorised by Hakl Puthoff, is a mechanism to either extract the high end of the ZPE spectrum, or a mechanism to downshift the frequency in order to replace energy extracted from the locality of the ZPE sea by tapping the higher end of the spectrum of the locality. It seems to me that the ultra dense virtual particle cloud provides just such a mechanism for extracting, or downshifting energy from the ZPE sea. As a virtual particle shield forms about a forming charge cluster, a disproportionate increasing ZPE pressure is applied to the cluster. That is because, as the virtual particle cloud forms an increasingly dense virtual photon shield, thus increasing the ZPE pressure compressing the cloud, an increasing part of the ZPE spectrum is shielded from the inside of the cloud. This provides the mechanism for tapping the high end of the ZPE spectrum. Tunneling of the electrons from the tip into the confines of the shielded space of the cluster can proceed (due to the original potential gradient providing a lower potential space beyond the tip) until the pressure of the cloud separates the cluster from the tip. A similar tunneling out of the cluster can occur upon the cluster arriving at a lower potential conductor, resulting in the explosive decompression of the cluster, and relase of the original energy, plus the ZPE supplied compression energy. What do yo think? Is this reasonable? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 18:07:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23842; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:44:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:44:47 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:21:18 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: diamagnetic water Resent-Message-ID: <"QCQ092.0.Sq5.Duiuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3511 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A >DIAMAGNETIC WATER > >Place a neodymium disk magnet in a shallow dish. Fill the dish with water >so the magnet is completely covered (about .5cm water above the magnet). >Bounce light from a distant small source off the water surface at a >shallow angle and onto a wall or screen. You will see an oval reflection >from the water surface, and at the location of the magnet will be a small >bright splotch. The bright area is caused by a concave dimple in the >water surface. The magnet repels the water slightly, which creates the >concavity. Add more water and the dimple remains, even with a large >obvious layer of water over the magnet. > >(I heard about this one from someone who was deflecting streams of water >with a large neodymium magnet. The dimple effect is easier to show to a >large audience.) > >So, does the Podkletnov effect do a similar thing to water, but for less >conventional reasons? > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 My son John and I just tried a similar experiment using a 1"x1"x0.5" 35 MGO neodymium magnet. Placed the magnet in water in a plastic container, flux coming vertically out of the water, and veritcally through the 0.5" dimension. The magnet was purched on top of a plastic cap in order to position the top surface of the magnet about .5 cm below the water surface. The water was very hard, but contained very little iron. We tried projecting a flashlight beam on the wall from the water surface, but the flashlight beam was too non-uniform to determine anything. We then taped up a piece of blue line graph paper behind the water container such that the blue line grid reflected on the water surface. It was fairly clear that there was no significant bulge in the water surface above the magnet. However, a pretty neat little phnomenon was clearly visible in the square above the magnet. The blue lines were fairly steady and clear outside the square bounds above the magnet, but had a very clearly wiggly nature in the vicinity above the magnet. The reason is that the area above the magnet is shallow, so the barly visible waves on the water surface, caused by house and table vibrations, slow down, shorten wavelength, and build in corresponding wave height in the shallows above the magnet, thus making them visible. The fact that the hunk of stuff was a magnet was incidental to the results. I wonder if such a wavy appearance above a circular magnet could give the impression of a "bump" when projected by a fuzzy light beam? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 18:07:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23799; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:44:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:44:35 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:44:17 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: diamagnetic water Resent-Message-ID: <"15TVG1.0.np5.1uiuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3510 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The post I sent this morning about the diammagnetic water experiment was written last night. We left the experiment on the kitchen table over night. When I looked at the water this AM I saw the reflection of a kitchen ceiling light fixture. I noted what seemd to be an ever so slight depression in the water above the magnet. There was some dust in the water, but I could not tell if the dust was thicker above the magnet. However, It occurred to me that oxygen is diamagnetic. Oxygen could slowly accumulate above the magnet and depress the water. Then what of the magnetic properties of the O and H in the water itself? Is the bump supposed to be convex or concave. What I (maybe) saw was concave. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 19:42:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA10521; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:30:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:30:50 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970119193142.00af96a0 mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:31:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com From: Epitaxy Subject: Overunity Motor on TV Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uS7fk2.0.4a2.cRkuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3512 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A guy in Baton Rouge, Louisiana made an OU magnetic motor based on the Pereginus design it was shown on TV. The TV show was aired on 8/23/96 at 10pm the inventor's name is Richard White (not Gonzalez) his address is P.O. Box 65, Brittany 70718, his phone number is 504-644-4783. The TV station was WBRZ in Baton Rouge at 504-387-2222 or 504-336-2338 I talked to Richard White on the telephone and gathered the following impressions. He does not have a computer, Internet access or fax machine, he is around 60 years old, he is not paranoid, he is not aware of any FE energy work done by others, he was distrustful toward me for no apparent reason other than me calling him out of the blue. His motor works on similar ideas to Finsrud's and Stefan Marinov's (Chaotic motion, PM, energy vacuum, etc) It does require energy input, but it appears only to be for commutating or starting... --------------------------------------------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 19:43:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA10846; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:32:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:32:23 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:32:16 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: diamagnetic water In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"LrRTj.0.Of2.5Tkuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3513 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Horace Heffner wrote: > We tried projecting a flashlight beam on the wall from the water surface, > but the flashlight beam was too non-uniform to determine anything. We then > taped up a piece of blue line graph paper behind the water container such > that the blue line grid reflected on the water surface. It was fairly clear > that there was no significant bulge in the water surface above the magnet. Hi Horace! Try a single bare lightbulb in a somewhat darkened room. Fill your container pretty full, so the edge doesn't block the light. Bounce the light at an extremely shallow angle (did I forget this? the angle must be shallow, like 10 or 20deg.) The more distant the bulb, the better. (mine was about 10ft distant) An un-frosted bulb would be even better. You should see an elliptical patch of light on the screen if your container is round. Tap on the tabletop near the water, and the paper screen should show very obvious wave movements. (walking around the room causes large waves too.) | | Paper Screen | || | / \ | \_/ |----------| | | bare bulb |__________| container of water > However, a pretty neat little phnomenon was clearly visible in the square > above the magnet. The blue lines were fairly steady and clear outside the > square bounds above the magnet, but had a very clearly wiggly nature in the > vicinity above the magnet. The reason is that the area above the magnet is > shallow, so the barly visible waves on the water surface, caused by house > and table vibrations, slow down, shorten wavelength, and build in > corresponding wave height in the shallows above the magnet, thus making > them visible. The fact that the hunk of stuff was a magnet was incidental > to the results. I wonder if such a wavy appearance above a circular > magnet could give the impression of a "bump" when projected by a fuzzy > light beam? Nope, when I stick my head in place of the paper, and view the reflection of the light bulb, I see an obvious distorted patch on the surface, and the distortion appears as a circular depression, shaped same as the magnet shape. On the screen I see a bright patch surrounded by dark, as if the surface distortion is slightly focusing the light. No wiggling is visible in the depression. I could see no vibrations at all, and since the dish was on a counter top and late at night with no one moving, this is expected. If I tap on the countertop, very obvious waves appear, but they decay to nothing after about five seconds. OK, just tried it again. With about 1.5 cm depth above the 2cm dia magnet disk, no image is visible on the screen, but if I close one eye and view the reflected image of the light bulb in the water surface, the edge of the circular light bulb is definitely distorted. If I decrease the depth to a couple mm, the depression looks different: there is a slight hump in the center and an obvious crease where the edge of the magnet should be. Sort of like an inverted shape of a lunar crater. This is expected, since the repulsion should be proportional to the field gradient, and the gradient is highest at the edges of the magnet. This is a 35 MGOe disk, 3/4" dia, 3/8" thick. With your large rectangular magnet, the depression is probably flat-bottomed, so the blue paper lines would only appear distorted where they were above the magnet edges. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb eskimo.com www.eskimo.com/~billb EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 19:44:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA11391; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:34:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:34:31 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: great idea Robin Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 03:34:46 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e2f168.2161098 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <970119020020_1045874661 emout17.mail.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <970119020020_1045874661 emout17.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"b_7t-2.0.rn2.4Vkuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3514 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 02:00:21 -0500 (EST), FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: [snip] >I suggested the same thing some years ago. When Frank Stenger calculated the >thermal velocities of electrons in a cool plasma we found that the velocity >was much to high to form any type of condensation. > >Ke = 3/2 Kt > >If the electrons were slowed down by cooling, woops, the plasma deionized. >The only answer seemed to be to keep the electron velocity high and the >relative velocity low. So Frank S. and I arrived at the same solution as >you. Sorry gentlemen. I didn't wealise I was reinventing the wheel.:) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 21:19:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA04338; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:08:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:08:08 -0800 Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:08:01 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: New rule for Vortex-L Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FQ5441.0.i31.tsluo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3515 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's what I've added to the list of rules. It's intended to prevent recurrences of events like the "magnets motor" crossover discussion from freenrg-L. 5. Please do not include any other email list in the TO line or the CC line of your messages to vortex-L. In the past this has caused thread leakage between lists and redundant messages as replies from subscribers go to both lists. It's OK to manually forward mail from other lists to vortex-L, as long as the TO line and CC line has only vortex-L and no other list. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 19 21:41:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA08242; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:31:31 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:31:31 -0800 Message-ID: <32E30344.78B9 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 00:31:48 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: diamagnetic water References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VC3vT2.0.d02.nCmuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3516 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > (To Horace:) > With your large rectangular magnet, the depression is probably > flat-bottomed, so the blue paper lines would only appear distorted where > they were above the magnet edges. OK, Bill, Horace, - I just tried this experiment with a 2.75 OD ceramic speaker magnet with the rear steel disk + 1" dia. center core still attached. I put the magnet in the container with the bare side of the ceramic ring + the protruding 1" core on the top. Water cover was about 1/2 cm. I used a small "Maglite" flashlight for a source. I am picking up a bright ring-shaped spot around the center of the eliptical image of the water surface. I think the fringe field from the center pole to the adjacent ring-magnet surface is fairly intense - even though it is not a high-energy magnet. The general setup was about as per your sketch, Bill. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 00:45:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA05040; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 00:35:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 00:35:42 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 23:36:53 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: great idea Robin Resent-Message-ID: <"SK7tT2.0.eE1.Rvouo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3517 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 09:33 AM 1/19/97 -0500, Frank Znidarsic wrote: >> >>Two >>Miley has found "multi-body reactions" implying that the length of the >>nuclear force has increased. (from 10 -13 cm to > .1 cm) >> > > Frank: > > Could you please explain how you obtained/derived/calculated >the numbers for this, presumably from his preprint, or paper? > > Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) I missed the above post by Frank Z. today, and probably others, as there was a local name server outage for about 4 hours. Could you send me a copy of your post Frank? Thanks. Looks interresting - a Terra-leap! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 03:43:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA31692 for billb@eskimo.com; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 03:43:48 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 03:43:48 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tt aaisp.com Mon Jan 20 03:43:45 1997 Received: from ntdnsmail.AAISP.COM ([206.152.168.6]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA31673; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 03:43:44 -0800 From: tt aaisp.com Received: from [206.152.168.81] ([206.152.168.81]) by ntdnsmail.AAISP.COM (8.7.3 Version 1.1 Build 565/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA00016; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 02:57:19 GMT Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 1 (Highest) Old-Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:06:42 -1812 To: tt aaisp.com Subject: ===>> FREE 1 yr USA Magazine Sub sent worldwide-270+ Choices! Up to $64.00 value! X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: A FFFF,0000,0000FOR MORE INFO: please "cut out" the below form on the "cut" lines shown, and fax it, for the fastest reply to: 718-227-9125 (this is a fax # in the USA) or send via smail (first class mail or airmail) to: Tempting Tear-Outs Att. Free-catalogue-by-email Dept 3835 Richmond Ave. Suite #200 Staten Island NY 10312-3828 USA FFFF,0000,0000SORRY, BUT.... our software is not set up to accept forms via return email; WE CAN ONLY acknowledge forms sent in via fax or smail. FFFF,0000,0000--> IMPORTANT complete directions, to ensure that you get a reply, and more info follow, below the reply form and the catalogue options. *------------cut here/begin-------------------------------------------* Name: Internet email address: Smail home address: City-State-Zip: Country: Work Tel. #: Work Fax #: Home Tel. #: Home Fax #: How did you hear about us (name of person/company who referred you or the area of the internet that you saw us mentioned in): Referral by: Tempting Tear-Outs 011897-l Name of USA mags you currently get on the newsstand or in the store: Name of USA mags you currently get on a subscription basis, through the mail: Name of USA mags you would like price quotes on when we call you: Catalogue version desired (list number of choice below): *------------cut here/end--------------------------------------------* CATALOGUE VERSION CHOICES: 1. This version can be read by everyone, no matter what type of computer you use, or what type of software you use. It is a simple format, with just our entire catalogue pasted into the body of a single email message, 316K in size. If you use pine or elm on a unix system or an advanced software version such as Eudora Pro 3.0 or later, you will most likely receive it as a single email message. However, if your software limits incoming email messages to a certain size, say 32K or so, then your software will split it into multiple email message parts. Whether you receive it as a single email message or multiple part email messages, you can easily paste it into one whole text document with your word processor, in about 10 minutes or so. 2. For more advanced computer users: attached text file ~316K - you must know how to download an attached text file and then be able to open it with your word processor. If in doubt, don't ask for this version. This isn't for internet *newbies.* Better to order option 1 and spend a few minutes pasting them into one whole text document with your word processor, than to waste hours trying to figure how to deal with this option. This version is great for doing word searches and jumping around within the catalogue with your word processing software, if your normal email reading software doesn't allow this. 3. For more advanced Macintosh computer users: compressed attached text file, created with a Stuffit(tm) self-extracting archive (.sea), ~140K. Can be decompressed by any Macintosh computer user; no special expansion software or knowledge of Stuffit (tm) needed. You just double-click on the file icon and it automatically expands (unstuffs). This is for more advanced mac computer users only, as you still have to know how to deal with an attached file. It will cut your download time by 55%. Expands out to the same ~316K file in option #2. See option #2 for more info on what you will need to be able to do. 4. For expert mac or pc computer users: compressed attached text file, created with Stuffit(tm), ~116K. Can be decompressed by any computer user who has expansion software to decompress (expand) Stuffit(tm) (.sit) files. This is for more advanced computer users only and will cut your download time by 63%. Expands out to the same ~316K file in option#2. See option #2 for more info on what you will need to be able to do. 5. For expert pc or mac computer users: compressed attached text file, in a .zip file format, ~143K. Can be decompressed by any computer user who has expansion software to decompress (expand) .zip files. This is for more advanced computer users only and will cut your download time by 54%. Expands out to the same ~316K file in option#2. See option #2 for more info on what you will need to be able to do. FFFF,0000,0000VERY IMPORTANT DIRECTIONS TO ENSURE THAT YOU GET A REPLY: 1. you must call from an "unblocked number," ie. one that is not blocked from caller id. We are very sorry for this requirement, but our fax software requires this before it allows an incoming fax call to connect. If you have a blocked number, you must first unblock it. In most cases this means dialing *82 from a touch-tone phone (or 1182 from a rotary phone) before you dial 1-718-227-9125. NOTE: If you are not sure if your number is blocked, just try dialing our fax # normally. If you don't get a recording telling you your number is blocked, your number has been transmitted and you may press the start button on your fax when you hear the fax tone from our fax. 2. no reply forms can be accepted by email....only via fax or smail. 3. your form must be typewritten or printed out on your computer printer before you fax it; ie. no handwritten forms can be accepted. 4. faxes with cover pages will be rejected. You must send *only* the reply form. 5. forms not *completely* filled in will not be acknowledged. 6. you will receive a reply within 1 business day directly from the company making the offer via email. Therefore you must have an email address. If you read this message, then you must have an email address, or access to one, at least. :-) 7. your fax must not exceed 1 page in length. Faxes of 2 or more pages will be sensed, then auto-terminated and deleted. Your fax goes directly onto our 5.0 gigabyte hard drive and we must limit all incoming faxes to 1 page. 8. all faxes must begin with: *------------cut here/begin-------------------------------------------* and must end with: *------------cut here/end--------------------------------------------* 9. Any fax not conforming to this format will be sensed by our software, then auto-terminated and deleted from the hard drive, before any human ever gets to see it. 10. If this all seems too complicated for faxing, just do it the old fashioned way via smail!!! WHO WE ARE: Tempting Tear-Outs is an advertising company that brings potential new customers to the companies they advertise for. MORE ABOUT THE COMPANY MAKING THE FREE OFFER: The company making the offer is a magazine subscription agency based in the USA. They have over 1,500 popular USA titles available to be shipped to *any* country, including of course, to anywhere in the USA! They offer a FREE 1 yr. subscription to your choice of over 270 of the titles in their catalogue to any new customer using them for the first time. The dollar value of the freebies, based on the subscription prices directly from the publishers, ranges from $6.97 all the way up to $50.00! For new customers in the USA, there is no charge for FPH (foreign postage & handling), so the freebie is 100% free! For new customers living overseas, the only charge on the freebie would be for the FPH (foreign postage & handling). Their president has been in the magazine subscription business since 1973 and they are very customer-service oriented. They will even help you with address changes on your magazines, even if you move from one country to another country. They have thousands of happy customers in over 59 countries. Their price guarantee is very simple: they guarantee that their subscription prices are the lowest available and they will BEAT any legitimate, verifiable offer before you pay them or match it afterwards, by refunding you the difference in price PLUS the cost of the postage stamp you would use sending in the special offer to them, even 6 months after you pay them, as long as it was current at the time of your offer. Does that sound fair? Wouldn't it be great if everything you bought came with that price guarantee? Sometimes they are less than half of the next best deal out there, sometimes just a little cheaper, but always you get the lowest rates without having to shop around. With 1,500 titles on their list, they would like to think that they have also the best selection around! Within the USA, for their USA customers, they are cheaper than all their competitors and even the publishers themselves. This is their price guarantee. The 1 yr. freebie that you get with your first order is completely free! Overseas, (even after you factor in the cost of the FPH (foreign postage & handling) and the conversion from USA Dollars to your currency), on the average, they are generally around one-fourth to one-half of what the newsstands overseas charge locally for USA magazines. On some titles they are as little as one-tenth of what the newsstands charge. They are also the cheapest subscription source for delivery overseas, including directly from the publishers themselves! Some publishers don't even offer subscriptions overseas.........but overseas subscriptions are this company's specialty! They feel that magazines should not be a luxury overseas. In the USA, people buy magazines and then toss them after reading them for just a few minutes or hours. They are so cheap in the USA! Well, this company would like to make it the same way for their overseas members. They are also cheaper than all their competitors in the USA and overseas, including the publishers themselves! It is also *highly unlikely* you will find any of their USA competitors calling you overseas, in order to offer that personal touch, just to sell you a couple of magazines! But that is what this company specializes in and loves doing! Around one-half their business comes from overseas, so they are very patient with new members who only speak limited English as a 2nd language. Subscription prices quoted for overseas consist of the subscription price, plus the FPH. You add the two together and that is your total cost. The exception is the 1 yr. freebie you get with your first order. On that title, you pay *only* the FPH for the 1 yr. term. Their prices are so cheap because when you deal with them, you cut-out all the middlemen. HERE IS HOW YOU CAN GET MORE INFO AND GET STARTED WITH THEM: Simply fax or smail back to us the reply form listed at the top of this message. We will then forward your form on to the subscription agency. They will then email their "big and juicy" catalogue to you, in whichever of the four formats you chose. The catalogue is FREE and makes for hours of fascinating reading, on its own. It includes the complete list of freebies, a complete list of all the titles they sell, as well as detailed descriptions on most of the titles, along with lists of titles by category of interest and their terms of sale. They will then give you a friendly, no-pressure, no obligation, 5-minute call to go over how they work and to answer any questions that you might have, as well as give you up-to-the minute price quotes on any titles you might be considering. They will call you in whatever country you live in, taking the time difference into account. As they like to emphasize the personal touch they give to each new customer, all first-time orders can only be done via phone, so they can answer all your questions completely and personally. Once you have placed your first order via phone, you will be able to place future orders and make inquiries on your account, get price quotes, etc., all via email, if that is most convenient for you. Within the USA, they accept payment via check over the phone, Mastercard, Visa and American Express. Overseas, they accept Mastercard, Visa and American Express, even if your credit card is a local one in local currency! That's our introduction of our client that we represent. We hope that we have piqued your interest and that you will take the next step to get their free catalogue! Thank you for your time and interest. 0000,FFFF,0000-- Tempting Tear-Outs. For more info on advertising rates, please write us on your company letterhead, w/business card, via smail to: Tempting Tear-Outs, 3835 Richmond Ave. Suite #200, Staten Island NY 10312-3828, USA. 0000,FFFF,0000 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 08:52:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA26862; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:41:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:41:10 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:42:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"N1wA.0.XZ6.a0wuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3518 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> The key problem, is the resistance of the tapwater electrolyte. It >>effectively shorts out the capacitor formed by the plates << [snip] >>> what happens if one covers one, or both of the plates, with a very thin >>>skin of insulation. The capacitor now becomes an idealised capacitor. << If one covers one or both plates with a thin insulator, then most of the electric potential drop occurs across the thin insulator and little across the ionically conductive water. The capacitance of the assembly is set by the good dielectric. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 13:14:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA03919; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:59:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:59:57 -0800 From: "John Kent" To: Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:24:24 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20575535001350 andover.co.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <"TZ3CL3.0.6z.9pzuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3520 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Schaffer gav.gat.com > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: water resonance > Date: Monday, January 20, 1997 4:42 PM > > >> The key problem, is the resistance of the tapwater electrolyte. It > >>effectively shorts out the capacitor formed by the plates << > [snip] > >>> what happens if one covers one, or both of the plates, with a very thin > >>>skin of insulation. The capacitor now becomes an idealised capacitor. << > > If one covers one or both plates with a thin insulator, then most of the > electric potential drop occurs across the thin insulator and little across > the ionically conductive water. The capacitance of the assembly is set by > the good dielectric. It depends apon the ratio, of the dielectric constants of the water (80) and that of the insulator. jk > > Michael J. Schaffer > General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA > Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 14:08:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA18129; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:56:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:56:04 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:57:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"VQCgp2.0.2R4.md-uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3521 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> The key problem, is the resistance of the tapwater electrolyte. It >>effectively shorts out the capacitor formed by the plates << [snip] >> what happens if one covers one, or both of the plates, with a very thin skin of insulation.. Schaffer replied: >If one covers one or both plates with a thin insulator, then most of the electric potential drop occurs across the thin insulator and little across the ionically conductive water. The capacitance of the assembly is set by the good dielectric. John Kent replied: >It depends apon the ratio, of the dielectric constants of the water (80) >and that of the insulator. Yes and no. If the water resistivity is sufficiently high, Kent is correct. However, the question was posed for the case of conductive water. In this case, the water acts like a resistance in series with the thin-dielectric capacitance. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 15:24:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA00617; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:11:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:11:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:11:46 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January In-Reply-To: <32E3F903.41C67EA6 math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FigSu3.0.T9.-k_uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3523 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Barry Merriman wrote: > Yhanks for the article, Chris. > > > Sunday Telegraph, 19 January 1997 p18. > > > > How to create energy from literally nothing. > > > > > (Note to Jed: recall our discussion of whether the Casimir force > had ever been measured...it appears that I was correct in my guess > that it had not been.) > Hi Barry, you should know better than to believe everything you in the paper! The original experiment showing the size of the force was performed in 1955. I once sent you the reference. I can dig it up again. Since then measurements have of the force have been continually refined. This is simply the latest measurement given the maximum hype by s reporter to make his story sound interesting. The Casimir force is actually used industrially to make wire bonds on integrated circuits. The Bonding machines don't have actually make the wires touch the pads, just bring them close enough for the Casimir force to pull them together. Other people on vortex-l have decribed how it screws up space missions due to the vaccuum welding effect. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 15:44:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA01520; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:18:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:18:28 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701201714.ZM16687 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:14:32 -0600 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"IhQSi1.0.aN.1r_uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3524 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The following is from pages 36 and 37 of a paper I was reading over the weekend called "The Computer Inside You" Third Edition, by Kurt Johnmann. The paper is about a computer type model of the universe and matter (as opposed to theological or mathematical type models). Unknown to me at the start, the primary focus seems to be an attempt to explain paranormal phenomenon like astral projection, lucid dreaming, esp, ghosts, souls, etc. The article was mostly interesting and entertaining untill I ran across the following passages quoted below. They stood out to me only because of recent discussions about aether and ZPE. What the author calls esoteric and erroneous seems to sound alot like it would be plausible in what Mr. Tessien has proposed in his theory of standing waves of energy resonance as a basis for matter. These phenomenon/entities could exist as altered or out of phase energy frequencies, related to, but distictly seperate from the matter of our node. ---- Regarding the vibration of the bion body, the bion body is known to vibrate at times. The esoteric literature of the 20th century has an eroneous, standard explination for this vibration of the bion body, beginning with the premise that these are different invisible planes of existence. According to the erroneous explanation, these planes operate at different frequencies, and the vibration rate of the bion body can match these different frequencies. Thus, according to this explination, the vibration rate of the bion body determines which of these invisible planes becomes visible and accessible to the projectionist. There are three reasons why this erroneous explanation came about. First, bion-body projectionists report that when they feel the vibrations increasing in frequency, seperation of the bion body from the physical body will happen. Conversely, when they feel the vibrations decreasing in frequency, reassociation of the bion body with the physical body is likely. Thus it was argued that there is a correlation between the low vibration frequency and the physical plane of existance. Probably this vibration of the bion body is a consequence of the process that keeps the bion body together when it is away from the physical body. "Once you are exteriorized, and your sense of sight is working, the room, which was dark to your physical eyes, is no longer dark, for you are using your astral eyes, and there is a 'foggish' light everywhere, such as you see in your dreams, a diffused light we might call it, a light which seems none too bright, and yet is not too dim, apparently sifting right through the objects of the material world. (Muldoon, Sylvan, and Carrington. "The Projection of the Astral Body" Weiser, New York, 1980. Page 204)" ---- The implications seem to be that our matter/energy/resonance state can be modified and certain members of our society may be doing it. Tapping into ZPE/aether energy could potentially get a boost with new research into some of these fringe areas. Maybe just take another look at existing data from a new perspective. The organic complexity may be well beyond our current technological capabilities, but clues or principles may become obvious now that we have a better idea of what to look. Like with many of humanity's "advancements", nature may already be one step ahead of us. Just some thoughts... -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 15:46:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA05510; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:35:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:35:03 -0800 Message-Id: <199701202252.PAA15845 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Question regarding Os197 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:06:42 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hjv7m2.0._L1.b40vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3525 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I was approached yesterday regarding the possible production of Os197. Looking at the specs, it ahs a relatively high nuclear cross section. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what its use may be? ___________________________ Joe Champion JChampion transmutation.com http://www.transmutation.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 16:12:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA07178; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:43:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:43:49 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32E40329.2781E494 math.ucla.edu> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:43:37 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vQv793.0.2m1.qC0vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3526 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wrote: > > (Note to Jed: recall our discussion of whether the Casimir force > > had ever been measured...it appears that I was correct in my guess > > that it had not been.) > > Oops, wrong again: Martin Savior has corrected me: > you should know better than to believe everything you in the paper! Well, some lessons you can't learn too many times :-) > The original experiment showing the size of the force was > performed in 1955...The Casimir force is actually used industrially > to make wire bonds on integrated circuits...it [also] screws up > space missions due to the vaccuum welding effect. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 18:47:11 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA14139; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:34:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:34:17 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 02:34:23 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e3eb82.25568236 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <12412506700692 andover.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <12412506700692 andover.co.uk> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LrWQR1.0.kS3.bi2vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3527 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:40:16 -0000, John Kent wrote: [snip] >capacitance. The question I am asking myself, is what happens if one covers >one, or both of the plates, with a very thin skin of insulation. [snip] A simple way to do this is to place a plastic sandwich bag around the electrode of an existing cell, and suck the air out of the bag. Then tie it off at the top. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 18:47:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA14183; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:34:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:34:26 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 02:34:29 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e5ed9d.26107258 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <12412506700692 andover.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <12412506700692 andover.co.uk> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LRMOG.0.NT3.ki2vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:40:16 -0000, John Kent wrote: [snip] >fraction of what it is, with uninsulated plates. I will continue if there >is any interest. john kent. > > Yes please. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 18:49:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA14219; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:34:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:34:38 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 02:34:31 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e6f56b.28106216 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <2.2.16.19970119164210.467fe864 world.std.com> In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19970119164210.467fe864 world.std.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BPb1a2.0.OT3.ki2vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3528 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:43:32 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: [snip] > There has been switch from magnetostatic to electrostatics. > In the electrostatic regime, this does not involve resonance. > Although some may speak of "resonance" with high voltage DC electrode >systems and water, FYI dielectric techniques use RELAXATION and not RESONANCE. >The absorption curves are totally different, as are the effects. [snip] There may be a connection nevertheless. If the plates act as a capacitor, then they could convert some of the feed signal into sonic vibrations in the water. These vibrations could in turn couple to the afore mentioned magnetic resonance (or not ?). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 19:22:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA24741; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:11:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:11:54 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Question regarding Os197 Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 03:11:52 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32eb3353.17090750 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199701202252.PAA15845 nz1.netzone.com> In-Reply-To: <199701202252.PAA15845 nz1.netzone.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7V3xd1.0.O26.oF3vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:06:42 -0700, Joe Champion wrote: > >I was approached yesterday regarding the possible production of Os197. >Looking at the specs, it ahs a relatively high nuclear cross section. Does >anyone have any suggestions as to what its use may be? Joe, Where did you get the specs? According to: http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/CoN/index.html it doesn't even exist. Even if it could be produced, I would imagine that it would be extremely radioactive, and therefore neigh on impossible to keep. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 19:45:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA31380; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:34:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:34:37 -0800 Message-Id: <199701210320.UAA14119 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: Subject: Shit!!! I screwed up!! Os187 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:34:24 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"H1-Io2.0.Bg7.Bb3vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3531 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sorry guys, I guess I was thinking of something else while I was typing. Here's the story. I was approached this weekend about a specific requirement of Os 187. Bill Stehl, member of Vortex has been approached about this particular isotope for the last two years. Mt direct question is -- since Os187 exists at 1.6% abundance and has an extremely high thermal nuclear cross section, does anyone have any comment as to what its intended use may be. Sorry for my digit out of place............... > > Where did you get the specs? According to: > > http://necs01.dne.bnl.gov/CoN/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 21:24:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA26818 for billb@eskimo.com; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:24:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:24:06 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Mon Jan 20 21:23:59 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA26774 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:23:57 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id VAA23265 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:19:45 -0800 Old-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:19:45 -0800 Message-Id: <199701210519.VAA23265 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis? X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Thanks for the post John; What the author calls esoteric and erroneous seems to sound >alot like it would be plausible in what Mr. Tessien has proposed in his theory >of standing waves of energy resonance as a basis for matter. These >phenomenon/entities could exist as altered or out of phase energy frequencies, >related to, but distictly seperate from the matter of our node. I do not normally venture out to discuss what I have learned about what my theory predicts on the front of the paranormal because I am trying in earnest to develop the theory in a formal mathematical manner and to present it to the physics community and try to that little prize over the pond. I have the satelite observations to back up my predictions and the primary notions I want to set straight are that; 1) There exist in nature, no attractive force mechanisms. (ie, to induce an "attraction" you are really working with energy arriving from the opposite direction that is pushing for one reason or another ie resonances, and not with an intrinsic **pull**. This is most easily understood from the very simple phenomena of a vacuum suction cup which is not attractively pulled to the surface of the refrigerator, but rather the air pressure on the outside is pushing it to the surface and the lack of air pressure on the inside is **not** pushing it away.) 2) Mass and energy are not **equivalent**. Both are conserved in the equation E=mc^2. Thus, the emitted mass in exothermic reactions must have gone somewhere since we find no "particles" being emitted. The "somewhere" is that it became, "space". This will have no measureable consequences in the vast majority of cases. The exception is in stellar behaviors due to the huge volume of space (or rather aether with acoustic energy in it which we know as spacetime) emissions leaving stars. This is a true net flux of aether which is what many erroneously suppose is what I am talking about when I am trying to describe gravitation. I have many satelite observations showing that there is something strange going on beginning in the interior of stars (GONG measurements of solar acoustics), to the corona, the solar wind, and then to the dark matter problem. When linked in this coherent thread one can finally see that if we consider this notion a lot of mysteries can all be cleared up in one swoop. I won't belabor that stuff here in this response, but my point is that I hesitate to be *branded* as more of a crackpot than I already am. But here goes anyway because your post touches on some things that are tremendously important for humanity, IMHO. > > Regarding the vibration of the bion body, the bion body is known to >vibrate at times. The esoteric literature of the 20th century has an eroneous, >standard explination for this vibration of the bion body, beginning with the >premise that these are different invisible planes of existence. >According to the erroneous explanation, these planes operate at different >frequencies, There is one fundamental frequency permeating the universe at the Planck scale. The reason for it being predominant is that at that frequency, the aether is able to undergo a condensation if there is too much density focused into a given region. This leads to a non linearity in the wave propogation and to a temporary collapse and subsequent explosion back outward of that condensate. This is why the quantum vacuum is permeated with "virtual particles". It is also, an a large scale, the power mechanism behind a supernova explosion I think. There are all manner of lower frequencies of resonance below that of the Planck energy which is at a frequency of about E45 Hz. There could be beings and other forms of matter at different frequencies if our matter is not resonating at the Planck scale frequency. ie, if we are a harmonic of that frequency. but I suspect that this is not the case as we are linked to spacetime which is at that frequency. Thus, I think the author is likely incorrect here and that he should be saying that if you can rotate the phase angle of coupling of your energy into the imaginary phase angles at 90 and 270 degrees relative to our 0 degree reference we call "positive charge", then you could exist in the same region of spacetime and not interact with our matter. ie, you could be an "angel" or a "ghost" or something. There could be a weak and fuzzy connection from one phase regime to the other, and thus the descriptions mostly deleted could manifest and people could be tapping into this energy via meditation etc. snip >"Once you are exteriorized, and your sense of sight is working, the room, which >was dark to your physical eyes, is no longer dark, for you are >using your astral eyes, and there is a 'foggish' light everywhere, such as you >see in your dreams, snip >The implications seem to be that our matter/energy/resonance state can be >modified and certain members of our society may be doing it. Tapping into >ZPE/aether energy could potentially get a boost with new research into some of >these fringe areas. >John E. Steck >Motorola CSS The ramifications of my model on this aspect are huge, and I intend to write a book on these notions following my presentation of the more formal physics. To grasp what I mean here you must learn about holograms and how they work and how they form in three dimensional spacetime. You see, I figured out that a hologram is sort of like a grown ups two slit experiment if the two slit experiment is for children. I don't know any other way to put forward the magnitude of difference in complexity, but I will try to show you why a hologram and a two slit experiment are the same. Then, why that is important to the structure of matter and larger objects. And then why that is important to us and who and what we are. First, I assume all of you know what a hologram is, but that only some of you know how to make one. A hologram is an interferogram. In its simplest version, you take a beam of coherent (laser) light, and you split that beam through a partially silvered mirror. Then, with one of the beams, you spread the light out in a diverging cone and shine it on the surface of a glass plate with an emulsion sensitive to that light energy. So with that beam you have done about the same thing as if you took a flashlight and shined it on a plate of glass. With the other beam, you shine that on some object you want to make a hologram of that is situated in front of the plate. Then, the laser light reflects off of the object and then some of that reflected light hits the plate of glass and combines with the original light energy. This leads to constructive and destructive interference where the light energy is in or out of phase match. So, on the plate, what you get is a pattern of bright and dark regions, and you adjust how long you expose the plate so that the bright regions have hardened the emulsion and the dim or dark regions have not. What you get, if you look at it under a microscope is a bit like a bunch of dots and swirls of dots like you might see in the half tone images on a newspaper. But, how did that happen? Why is it that over a period of time, you are able to get that interference pattern? Why don't you get just a smeared out mess if photons are heading in all directions through spacetime? Note, that in the two slit experiment something that baffles physicists is that you can turn down the intensity of the light energy passing through the two slits to the point that you have just one photon heading through it at a time, and you will still get the same interference pattern, but it will take longer to get it. Well, the same is true of the hologram, only you don't have two slits! You have an entire volumetric region of spacetime, and through that region, for some reason, the photonic energy seems to know how and where and when to go. And how could that possibly be if light is really made up of photons? You see, if we shot one photon at a time through the two slit experiment, we can grasp that an interference could still manifest because the path length of the two photons is about the same. But in the hologram this is not true. The path length for the light energy of the hologram is very much different, so how could you ever get an interference as a result of the interaction of two photons following different paths with different time delays? Answer, you can't. Thus, there is only one answer to the problem, there is a 3D structure to the spacetime around the glass plate and that structure is altered by the presence of the object you are making the image of. In short, the oscillations of the matter in that object are extended out into the volume surrounding them and making their presence known in the processing of this hologram, but we completely miss the point because we are focused on the "photons". There is another photographic process known as Kerlian (sp?) photography. This is a real process where all you are doing is charging an object and then making an image of the shape of the electric field that is present. It really isn't as mystical as some people think (ie, many think it is a bunch of charlatan trickery, but it is really a very simple and real process). What is interesting are the images you get in certain cases. People will give off "auras" that are intense or weak or whatever, and these will change depending on their emotional and or physical condition. Religious people in a heightened state of meditation will give off some really intense energy. But I want to deal with the hologram some more. They have taken a maple leaf, and cut off one of the three petals of the leaf and then made an image of the leaf. What is interesting is that they can record a fuzzy image of the petal that isn't there on the photograph of that disected leaf. How can this be? Does the spacetime around the leaf know that it used to have another petal? And then there is the problem of the creation of a life form from DNA. I know there are billions of sequences in the DNA information, but I am sorry to present my opinion that the information in the DNA falls painfully short of forming a human being if it is used in a sequential manner as most think it works. That is like working with one of our computer programs, a serial set of instructions for the formation of an object. There just isn't enough there to work with and to place each and every atoms in our body in the proper positions to form and to grow a human being or any other living form. There is, however, another way. And as you may have guessed, it is via holographic fields of energy. If DNA is a hologram, then we are the projection of that interferogram. As such, you wind up with something like a billion factorial in the amount of structural information encoded in that DNA strand, way more than enough information to put our structure together. The identical DNA in different regions of the growing fetus will be in resonance with different sections of the DNA strands and thus force the manifestation of the properties and development of eyes or feet or hands where they ought to be. Put another way, the entire organism must be buzzing with acoustic energy at the Planck scale of the quantum vacuum, and it must be a hologram of that DNA. This means that the entire growing organism must all be coupled together in the manner in which it distorts the spacetime around it. A fetus would be bathed inside of a filtered spacetime due to the mothers matter surrounding it. And that maple leaf, would have encoded the information for the formation of its entire projected holographic existence in the entire structure of the hologram. And for that reason, when you find a manner to make visible the structure of the distortions to spacetime induced by that leaf with the severed petal, you come to find it is reasonable that the balance of the matter in the leaf still has the information frozen in its structure due to the presence of that petal when the rest of the leaf formed. The structure was a continuum, and that continuum is still there recorded in the remainder of the leaf. This is true in a hologram on the glass plate too. If you break that glass plate into a bunch of pieces, each piece contains the entire image of the object you recorded, but from the perspective it had when the image was recorded. Even tiny little chards have the entire interferographic information set from the position it had occupied during the exposure. The only thing is that your ability to discern the object will be reduced because you have reduced the number of essentially pixels in what you are looking through. In the same manner, the severed petal should show the image of the entire leaf just as the remainder of the leaf shows the severed petal still there. But the intensity of the image will be much reduced in the case of the petal since the amount of matter acting on the surrounding spacetime is reduced. OK, so what has all the above got to do with paranormal? Well, if we are made up of standing waves, then we are also in essence, holograms. By this I don't mean pictures, but rather complex interferences of spacetime but in a volumetric manner, and with a very much finer detail due to our matter being made of Planck scale resonances rather than of light resonances. And it also means that our matter is not self contained, but rather it is coupled to our surroundings and that it is emitting wave energy to, and receiving wave energy from, those surroundings. And here is where the concept of who and what we are takes a radical jump, and you will see why I do not talk about this publicly very much as I am truly trying to get the physical basis of the theory presented first. The wave energy I speak of is that of quantum vacuum fluctuations that are what the standing waves of our matter are composed of. but this means that the wave energy from me, extends 186,000 miles per second into my surrounding spacetime. And it means that I then must extend out many hundreds of millions of miles into the space around us. In other words, the effect of my presence, while small in the scheme of things, extends a tremendous distance out there. And if this is so, then so too do you, and we are all thus virtually inside of one another. What we see as our bodies, is nothing by the convergence location of that energy. To think that we are inside of our bodies, or that this is where we are located, is sort of like saying that a tornado is over there. While it is true that we see the convergence and all the dust flying, "over there" at the convergence of the tornado, is that really "The Tornado"? I would say, no. I would say that more important than the convergence is the energy that is driving that convergence. And that energy, in the case of a tornado, comes from the storm fronts extending hundreds of miles around the location of the tornado, and which converges into that vortex. Likewise, I would say that I no more exist here than I do for a hundred million miles around our solar system or 41 light years out into our galaxy depending on whether I want to speak of my recent or past behaviors. But what I am is the sum of my interaction with that surrounding spacetime. Thus, when religious people say that God is in them or that they are leaving their bodies or all of the rest of the metaphysical behaviors that are put foward, I have to take a new look at what they are saying and pay attention to the details of what they think it going on. And as I have done this a little bit, I must say that I find it interesting to listen to the things they say. In particular, in so much as my model of the universe requires that it began when a huge black hole core breached confinement and began to boil and sent acoustic energy throughout that volume, I also note that other galaxies had to have been smacked by that expanding ball. And I can think of no more apt description of hell. And as the interior thinned out and matter resonances formed, and light began to propogate, the comment "And God said, let there be light" leads me to wonder if we were not given that information in fact from God or from some other race of beings that put us here or who visited us and told us about this information to help save us from ourselves when we grew intelligent enough to harness the power of the atom. And I have to wonder too about Roswell. Because that incident occured shortly after the explosion of our first atomic weapons. And it seems to me that it should be possible to conduct acoustic shock energy through the ocean of aether at FTL velocities if there is a sudden expansion in the volume of spacetime locally. And that is what occurs in an atomic explosion as far as I can tell. The matter flies out of there because the released aether is forming new spacetime, and that spacetime is accelerating out. So that a more intelligent civilization might be able to monitor that sort of signature as easily as we monitor a radio wave seems very plausible to me. Thus, as you can see, I feel that my theory is indeed leading in the direction of the unification of not only General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, but as well, Metaphysics. That latter story will be put forward in a second book after the physical notions are given a fair and unprejudiced appraisal. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 20 23:39:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA20515; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:28:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:28:59 -0800 Message-ID: <32E46F73.44C5 advertronix.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:25:39 -0800 From: Carl Leonard Reply-To: carl advertronix.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Question regarding Os197 References: <199701202252.PAA15845 nz1.netzone.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"E9CiH2.0.r_4.v07vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > I was approached yesterday regarding the possible production of Os197. > Joe Champion I think Os192 is the highest stable isotope of Os. If you have any extra Au197 laying about I'll take it... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 02:09:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA15279; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 01:46:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 01:46:41 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 00:48:09 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Question regarding Os197 Resent-Message-ID: <"-QBhu3.0.dk3.029vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I was approached yesterday regarding the possible production of Os197. >Looking at the specs, it ahs a relatively high nuclear cross section. Does >anyone have any suggestions as to what its use may be? > > > >___________________________ >Joe Champion >JChampion transmutation.com >http://www.transmutation.com Aside from the fact ordinary mined osmium is about $100/gram, it would make about the best ammo money could buy - at 22.4 g/cm^3 it's about twice the density of lead (11.4 g/cm^3). What's a good bullet worth? Silver bullets are so declasse, and uranium, well it's neither spent nor politically correct. However, if pulverized when hitting an armored vehicle, Os would slowly generate a poison gas (OsO4) on the inside of the vehicle. OsO4 has been used for detecting fingerprints. As to specifically Os187, its only major distinguishing characteristics seem to be rarity (1.6%) and, as you note, the fact it is as big as a barn, 210 of them to be more precise. The rarity of the isotope could be used to determine if it's stolen, even after melting down with other Os. Os187 has a very low sensitivity to NMR. It would therefore make a very good agent for spiking gold, or anything else, for later identification, as it would be hard to detect without mass spectrometry or neutron activation equipment. Just some thoughts and guesses. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 02:17:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA02454; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:00:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:00:34 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32E3F903.41C67EA6 math.ucla.edu> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:00:19 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January References: <970120182455_100433.1541_BHG56-2 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wRH8n3.0.8c.Fa_uo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3522 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yhanks for the article, Chris. > Sunday Telegraph, 19 January 1997 p18. > > How to create energy from literally nothing. > > Now, half a century since its existence was first suggested, > Steven Lamoreaux at Los Alamos has finally surceeded in detecting > the [Casimir] force. His two metal plates consisted of > gold-coated quartz > crystals placed less than a thousandth of a millimetre apart. > > As the vacuum force tried to pull the crystals together, Lamoreaux > kept them apart by altering the voltage applied to their > mountings. The readings showed that there was a vacuum force > between the crystals My question: how did they prove it was the casimir force they were detecting, instead of simple electrostatic forces? Does anyone have a pointer to the actual paper? (Note to Jed: recall our discussion of whether the Casimir force had ever been measured...it appears that I was correct in my guess that it had not been.) -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 05:54:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA14254; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 05:44:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 05:44:26 -0800 From: RMCarrell aol.com Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:43:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970121084344_1419957055 emout14.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January Resent-Message-ID: <"_RJ6F3.0.aU3.tWCvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 97-01-21 05:15:08 EST, Barry Merriman wrote: >> As the vacuum force tried to pull the crystals together, Lamoreaux > > kept them apart by altering the voltage applied to their > > mountings. The readings showed that there was a vacuum force > > between the crystals >My question: how did they prove it was the casimir force they >were detecting, instead of simple electrostatic forces? The quote said "voltage applied to their mountings", not "voltage applied to the crystals". A common way to get well controlled, very small movements, is to use piezoelectric elements. Such are used in the various scanning probe microscopes, which measure atomic dimensions. Quartz is piezoelectric in certain orientations, as in the oscillators in electronic watches, your computer, radio stations, etc. Thus it is straightforward to devise a setup which can exert force on the crystals to maintain a given separation against the casimir force, without involving electrostatic forces on the crystals themselves. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 07:31:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA23340; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:39:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:39:04 -0800 Date: 20 Jan 97 13:24:56 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Sunday Telegraph 19 January Message-ID: <970120182455_100433.1541_BHG56-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"363Rn3.0.Zi5.4lxuo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3519 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This might interest some people. ------------------------------------------- Sunday Telegraph, 19 January 1997 p18. How to create energy from literally nothing. Robert Matthews SOME of the best minds in science are currently getting very excited about nothing at all. Naturally, "nothing" has a very precise meaning here, and it is a long way from the absence of matter usually conjured up by the term "vacuum" Physicists are finding that even apparently completely empty space is seething with events so bizarre they seem close to magic. Want to conjure some matter -- or maybe an entire universe -- out of nowhere? The vacuum can do it for you. Need a force field to appear out of thin air? Again, it is no problem for the vacuum -- as an amazing experiment by an American scientist has now demonstrated. The first inklings that empty space is anything but empty came in the Twenties, when Werner Heisenberg, the German physicist, published his famous uncertainty principle. According to this, it is impossible to know precisely both the location and speed of a subatomic particle at the same time: the more accurately you measure one property, the more fuzzv the other becomes. That, at least, is the bestknown version of the principle, and it is usually seen as a rather negative scientific discovery, a fundamental limit to what humans can know. But there is another version, and it has much more intriguing overtones. Roughly speaking, it states that we cannot pin down precisely how much energy there is in a given amount of empty spare during a fixed amount of time. In other words, even a total vacuum can have huge amounts of energy suddenly hursting into existence within it -- as long as it vanishes again sufficiently quickly. It all sounds like a bit of physics trickery: a rabbit appearing out of a hat and then disappearing again before anyone can tell what happened. Yet while very fleeting, the existence of this so-called "vacuum energy" can and has been measured. In the late Forties, American scientists discovered a tiny shift in the spectral lines of hydrogen caused bv the energy of the vacuum, and its size matched theory to an astonishing degree of precision: better than one part in 100 million. Encouraged by such success, physicists have since called upon the services of vacuum energy to solve a number of outstanding mysteries, including the origin of the universe. According to present theories of the Big Bang, the universe is essentially the result of a fountain of vacuum energy.that burst literally out of nowhere 15 hillion years ago to create everything we see around us. Now a scientist at the Los Alemos National Laboratory in New Mexico has demonstrated a more down-to-earth manifestation of vacuum energy: a force field that appears out of thin air. Hints of this bizarre possibility emerged in the Forties, when the Dutch physicist Hendrick Casimir looked at what happens when a tiny region of vacuum energy becomes isolated from the rest of the universe. He suggested doing this by bringing two highly polished metal plates very close together. According to his calculations, the vacuum energy lying outside would then start "hammering" on the plates demanding to be let in. 'I'he result, said Casimir, would be like a force appearing between the plates, pulling them together. A number of attempts have been made to detect the presence of this strange effect, but the "force from nowhere" is so weak that its detection demands the most incredibly sensitive equipment. Now, half a century since its existence was first suggested, Steven Lamoreaux at Los Alamos has finally surceeded in detecting the force. His two metal plates consisted of gold-coated quartz crystals placed less than a thousandth of a millimetre apart. As the vacuum force tried to pull the crystals together, Lamoreaux kept them apart by altering the voltage applied to their mountings. The readings showed that there was a vacuum force between the crystals -- and its strength is equivalent to around one-tenth the weight of the ink on this full-stop. Hardly a lot, but the wonder is that it is there at all. Already, a number of physicists have begun to talk of building microscopic machines powered by vacuum energy. Rough calculations suggest that such machines might work indefinitely, drawing on the bottomless well of energy in empty space. If correct, it can only be a matter of time before that dread phrase "perpetual motion machine" starts to appear again in the records of the Patent Office. [end] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 12:10:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA10698; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:54:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:54:59 -0800 Date: 21 Jan 97 14:51:04 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: ZPE in NYT Message-ID: <970121195103_72240.1256_EHB112-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"NDEXg2.0.wa2.hxHvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The New York Times also has an article about this zero point energy experiment performed by S. Lamoreaux. It is a long piece by Malcolm Brown, dated January 21, 1997, on page B9, in their regular Tuesday Science Times supplement. Details were described here previously, from the Sunday Telegraph, January 19, 1997, page 18. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 12:20:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA15258; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:07:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:07:08 -0800 Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:06:01 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199701212006.PAA23253 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: <970119112631_1378053824 emout03.mail.aol.com> (FZNIDARSIC@aol.com) Subject: Re: great idea robin Resent-Message-ID: <"HWI7h1.0.0k3.R7Ivo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > If some mechanism could be found where electrons move in a coordinated > rather than random fashion, then their *relative* motion could remain small Actually, there is a (fairly) well understood phenomena. If you have a current flowing through a wire, the magnetic field generated compresses the wire. In an arc you get a glow discharge below a critical current, and when you excede that level the magnetic compression causes an arc. Since the compression is stronger the smaller the plasma, this causes pinching off unless you stabilize the plasma. Now instead of a plasma, visualize an electron beam. Same effect. But if you aim a betatron into the air you will see the beam abruptly stop. It jumps back and forth due to random deflections, but once it has been slowed enough, the beam spreads out and dissapates. So electron clusters are possible if they are moving fast enough (relative to what is an exercise left to the reader. ;-) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 12:45:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA21933; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:21:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:21:33 -0800 From: "John Kent" To: Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:25:21 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20171640100079 andover.co.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <"brxnG2.0.aM5.BLIvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Robin van Spaandonk > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: water resonance > [snip] > A simple way to do this is to place a plastic sandwich bag around the > electrode of an existing cell, and suck the air out of the bag. Then tie it > off at the top. I wanted to get the coating down to a few microns thick, so I have had the central electrode, powder coated. Also increased the driver transformer ratio to 1:66. ...jk > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 17:18:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA08829; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:54:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:54:55 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970121140246.006fa620 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:57:28 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0wj6.0.p92.ULMvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3538 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:14 PM 1/20/97 -0600, you wrote: >The following is from pages 36 and 37 of a paper I was reading over the weekend >called "The Computer Inside You" Third Edition, by Kurt Johnmann. The paper >is about a computer type model of the universe and matter (as opposed to >theological or mathematical type models). Unknown to me at the start, the >primary focus seems to be an attempt to explain paranormal phenomenon like >astral projection, lucid dreaming, esp, ghosts, souls, etc. The article was >mostly interesting and entertaining untill I ran across the following passages >quoted below. They stood out to me only because of recent discussions about >aether and ZPE. What the author calls esoteric and erroneous seems to sound >alot like it would be plausible in what Mr. Tessien has proposed in his theory >of standing waves of energy resonance as a basis for matter. These >phenomenon/entities could exist as altered or out of phase energy frequencies, >related to, but distictly seperate from the matter of our node. > > >"Once you are exteriorized, and your sense of sight is working, the room, which >was dark to your physical eyes, is no longer dark, for you are >using your astral eyes, and there is a 'foggish' light everywhere, such as you >see in your dreams, a diffused light we might call it, a light which seems none >too bright, and yet is not too dim, apparently sifting right through the >objects of the material world. (Muldoon, Sylvan, and Carrington. "The >Projection of the Astral Body" Weiser, New York, 1980. Page 204)" > >---- > This is one of the most important early stage clues which objectifies the quest of those who seek. There are people, I am one of them, who can walk through a pitch black dark space cluttered with obstacles without bumping into anything. How do we do it? We can see, if we work on it, the foggish light. Since we know from science that we cannot with our rods and cones demodulate infrared directly, what is the foggy light? One cannot entirely dismiss infrared (it is not too far of a stretch to suppose that there may be a seldom used hidden pathway of infrared demodulation in our bio circuitry) but the ancient hypothesis is that it is a higher vibration than OUR typical light band, not lower. >The implications seem to be that our matter/energy/resonance state can be >modified and certain members of our society may be doing it. Tapping into >ZPE/aether energy could potentially get a boost with new research into some of >these fringe areas. Maybe just take another look at existing data from a new >perspective. The organic complexity may be well beyond our current >technological capabilities, but clues or principles may become obvious now that >we have a better idea of what to look. Like with many of humanity's >"advancements", nature may already be one step ahead of us. > >Just some thoughts... > >-john > >-- >John E. Steck >Motorola CSS > Ah so! Incidentally, it is most interesting that quartz figures in. As I am sure you know well, quartz is a most superlative transducer up and down the known spectrums and between the two fundamental waveforms as well, making it what we might call a universal transducer. The question is, where does it begin and end, this alpha and omega property of quartz? We must also ask, how, in any given circumstance, are we to account for what it is transducing since it seems so perfectly reactive to all influences? I think much difficulty here. To add it to it, I am perfectly willing to demonstrate that the presence of human hands in the near vacinity will alter the nature of the result in that small space. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 18:23:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA24281; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:11:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:11:45 -0800 Message-ID: <32E5782B.FBC interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:15:07 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: great idea robin - Eachus References: <199701212006.PAA23253 spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EFx4C3.0.Gx5.UTNvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3539 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > (snip) > So electron clusters are possible if they are moving fast enough > (relative to what is an exercise left to the reader. ;-) > OK, Robert: Consider a cylindrical beam of electrons moving at velocity, v. __________________________________________________________ -------> v ....... n electrons/m^3 beam radius = r __________________________________________________________ Using a CLASICAL analysis: There will be n * Pi * r^2 electrons per unit beam length. If each electron has charge of q_e, then the total charge per unit length = n * Pi * r^2 * q_e coulombs. Charge Per Unit Length = CPUL The electric field at the outer beam surface, Eo, is: Eo = CPUL/(2 * Pi * epsilon_0 * r) = (r * n * q_e)/(2 * epsilon_0) So, the outward radial coulomb force on an electron on the beam's surface is q_e * E , or outward force = (r * n * q_e^2)/(2 * epsilon_0) newtons. The magnetic induction on the outer beam surface, Bo, is: Bo = (mu_0 * current)/(2 * Pi * r) = (mu_0 * r * n * q_e * v)/2 where the current = Pi * r^2 * n * q_e * v . So, the radial inward pinch force on an electron on the beam's surface is, inward force = (mu_0 * r * n * q_e^2 * v^2)/2 . If we set outward force = inward force, the (r * n * q_e^2)/2 factors cancel out and we are left with: Velocity for force balance: v = 1/square root (mu_0 * epsilon_0) = c (= light speed!) Here our clasical analysis winds up with a relativistic velocity as the answer! Does this mean that an electron beam of ANY density will not diverge IF it moves with the speed of light? I know a 100 mev betatron beam is very close to light speed, but, does a relativistic analysis say the same thing? Wondering if my algebra is right ------ Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 21:02:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA31525; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:50:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:50:19 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 23:52:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970121234748_2090978246 emout19.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January Resent-Message-ID: <"OWwps2.0.Ui7.AoPvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: P.S. The Casimir measurement is supposed to be contained in the first January issue of Phys Rev Letters, which has yet to come out in the Univ of Texas library. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 21:50:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA08559; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:31:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:31:37 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:34:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970121234538_1993263424 emout08.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January Resent-Message-ID: <"8-86h.0.c52.uOQvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3542 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman said: <<(Note to Jed: recall our discussion of whether the Casimir force had ever been measured...it appears that I was correct in my guess that it had not been.)>> Actually, the Casimir force had been measured between dielectrics. I can give the references, or you can get them in Forward's 1984 Phys Rev B paper. It's just that they had not been measured between metals (successfully). The formula for dielectrics is the same as that for metals multiplied by a function of the dielectric constant that varies between 0 and 1 as the dielectric constant varies from1 to infinity (the equivalent of a metal). Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 21 22:16:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA07251; Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:25:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:25:56 -0800 From: Puthoff aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:28:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970121235120_173739345 emout17.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sunday Telegraph 19 January/Barry's Question Resent-Message-ID: <"u8bji1.0.Dn1.YJQvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3541 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman also asked: <<>My question: how did they prove it was the casimir force they >were detecting, instead of simple electrostatic forces? >> An excellent question, because this is what has been the downfall of all previous attempts to measure the Casimir force between metal surfaces - patches of charge. I am looking forward to reading the paper to determine whether Lamoreaux is convincing on this issue. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 03:34:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA27755; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 03:24:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 03:24:25 -0800 Date: 22 Jan 97 06:21:22 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970122112121_100433.1541_BHG84-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"u-Uk33.0.bn6.cZVvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This post is pure prattle, and I apologise in advance for it. I'm just trying to get some kind of a handle on this 'new physics'. And I want very much to avoid the clever stuff, just to look at the basics. The idea is that we have no 'pull' forces, only 'push' forces. And 'particles' are themselves just manifestations of the 'vacuum energy'. We know that two ships parked close together in choppy seas will be pushed together by the fact that longer waves are excluded from the space between them, and the idea seems to be that this kind of action explains all the forces? And there is really only one push force? What we see as electrostatic attraction, or gravity, or that which overcomes inertia, are all really the same thing, and analogous to the two ships being pushed together. Magnetic forces are a variation on electrostatic force, seen when a charged mass moves. Mass is just the kinetic energy of the 'particles', which therefore interacts with the vacuum, and charge is something like having spin on the 'particle' - I know I'm misusing terms, but as I understand it mass is something like a 'static' form of energy, or a 'randomised' one, whereas charge is something which has some kind of spin or vector with it? I'm pleased to leave the strong force out of all this for the moment, because I'd be happy with an atomic nucleus which behaves as it does. After all, since Thatcher scrapped that rather nice outfit in the UK which was working on nuclear structure, there doesn't seem to be a huge level of interest in that subject anyway. And just because when you zap a nucleus it produces bits, that doesn't (to me) mean that it contained those bits before it got zapped. The attribute of mass or charge interacts with the vacuum to produce a distortion in some quality it possesses, and thereby 'shields' another mass or charge from the push which otherwise would be symmetrical? The anisotropy of space, which appears to fit well the 'curvature' used to describe it in General Relativity, is just a localised distortion (by masses or charges) of its permeability/permittivity ratio? Now, I've never been thrilled with photons, because there seems to be a breach of the principle of parsimony here. We know matter reacts with em radiation in a quantised manner, but that doesn't seem to me to mean it has to travel in quantised form. And we have to have an infinite variety of photons, to allow for their infinite possible energies. But we then have the problem that light of wavelengths very much greater than the size of an atom will interact with that atom - or the other difficulties which the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering seem to present. But, hey, I've not seen a quantum treatment of long waves. Like, how do we fit antenna design into quantum theory? How do we count the em quanta coming into that antenna from a 1500m radio transmission? A dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director components of a UHF antenna) picks up much more energy than is incident upon it. Could an atom act as a dipole? Or could nearby atoms act as director sub-antennae? In the 'new physics', I suppose that em radiation must be a travelling distortion of the natural zp fluctuations. No real 'aether' as such, which was a virtually inelastic fluid, more some kind of bucket-chain with distortions being passed on. Yes, and it could be polarised and all the rest of it. One problem I have is that I don't see a proper description of all that in 'the new physics'. I can grasp dimly the notion that if a massive body were to pop from nowhere, its 'shielding' effect would propagate in all directions at c, but I'm less happy about the propagation of the similar effects of a changing charge - because that has to have some kind of vector or spin or something. Can someone tell me how the new physics explains how em propagates? And is this not a matter so fundamental that it should be addressed with some urgency by those who support these ideas? Maybe it has been, but I don't think I've seen an answer yet. Chris As a PS, I was rather startled to hear from Clinton at his inauguration that the US had been the first to split the atom and to invent the computer (by which I would imagine he meant the classic definition of such a beastie), and even more startled that nobody seems to have picked up that slip. Is understanding of the history of science and technology at an even lower ebb than even I thought? After all, the US is hardly a nation which is short of such matters of which it can justly be proud, so why pick three things (he mentioned the microchip as well), get two of them wrong - and nobody seems to notice? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 04:19:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA01722; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:10:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:10:46 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Shit!!! I screwed up!! Os187 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:13:51 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32e6a072.27258790 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199701210320.UAA14119 nz1.netzone.com> In-Reply-To: <199701210320.UAA14119 nz1.netzone.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sp7Kd.0.mQ.4FWvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:34:24 -0700, Joe Champion wrote: >Sorry guys, > >I guess I was thinking of something else while I was typing. > >Here's the story. I was approached this weekend about a specific >requirement of Os 187. Bill Stehl, member of Vortex has been approached >about this particular isotope for the last two years. > >Mt direct question is -- since Os187 exists at 1.6% abundance and has an >extremely high thermal nuclear cross section, does anyone have any comment >as to what its intended use may be. [snip] Being so dense, it would make great shielding material, especially as it absorbs neutrons as well as ionising radiation. ICBM cladding perhaps? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 07:14:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA26295; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:04:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:04:56 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:07:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970122100727_1077084304 emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: antenna Resent-Message-ID: <"5w1aI2.0.mQ6.MoYvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subj: Returned mail: User unknown Date: 97-01-22 10:06:00 EST From: MAILER-DAEMON aol.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem) To: FZNIDARSIC aol.com The original message was received at Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:04:53 -0500 (EST) from root localhost -o /aol/sendmail/lib/sendmail.oe ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications ----- vortexl- eskimo.com (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mx1.eskimo.com.: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 vortexl- eskimo.com... User unknown ----- Original message follows ----- Return-Path: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Received: (from root localhost) by emout20.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id KAA10512 for vortexl- eskimo.com; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:04:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:04:53 -0500 (EST) From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <970122100452_274007820 emout20.mail.aol.com> To: vortexl- eskimo.com Subject: antenna Like, how do we fit antenna design into quantum theory? How do we count the em .............................................................................. Chris Good question, that's where my field crosses over into yours. The antenna pattern of a quarter wave dipole is peanut shaped. The antenna pattern of a short dipole is spherical. That antenna pattern of a 1/2 wavelength antenna looks like an X Full wavelength antenna, a squashed X. .............................................................................. ................... They do look like the SPDF orbitals of an atom. Is there a connection? You bet there is. Frank Znidarsic ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From Wed Jan 22 10:05:31 1997 Received: from emout20.mail.aol.com (emout20.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.46]) by emin41.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA18038 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:05:30 -0500 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 07:15:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA26703; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:06:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:06:24 -0800 Message-ID: <32E62DBD.5FD7 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:09:49 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: Vortex Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. References: <970122112121_100433.1541_BHG84-2 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7ofXr1.0.6X6.kpYvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley wrote: > US had been the first to split the atom and to invent the > computer (by which I would imagine he meant the classic definition of > such a beastie), and even more startled that nobody seems to have picked > up that slip. Is understanding of the history of science and technology > at an even lower ebb than even I thought? After all, the US is hardly a > nation which is short of such matters of which it can justly be proud, > so why pick three things (he mentioned the microchip as well), get two > of them wrong - and nobody seems to notice? Our apologies to Rutherford and Babbage, Chris! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 07:18:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA27274; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:08:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:08:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:11:00 -0800 Message-Id: <199701221511.HAA29613 dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Fwd: Cold Fusion Update No. 12, ICCF-6. To: vortex-l eskimo.com To: drom vxcern.cern.ch Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Resent-Message-ID: <"NP96.0.-f6.1sYvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 22, 1997 From: 72240.1256 compuserve.com (Jed Rothwell) Subject: Cold Fusion Update No. 12, ICCF-6. Reply-To: 72240.1256 compuserve.com (Jed Rothwell) Sender: scott zorch.sf-bay.org Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway Message-ID: <970121134543_72240.1256_EHB35-1 CompuServe.COM> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:50:22 GMT Lines: 76 To: >INTERNET:fusion zorch.sf-bay.org Morrison's report on ICCF6 is full of mistakes, distortions and deliberate omissions of critical information. He has learned nothing since the time hedebated Fleischmann. For a realistic view of ICCF6, see my review at: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JedRothwell I will not attempt to correct the absurdities in Morrison's paper. That would be futile. I will, however, correct this statement that pertains directly to me: Dr. James Patterson and Jim Redding have been making large claims of continuous excess heat from the Patterson power cells and they have set up a company called Clean Energy Technologies Inc., CETI, to sell them. Their cells have been propagandised by Mr. Rothwell on the net but he withdrew after he was severely attacked (e.g. he said it could produce for hours 1300 watts out for one watt in but it was pointed out that this would boil all the water away and end the experiment quickly, so he changed his story). 1. I have not withdrawn anything, or changed any story. I stand by all of my claims regarding the 1300 watts. 2. The water could not possibly have boiled under these circumstances. 3. No mistakes were ever "pointed out" on s.p.f. or anywhere else. Nobody has ever found a mistake in my analysis. There was, of course, a great deal of nonsense and handwaving from people who tried to find a mistake, but they failed. Only one serious analysis of the device appeared on s.p.f., from Mitchell Jones, and he concluded that I was (mostly) right. That is, he concluded that I am off by a factor of two, but the handwaving brigades are off by a factor of two thousand. Here is the last message I posted to s.p.f. on this subject: Subject: Mitchell Jones vrs Bob Sullivan Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 17:15:22 GMT Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway bsulliva sky.net (Bob Sullivan) claims that the 1,300 CETI demo did not actually produce any excess heat. He writes: If you were to go back to the archives, you would find that I was one of the original posters who called the 1,344 Watt claim into question. Mitchell Jones efforts at replicating the Cravens 'cooling tower' were aimed at refuting my observations. In the end, Mitchell demonstrate that my observations were correct. If you look back in the archives, you will find that Mitchell Jones refuted Sullivan. Here is what Jones wrote: It seems likely that the low power run was producing about 200 watts, as claimed by CETI, rather than the 469 watts originally calculated by Jed. Whatever the true power output, it seems virtually certain to have been wildly over unity, because *it absurd to suppose that the flow rate measurement could have been sufficiently in error to account for all of the excess*. Certainly the backpressure hypothesis which I have been investigatin is insufficient for this purpose. Thus if you want to argue that the device wasn't over unity, you are going to have to come up with a better argument than that. For myself, I am not denying that the device was over unity. All I deny is that it was as far over unity as Jed claims that it was." -- Mitchell Jones (21cenlogic I-link.net), "Magnum 350 Run," sci.physics.fusion, Mon, 25 Mar 1996 15:55 I disagree with Jones' methodology. I think he is doing the experiment backwards. Flow calorimetry is a good, simple, direct method of measuring heat, whereas an analysis of cooling tower performance is fraught with complexity. However, I do not quarrel with Jones' results. He says my estimate of the CETI heat is off by a factor of two, but at the same time he says that Sullivan et al. are off by a factor of 2,000. I can live with that conclusion. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 07:23:31 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28832; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:14:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:14:07 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:16:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970122101551_-2046750433 emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: range of force interaction Resent-Message-ID: <"2u_S8.0.727.pwYvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I got started in this direction by noting that the electromagnetic forces seemed to behave differently within systems containing condensed charged. Then I mat Puthoff he had arrived at essentially the same conclusion. I then applied the same train of thought to gravitational systems and came up with some predictions that nobody believed. Now Dr. Noever is in the process of demonstrating these strange gravitational phenomena. Finally I applied the same reasoning to nuclear interactions and found that the range of the nuclear interaction should increase from 10 -13 cm to up to many cms in length. This was a hard nut for even I to swallow. Everyone knows that nuclear decay (interactions) are not sensitive to pressure, temperature, and environment. How then can condensed electrons effect the massive nucleus in such a dramatic way? Ordinary nuclear / electronic interactions result only in a hyperfine line splitting of the ground state spectrial lines. This is certainly a very week interaction indeed. In electromagnetic and gravitational systems I know that the exchange of angular momentum changes the range of force interaction. I must therefore assume that the exchange of angular momentum by phonons also accounts for the sttange nuclear phenomena. Theory: Condensed electrons form Bosons. Bosons do not obey the any exclusion principles. They can and do drop down directly upon the nucleus. They interact with the nucleus by exchanging angular momentum (what else would I say). This in itself is week interaction that only results in an allignment of nuclear spins. This allignment of nuclear spins has a big effect on the range of force interaction. We now know the direction of all of the nuclear magnetic moments. We know much about the angular MOMENUM of the nucleus. Hysenberg tells us that we now can know know very little about the nuclear positions. That's what I am thinking. The position of the the nucleons can lie anywhere within the charge cluster. The range of the nuclear force has effectly been increaced to the dimensions of the cluster. What do you think? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 10:29:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA03652; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:01:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:01:14 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701221609.IAA00245 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:09:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <970122112121_100433.1541_BHG84-2 CompuServe.COM> from "Chris Tinsley" at Jan 22, 97 06:21:22 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9aKkn2.0.Du._Mbvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3551 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley writes: > A dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director > components of a UHF antenna) picks up much more energy than > incident upon it. Some prattle and some real prattle. I didn't know the above information about a dipole antenna. It startles me. Anyone have an explanation or other thoughts about this? An antenna is a "passive" device -- a piece of metal. How can this happen? Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 10:35:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA01735; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:56:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:56:13 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701221112.ZM847 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:12:38 -0600 In-Reply-To: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 CompuServe.COM> "The 'new physics'." (Jan 22, 5:29am) References: <970122112121_100433.1541_BHG84-2 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Political Drivel Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"X_pji1.0.FO.hIbvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 22, 5:29am, Chris Tinsley wrote: > As a PS, I was rather startled to hear from Clinton at his inauguration > that the US had been the first to split the atom and to invent the > computer (by which I would imagine he meant the classic definition of > such a beastie), and even more startled that nobody seems to have picked > up that slip. Is understanding of the history of science and technology > at an even lower ebb than even I thought? After all, the US is hardly a > nation which is short of such matters of which it can justly be proud, > so why pick three things (he mentioned the microchip as well), get two > of them wrong - and nobody seems to notice? Education as a whole is at an all time low. History, science, and mathematics are severely neglected in the US and everyone is more uptight about "ebonics" being taught than the cornerstone subjects of civilization. Just because it is not reported does not mean it was not recognized by many. This administration seems to have the habit of unjustly taking the credit for everything positive they had nothing to do with, so it's really not that suprising. The examples are too endless to list here. It's Clinton's "they're all idiots anyway" populist approach to the people. Ironic thing is "education" is at the top of this administration's issues list now; he's going to be combating the very element that he relied on to get re-elected. -john legal crap: Opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Motorola Inc. -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 10:35:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA03330; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:00:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:00:05 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701221019.ZM602 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:19:53 -0600 In-Reply-To: Michael Mandeville "Re: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis?" (Jan 21, 6:56pm) References: <3.0.32.19970121140246.006fa620 aa.net> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"cDMqV.0.jn._Lbvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 21, 6:56pm, Michael Mandeville wrote: > To add it to it, I am perfectly willing to > demonstrate that the presence of human hands in the near vicinity will > alter the nature of the result in that small space. Many have claimed inventor's phenomenon on allot of what is discussed here. I do not dispute your claim, but how do you plan to *demonstrate* it? A repeatable effect could help us understand how to factor in or filter out this influence (if it exists) in our experiments. There may actually be allot of background "help" being applied in many situations. Reality shaped by concentrated or widespread belief? If matter really is condensed energy resonance, why not? Alter the defining resonance, fundamentally change, create, or influence matter. Man or machine, the desired effect would require the same applied principles. How ironic it would be if machines and devices were just a means to focus on desired effects we ourselves unconsciously produce on our own. Thinking too much again..... -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 11:40:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA20563; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:09:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:09:33 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:08:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Resent-Message-ID: <"dCqI12.0.S_4.ZMcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Chris Tinsley writes: >> A dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director >> components of a UHF antenna) picks up much more energy than >> incident upon it. > >Some prattle and some real prattle. I didn't know the above >information about a dipole antenna. It startles me. >Anyone have an explanation or other thoughts about this? >An antenna is a "passive" device -- a piece of metal. >How can this happen? > >Regards, >Robert Stirniman Not 'energy out of nowhere'. He means that the antenna's physical cross section, eg its length times the diameter of the conductor in the case of a wire dipole, is very small, yet it intercepts energy out of about (half a wavelength)^2 of the incident wave. This is related to the way the currents and charges in the antenna modify the incident EM field in this volume, though I've never studied it in detail. Once again, the equations of electromagnetism (Maxwell's equations) CONTAIN conservation of energy, so there is no 'free energy' to be had there. The director elements in Yagi antennas work much like a narrow point of land sticking out from shore to bend waves toward the downstream rocks or elements as the case may be. There is a shadow behind even a simple dipole antenna. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 12:41:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA01253; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:21:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:21:02 -0800 Message-ID: <32E66F95.7C03 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:53:17 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. - Remi References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VE4Tw1.0.hI.cQdvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Remi Cornwall wrote: > > Dear Stenger, > > Wasn't Rutherford a New Zealander? My source says you're right, Remi. However, it looks like he did his good stuff in England. Died in London about 1937----. And hey! - How about that magnetron in everyone's kitchen microwave? -- --- as British as the Royal family! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 12:43:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA07157 for billb@eskimo.com; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:42:56 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:42:56 -0800 X-Envelope-From: roshicorp earthlink.net Wed Jan 22 12:36:42 1997 Received: from germany.it.earthlink.net (germany-c.it.earthlink.net [204.250.46.123]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA04757 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:36:41 -0800 Received: from earthlink.net (pool018-max8.la-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net [207.217.5.93]) by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA04868 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:39:49 -0800 (PST) From: Chuck Davis To: John Steck Old-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:42:59 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9701221112.ZM847 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.4 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Subject: Re: Political Drivel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: On 22-Jan-97, John Steck wrote: >Education as a whole is at an all time low. History, science, and mathematics >are severely neglected in the US and everyone is more uptight about "ebonics" >being taught than the cornerstone subjects of civilization. Well, as a black person, I totally agree! I seem to remember that when I entered the U of Colo. eng. school, those with the *lowest SAT scores* went into education and that's what we are suffering, today :( -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. -Albert Einstein- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 13:10:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA04510; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:35:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:35:07 -0800 Date: 22 Jan 97 15:36:47 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970122203646_100433.1541_BHG120-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"FxppE2.0.O61.wddvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert, > Some prattle and some real prattle. I didn't know the above > information about a dipole antenna. It startles me. Anyone have an > explanation or other thoughts about this? An antenna is a > "passive" device -- a piece of metal. How can this happen? I should have made myself clearer. What I meant was that even a dipole 'pulls in' energy from an em wave from a wider area than it intercepts. Queer things, antennae. Their design is often said to be something of a black art. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 13:25:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA12566; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:58:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:58:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:01:29 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199701222101.QAA27151 spectre.mitre.org> To: fstenger interlaced.net CC: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: <32E5782B.FBC interlaced.net> (fstenger@interlaced.net) Subject: Re: great idea robin - Eachus Resent-Message-ID: <"q5IKQ2.0.C43.E-dvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I said: (snip) > So electron clusters are possible if they are moving fast enough > (relative to what is an exercise left to the reader. ;-) Francis J. Stenger (fstenger interlaced.net) said: > ...Velocity for force balance: > > v = 1/square root (mu_0 * epsilon_0) = c (= light speed!) > > Here our clasical analysis winds up with a relativistic velocity as > the answer! Does this mean that an electron beam of ANY density will > not diverge IF it moves with the speed of light? > I know a 100 mev betatron beam is very close to light speed, but, > does a relativistic analysis say the same thing? > Wondering if my algebra is right... Looks right for ignoring relativity, but I didn't check closely. The real zinger, and I probably shouldn't have been so cute about it, is that to solve the "real" problem, you need to do a relativistic analysis and look at all the parts of the system. In particular, in a plasma, the important velocity is that of the electrons with respect to the reverse flow of positively charged ions. If you are firing an electron beam, the usual is to assume the laboratory frame as the reference. But what makes the phenomena so interesting is that you shouldn't be using mu_0 and epsilon_0. The actual values are a function of the beam. In an arc mu is highly variable as you go from the core of the arc out. (The surrounding plasma is very impermeable.) But even in a vacuum the presence of the concentrated charge changes the values slightly. If you have multiple charged particle beams going around, it gets really complex. And when you want to compute the characteristics of an arc tied in a knot, have fun. (Macbeth Arc Lamp Company still sells pulsed Xenon arc lamps where the tube, and thus the current path, is a three turn coil with one end threaded through the middle.) Oh, and one last detail. One part of designing beam colliders is to insure that self compression keeps the beam compressed to as small a cross-section as possible in the detectors to bring the luminosity up. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 15:04:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA03525; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:37:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:37:10 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32E69743.2781E494 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:40:03 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. References: <970122112121_100433.1541_BHG84-2 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"gmdC_.0.-s.IQfvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley wrote: > > As a PS, I was rather startled to hear from Clinton at his inauguration > that the US had been the first to split the atom and to invent the > computer > so why pick three things (he mentioned the microchip as well), get two > of them wrong - and nobody seems to notice? If I recall, the atom was first split in the induced fission sense by Germans in the mid thirties; the first electronic computer was due to a soviet name Anestasov (sp?) in the 30's-40's (or you could attribute it to Babbage in England). Moreover, the president actually struck out totally, since the first semiconductor transistor was created by some germans circa 1930. But, one could accurately say that the U.S. was the first to make major applications of these basic discoveries. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 16:11:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA00758; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:01:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:01:24 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:57:49 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: great idea robin - Eachus Resent-Message-ID: <"bvMGw1.0.bB.Ifgvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "Self focusing beams" have been achieved and the related math about them published in an article of that name. Don't recall where I read it though, sorry. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 16:36:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA06152; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:25:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:25:09 -0800 Date: 22 Jan 97 19:25:00 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970123002459_76016.2701_JHC137-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"TkgRU2.0.1W1.Z_gvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: C. Tinsley said: >>Queer things, antennae. Their design is often said to be something of a black art.<< I find it helpful to always think of antennae as radiating. It becomes easier to see how the energy is dispersed. Then, simply accept the fact that it all works regardless of the *direction of the wave* ... and it's not so magic! What is the effect of loss of the ground plane on a dipole? Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 16:40:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA07201; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:29:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:29:02 -0800 Date: 22 Jan 97 19:29:32 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970123002932_100433.1541_BHG73-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"w9lYL.0.Lm1.93hvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry, Let me indulge in a little unbridled chauvinism. > If I recall, the atom was first split in the induced fission sense > by Germans in the mid thirties; Usually credited to the NZ-er Rutherford at Manchester, I think. > the first electronic computer was due to a soviet name Anestasov > (sp?) in the 30's-40's (or you could attribute it to Babbage in > England). I'm sticking with Turing and co. > Moreover, the president actually struck out totally, since the > first semiconductor transistor was created by some germans circa > 1930. Be fair. Clinton specified the microchip, not the transistor. > But, one could accurately say that the U.S. was the first to make > major applications of these basic discoveries. Depends what you mean. Colossus made one HELL of a difference to WWII, and the Manhattan Project was American-British (though the first pile was certainly American), I knew quite a few old boys who worked on the Bomb. Roosevelt and Churchill agreed to develop it in the US for very obvious reasons! I'm still hoping for comments on all this "new physics" I groped towards trying to get my head around. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 17:11:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA15930; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:57:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:57:41 -0800 Date: 22 Jan 97 19:57:01 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701 compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970123005700_76016.2701_JHC142-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"a7aRI2.0.Nu3._Thvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: C. Tinsley said: >>Be fair. Clinton specified the microchip, not the transistor.<< Ah, hell, we stole that one from the aliens in '47. (See Proj. Tinkertoy.) Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 22:31:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA09478; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:21:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:21:26 -0800 Message-ID: <32E70257.3981 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:46:55 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: DNMEC flux gate generator design available Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5gtfc2.0._J2.ZDmvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3569 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, I have finished the first design of my DNMEC flux gate generator. Quick Field simulations and actual simple prototype testing matches with my theory. I am now construction a full device. I will keep you posted. If anyone wishes the construction details, they are available for free. Just ask. I will assist constructors any way I can. What you will get are Quick Field model files. They have all the info necessary for construction. You can also play with the sims if you wish to alter the construction details. My only request is for the information to be kept open and flowing. We owe our children a better future than what we have now. Low cost, safe, non polluting power (rotary & electrical). This will change the future. By the way, if you make any money, a 5% royalty would be nice. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, 61 8 8270 2737 (Home / Office / PC Fax) gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 22 23:39:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA23428; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 23:30:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 23:30:00 -0800 Message-Id: <199701230719.AAA03764 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" , "\"Alchemy discussion group\" <" Cc: "Non-Moderated WhiteGold" Subject: Something that may be of interest.......... Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 00:33:05 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lbHPe2.0.zj5.rDnvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Another source of ??? Date: The following message was in my inbox yesterday. I finally got around to reading it so I thought I would share its contents in full.... No, I do not endorse any of the following. Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:03:58 +0100 From: Roger Natanaelsson To: JChampion transmutation.com http://boulder.earthnet.net/~ics/globsci.html LOOKING AT : Saturday, January 18, 1997 9:40-10:40 am Nanetta Crist Johnson, Virginia Beach Virginia. "THE ELIXIR OF LIFE REDISCOVERED". An Internationally known clairvoyant and visionary artist, she will present her amazing encounters with a great alchemist and adept who lived to be over 250 years old in youth and vigor. She will share how she requested he work with a modern scientist to make his formulas available to all people for enlightment, health and longevity. Actual video tapes of how the life force is captured and sets up a superconductivity field in the body will be shown. These microscopic pictures will reveal how predeluvian cultures encoded this knowledge into their "Sacred Seals of the Gods." The formula developed from this knowledge, which is called "Life Everlasting" will be available at the congress. Very promising, any info. about this ? regards Roger N. ___________________________ Joe Champion JChampion transmutation.com http://www.transmutation.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 01:01:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA23062; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:19:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:19:51 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:17:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: "Francis J. Stenger" cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, Vortex Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. In-Reply-To: <32E62DBD.5FD7 interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"YRQYQ1.0.Fb5.yVcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Stenger, Wasn't Rutherford a New Zealander? Oh well, if its part of the colonies, we can claim collective achievement? Remi Cornwall. > Our apologies to Rutherford and Babbage, Chris! > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 01:30:02 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA23120; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:20:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:20:24 -0800 Date: 22 Jan 97 14:14:57 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970122191456_100433.1541_BHG52-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"JE5Zt1.0.Qb5.-Vcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank, > Our apologies to Rutherford and Babbage, Chris! Well, Rutherford was a New Zealander working in England. But I would define a computer in the modern sense as an electronic data-handling engine which is capable of amending its own instructions (which of course most of us prefer to be restricted to program-loading...). On that basis the first computer was that designed by Turing and others, used with huge success for code-breaking in WWII at Bletchley Park in England, and generally hushed-up for a very long time! Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 01:39:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA11519; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 01:30:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 01:30:45 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 97 01:33:49 PST From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <9701230933.AA14725 joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Something that may be of interest.......... Resent-Message-ID: <"n7-nj3.0.vp2.3_ovo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sounds like a nut, though I note an interesting connection to the claims of Dan's Dr. Merkyl. I wonder if she plagiarized from him, or if there is actually a whole subculture of people who have come to believe in Merkyl-like ideas. (i.e. independent of merkyl)...that would be quite strange. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 03:39:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA23398; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:21:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:21:27 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:18:06 -0800 Message-Id: <199701221918.LAA05788 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Resent-Message-ID: <"_KcMu.0.xg5.fXcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Chris Tinsley writes: >> A dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director >> components of a UHF antenna) picks up much more energy than >> incident upon it. > >Some prattle and some real prattle. I didn't know the above >information about a dipole antenna. It startles me. >Anyone have an explanation or other thoughts about this? >An antenna is a "passive" device -- a piece of metal. >How can this happen? >Robert Stirniman As you noticed, it cannot. (Unless that is, you believe in things like Uncertainty. then since you cannot be certain about anything at all at the level of the quantum vacuum, it could have a lot of energy picked up that wasn't even there! :-) Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 03:43:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA25238; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 03:34:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 03:34:46 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:37:53 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: "Francis J. Stenger" cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Let us celebrate the achievement of the west and western method In-Reply-To: <32E66F95.7C03 interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"UFvuY.0.DA6.Lpqvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Francis, With all this new age prattle (X files etc., mysticism) let us remember our forebarers and the western analystical approach. Perverse people keep trying to tell everyone that logic is dead and the western approach should give way to old age (or is it stone age?) mysticism. They do serious damage and warp the mind of the youth, leaving them frustrated and perplexed in life. To me nothing could be more cruel. I'm still quite young and observe the 'philosophy' of some of my teachers I keep in contact. I'm old enough and brave enough to challenge their non-science (or is it nonsense?) and their lack of coherent logical argument. The latest fad is the incorrect discussion of quantum mechanics and relativity with lots of hand waving ('everything is relative, nothing is absolute or causal') and discussion of how we are all 'quantumly coherent with the brethen of this planet' or the teachings of guru Khrisnamurti. I know freeloader/looter talk when I hear it! (-: The clever far east countries know our approach works and I buy their products any day! I fear for freedom in the west and most of all freedom of inquiry. Too many people see science as some kind of political activity where majority consensus is correct - well it don't work like that! Enough counter-sabotage, All the best brothers in spirit, Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 07:06:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA21340; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:12:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:12:51 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:11:06 -0800 Message-Id: <199701221911.LAA05147 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: antenna Resent-Message-ID: <"wtNnX1.0.yA5.gPcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3553 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Like, how do we fit antenna design into quantum theory? How do we count the >em Count them as individual standing waves and monitor their motions and their accelerations. Then, analyse how their waveforms will sum as the result of the Doppler shifting of the wave energies emitted from individual electrons. When you sum that energy as you would in a complex phased array radar where some of the emitters are moving in relation to others, and especially where they are accelerating relative to one another, then you will come to see how an em field is formed and what it consists of. ie, Acoustic motions of the quantum vacuum, or, aether ocean in which we live and of which we are made. The tough thing to grasp is how the wave energy can remain coherent in things like photons and electrons, but to get it one must work with GR considerations and especially those dealing with a closed universe as a photon is sort of a closed structure in that kind of a sense. But like all other standing waves, it is as well open and connected to all of the outside in all directions. This leads to things like holograms and two slit experiments. Later Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 07:35:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA24243; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 07:23:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 07:23:44 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701230922.ZM6616 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:22:15 -0600 In-Reply-To: Remi Cornwall "Let us celebrate the achievement of the west and western method" (Jan 23, 5:38am) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the west and western method Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"PngqH.0.Pw5.q9uvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 23, 5:38am, Remi Cornwall wrote: > With all this new age prattle (X files etc., mysticism) let us remember > our forebarers and the western analystical approach. Perverse people keep > trying to tell everyone that logic is dead and the western approach > should give way to old age (or is it stone age?) mysticism. They do > serious damage and warp the mind of the youth, leaving them frustrated > and perplexed in life. To me nothing could be more cruel. Ditto, but there is a positive spin, however. This approach encourages our youth to consider new ideas, approaches, view points, and possibilities. Logic should definitely be taught, but it can sometime stop the creative flow and predispose us to not try things that shouldn't logically work. I very much doubt we would be intelligently discussing aether theory, cold fusion, and other topics in an open forum like this if this willingness to consider did not exist. Imagination is the hallmark of innovation. Many of the best minds of human history were a few chairs short of a dinning room set, so what is different now? > The latest fad is the incorrect discussion of quantum mechanics and > relativity with lots of hand waving ('everything is relative, nothing is > absolute or causal') and discussion of how we are all 'quantumly coherent > with the brethen of this planet' or the teachings of guru Khrisnamurti. I > know freeloader/looter talk when I hear it! (-: Ditto. I see it as primarily a rebellion against the establishment. Most discussions I find myself in regarding relativity and quantum mechanics are with people who haven't even read one word of them. It's usually a short discussion. I find the same problem with topics like gun control, religion, and politics so I don't think science is cornering the market on blathering idiots. > The clever far east countries know our approach works and I buy their > products any day! As far as I know, I am not aware of any mystically or theoretically manufactured products. Can't say I follow your point. If you are refering to quality standards, I don't think these are philisophically defined. I believe they are culturally defined. > I fear for freedom in the west and most of all freedom of inquiry. Too > many people see science as some kind of political activity where majority > consensus is correct - well it don't work like that! Your fear is well deserved. Freedoms are evaporating worldwide at an alarming rate. It is indicitive of a modern culture where opinions and moral stands are legislated not taught. Informed opinions are rare ("The masses are asses" - Thomas Jefferson). Education is the key to change; the carrot instead of the stick. It all starts by encouraging kids to read. > Enough counter-sabotage, Remember, idiots have most of the money in the world. Learn to embrase them and you can be a rich man. -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 07:58:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA27079; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 07:34:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 07:34:57 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:37:22 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970123100735_203368762 emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: not true Resent-Message-ID: <"zCp4p3.0.xc6.UKuvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director > components of a UHF antenna) picks up much more energy than > incident upon it. Antenna do not produce any anomalous energy. The idea of antenna GAIN may appear to apply that excess energy is being adsorbed. It does not. Gain = signal received/transmitted by antenna / signal received/transmitted by a non-directional antenna .Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 10:05:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA10927; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:54:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:54:02 -0800 Message-ID: <32E7A591.2A9D advertronix.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:53:21 -0800 From: Carl Leonard Reply-To: carl advertronix.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the west and western method References: <9701230922.ZM6616@me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WV00U.0.dg2.pMwvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: > > On Jan 23, 5:38am, Remi Cornwall wrote: > > > With all this new age prattle (X files etc., mysticism) let us remember > > our forebarers and the western analystical approach. Perverse people keep > > trying to tell everyone that logic is dead and the western approach > > should give way to old age (or is it stone age?) mysticism. They do > > serious damage and warp the mind of the youth, leaving them frustrated > > and perplexed in life. To me nothing could be more cruel. New Age = Religon These people say this is the way it is. You can not prove or disprove most of what they say. However, most of them have cars, electricity in thier homes and may use computers and the internet to distribute ideas. All produced from the so called "dead" western logic. Many if not most people need someone telling them thier place in the world. The *real* world is to harsh and depressing. Atleast with the "western analytical approach" we take as truth what can not be disproven. It will not produce a "meaning of life", but this computer that I'm typing into seems to work pretty well. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 10:59:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA21412; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:46:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:46:26 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Re: the west and western method Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:48:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zXlo73.0.7E5.x7xvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Carl If it doesn't, try praying to the New World God(s) to fix it and see what happens. Hank ---------- From: Carl Leonard To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the west and western method Date: Thursday, January 23, 1997 9:53AM John Steck wrote: > > On Jan 23, 5:38am, Remi Cornwall wrote: > > > With all this new age prattle (X files etc., mysticism) let us remember > > our forebarers and the western analystical approach. Perverse people keep > > trying to tell everyone that logic is dead and the western approach > > should give way to old age (or is it stone age?) mysticism. They do > > serious damage and warp the mind of the youth, leaving them frustrated > > and perplexed in life. To me nothing could be more cruel. New Age = Religon These people say this is the way it is. You can not prove or disprove most of what they say. However, most of them have cars, electricity in thier homes and may use computers and the internet to distribute ideas. All produced from the so called "dead" western logic. Many if not most people need someone telling them thier place in the world. The *real* world is to harsh and depressing. Atleast with the "western analytical approach" we take as truth what can not be disproven. It will not produce a "meaning of life", but this computer that I'm typing into seems to work pretty well. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 11:44:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA27407; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:19:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:19:09 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 14:21:03 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: First atom-splitting, computers, etc. Message-ID: <970123192102_72240.1256_EHB126-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"-vETW2.0.6i6.hcxvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Strictly speaking, Clinton's claim that the U.S. was first to split the atom and invent computers is incorrect, but in a broader sense I think it is right. Most people think of the first self-sustaining fission reactor and the atom bomb as the first examples of splitting the atom. They were the first large-scale, practical, exothermic atomic reactions. This is akin to saying that Savory was the first person to build a steam engine, in spite of the fact that the ancient Greeks and others built steam driven turbine toys. They never attempted to scale them up or perform any useful work with them. Chris champions Turing's WWII Bombe as the first computer. You can make a good case for that, but many people say that John Vincent Atanasoff's 1930's computers at U. Iowa anticipated most major features in both the Turing and Mauchly machines. Atanasoff did make that case, in court, and he won. Vannevar Bush made a nifty analog computer in 1930. But I think the real honor for the "first" computer goes to Mauchly, because his ENIAC led to MANIAC (appropriately named -- it was used to design the hydrogen bomb), UNIVAC and the other commercial models. Turing's Bombe led nowhere, because it was kept secret. Some details are still secret today! That makes it like the ancient Chinese government astronomical clocks. The designs were top secret. Naturally, the government kept forgetting how to make them. It had to pay experts a fortune to rediscover them every few generations. They were reportedly amazingly accurate and elaborate, but since they were secret they never led to practical, widespread devices. That is a key point. Hadley and Godfrey deserve credit for the "first" sextants even though Hooke and Newton invented sextants years early. H&N never bothered to tell people. They never made demonstration instruments, they never gave them to sea captains for testing. If H&N had been obscure scientists their designs would have been lost. Rather than giving them any credit, we should rather condemn them. If Newton had only taken an hour to explain the design to a London instrument maker, in a few years sextants would have been in widespread use. This would have saved thousands of lives, millions of pounds, and the eyesight of many mariners, lost squinting at the sun. Pons and Fleischmann were not the first to look for fusion in palladium deuteride. They were not the first to publish. But they were the first to do a bang up job. They were the first to find unambiguous evidence of a reaction. Most important, they were first to hold a press conference, forcing the world to pay attention. A scientific paper alone would not have sufficed. Hundreds of scientific papers have been written subsequently at places like Los Alamos, many of them showing better evidence than Pons and Fleischmann had back in 1989. Yet these subsequent papers have been ignored. Why? Because the authors did not hold press conferences. They have disdained all forms of advertising, promotion and Public Relations. Advertising -- self-promotion, selling your ideas -- is essential in science, just as it is in any other institution, including the Catholic Church, the Royal Society, and the Boston Symphony Orchestra. In most high-brow institutions we don't call it advertising, but it amounts to the same thing. The establishment often castigates Pons and Fleischmann for holding a press conference. Yet science reporters make a full time career attending press conferences and hoopla connected surrounding Hubble telescope discoveries, DNA breakthroughs, AIDS research, life in Rocks That May or May Not have Come from Mars, ZPE research at Los Alamos, hot fusion runs, etc. It has always been that way, and it always will be. Some people express moral objections or aesthetic disgust at politics and PR, as if Science should Above All That. I find this amusing. It is like saying you don't want children because sex and diapers are such a mess. I say if you not willing to put up with life's stink, don't complain when you fail. You must stick your neck out and promote your discovery, or people will ignore you today and steal your ideas tomorrow. You cannot expect credit for the "first" computer or atom-splitting machine unless you go to the public and make your case the way Atanasoff did. (He did not do enough, and he does not deserve much credit. He did, however, show the machine to Mauchly who visited him in the late '30s. The rest, as they say, is history.) To be truly first, in a meaningful sense, you must discover, publish, promote, and champion the discovery, or get someone else to do these things for you. In this sense, Huxley deserves a large chunk of the credit for the theory of evolution. I think Darwin would agree, and he would not begrudge Huxley that recognition. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 12:04:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA30582; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:34:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:34:00 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 14:28:07 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Message-ID: <970123192807_100433.1541_BHG116-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"ntAsu1.0.gT7.bqxvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross, > As you noticed, it cannot. (Unless that is, you believe in things > like Uncertainty. then since you cannot be certain about anything > at all at the level of the quantum vacuum, it could have a lot of > energy picked up that wasn't even there! :-) I was not suggesting anything anomalous about an antenna! All I was doing was to point out that it absorbs more energy from the incident radiation than the total which passes its cross-section. In other words, it acts as a kind of em-radiation attractor. Nothing fancier than that - but it remains 'interesting' nonetheless. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 13:15:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA30596; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:34:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:34:04 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 14:28:02 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: the west and western method Message-ID: <970123192801_100433.1541_BHG116-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"qbjy53.0.zT7.dqxvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John, > Logic should definitely be taught, but it can sometime stop the > creative flow and predispose us to not try things that shouldn't > logically work. I very much doubt we would be intelligently > discussing aether theory, cold fusion, and other topics in an open > forum like this if this willingness to consider did not exist. I must respectfully but vehemently disagree. One of the fundamental rules of logical thought (the Principle of Parsimony) requires of us that we must not believe anything until *nothing else* will satisfy the evidence. On that basis, relativity may be flawed because curved space may be nothing but a mathematical analogy; the big bang would go straight out, along with black holes and the rest of the theoretical constructs. Probably we'd lose photons and quite a lot of other stuff. But would we lose the thermal anomaly of "CF"? Not a chance, that is as solid as evidence comes. I do agree that it is the wild men who often come up with new stuff - indeed, as it takes so much effort to get a physics PhD, few will dare question what they have struggled so hard to understand. > Freedoms are evaporating worldwide at an alarming rate. Perhaps we are in a period of change, when we lose some freedoms and gain others. I am always reminded of a funds-seeking spoof general in "Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In," who said, "An America at war with others is an America at peace with itself." The reverse may be true - and not just for America, I think the idea is relevant to all of us. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 14:41:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA27533; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:55:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:55:10 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:58:53 -0800 Message-Id: <199701232158.NAA05844 netserve.kfalls.net> X-Sender: me2 kfalls.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ME2 KFALLS.NET (Don Evans) Subject: GRAVITY SHIELD Resent-Message-ID: <"oK2ty.0.6k6.zuzvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > as many of you know i have been working on the recreation of a gravity shield as described by the finnish scientist. in conjuction with a means of electrical power generation. > this is to report that i have achieved a 1% sheilding of the acceleration force of gravity and that a person i was corresponding with has also achieved a 5%shielding effect( john schuareer) i hope he dosent mind me mentioning his name. this was accomplished on my part using a layerd set of ybco superconductors a rare earth magnet and a pulsed d.c. current into a coil. i am now looking for people who would be interseted in colaborating on this subject with any luck i should be able to achieve a steady shielding effect and the generation of excess power by using this shielding effect to change the acceleration force of gravity to electical power . i am no scintist and lack alot of phyics understanding however i am a tinkerer and curios at nature i have a super understanding of machines >and am competent at building most things so if you are interested in this email me and please tell me what you are good at, interested people may also email. but because i correspond with so many and also have other business interest, i may not be able to answer each and every person but will try to post at least once a month. i am looking for some one in material sciences mainly supercondutors , electricity, >drafting ability , mechanical engener, someone with coil building experence, or anyone with a related field that would like to colaborate all information will be shared and everyone will get credit for the work they have contributed as well as part ownership if we prove successfull. i do NOT want any money as i will furnish this for what we need. so if you would like to collaborate on this i truley believe we could have a working model of the generator within six months. i know several of you i owe updates on and will try to furnish you this in the next week several of you have asked to come and see this foir your selfs i will try to arrange a public demontration this spring. > > >regaurds don evans > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 14:52:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA31519; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:08:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:08:25 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701231607.ZM8933 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:07:40 -0600 In-Reply-To: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 CompuServe.COM> "Re: the west and western method" (Jan 23, 1:37pm) References: <970123192801_100433.1541_BHG116-1 CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the west and western method Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"P86lQ2.0.Oi7.M5-vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 23, 1:37pm, Chris Tinsley wrote: > I must respectfully but vehemently disagree. One of the fundamental > rules of logical thought (the Principle of Parsimony) requires of us > that we must not believe anything until *nothing else* will satisfy the > evidence. I agree with your disagreement. I do not contest *correct* logical analysis and the rules of logical thought. I speak regarding the premise/conclusion structure that revolutionary ideas are shot down with. I speak regarding the false absolutes that are inadvertantly created that many rally their banners behind without question. I speak regarding the arogance that if a math equation can define it, it is unquestionable. By no means could I imply CF would be invalid if established logic structures prevailed, just under explored, under funded, or just an underground movement due to societal censoring or close mindedness. Look at what we do to unfortunate individuals who reveal UFO experiences or ESP. A premise, even a faulty one, is sometimes difficult to replace. Even more so when you construct countless theories from it, tailor observed phenomenon to support it, and base educational degrees regarding it. CF, UFOs, and other fringe topics are not disputed because they are wrong. They are disputed IMO because they fly in the face of commonly held, logically supported theories held by many who have dedicated their lives to them and/or staked their reputations on them. > I do agree that it is the wild men who often come up with new stuff - > indeed, as it takes so much effort to get a physics PhD, few will dare > question what they have struggled so hard to understand. My point exactly on both statements. I do not wish to insult or invalidate anyone's educational accomplishments, but effort does not insure success or correctness. Willingness to admit to being wrong once in a while insures that. I will not surrender my right to question. If nothing else it expands my own understanding. Sorry if I was unclear. I don't think logic is to blame, just the improper use of it to censor. I wouldn't trade my logic classes in college for anything. They marked a turning point in my exploration of the universe. I certainly wouldn't be the person I am today without the influence. -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 14:57:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA03812; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:29:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:29:45 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 17:05:53 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: First atom-splitting, computers, etc. Message-ID: <970123220552_100433.1541_BHG30-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"HQAs31.0.Ix.LP-vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, A fine summary. > Turing's Bombe led nowhere, because it was kept secret. Some > details are still secret today! Yes, it really is bizarre. And Bletchley Park is being allowed to fall down. I think the argument was that it was difficult to know where to stop - although one would imagine that the hardware might have been made public. Apparently, although cryptanalysis has progressed enormously since WWII, some of the underlying approaches used in the hugely successful code-breaking were pretty clever and devious; HM Govt was pretty wary of opening the can of worms at all. But I would love to see the schematics of Colossus! It is said that when Turing caught cold, our Atlantic losses went up enormously. And of course the British (and therefore Allied) ability to read just about all the Axis traffic was one of the War's best-kept secrets. But I reckon you are trying to have it both ways. Rutherford's splitting of the atom was very much public knowledge, as was the early work on 'real' computers. But Turing exploited the concept of the computer to dramatic and vital effect, just as Fermi and others did with nuclear physics. By the way, any computer nerd who is in London should visit the Science Museum and see Babbage's Difference Engine in all its brassy, hand-cranked beauty. It was made using technology of Babbage's own times, just to find out whether it would really have worked. It did. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 16:10:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA24029; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 15:57:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 15:57:23 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 18:58:29 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: First atom-splitting, computers, etc. Message-ID: <970123235829_100060.173_JHB112-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"lHK84.0.Nt5.Xh_vo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chris, >> And Bletchley Park is being allowed to fall down. << By a strange coincidence I have close neighbours who worked at Bletchley Park during the war, and I am taking them to an open day at Bletchley Park in March arranged by the Royal Institution. The place has been refurbished as a museum with some of the original equipment in its original location. I gather that the place has been open to the public for a period, but I'm not sure for how long. I'll let you know what we see. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 16:32:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA29272; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:20:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:20:46 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:23:47 -0800 Message-Id: <199701240023.QAA04235 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Resent-Message-ID: <"sbPR7.0.E97.R10wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Ross, > > > As you noticed, it cannot. (Unless that is, you believe in things > > like Uncertainty. then since you cannot be certain about anything > > at all at the level of the quantum vacuum, it could have a lot of > > energy picked up that wasn't even there! :-) > >I was not suggesting anything anomalous about an antenna! All I was >doing was to point out that it absorbs more energy from the incident >radiation than the total which passes its cross-section. In other >words, it acts as a kind of em-radiation attractor. Nothing fancier >than that - but it remains 'interesting' nonetheless. > >Chris But I do not believe this is what is happening. The antenna has an effeciency for coupling the energy passing through its region of spacetime and that effeciency will be thermodynamically less than unity. Thus, **less** energy will couple into the antenna electronics than passes by the antenna, not more. The antenna does absolutely not "attract" em energy into its region of spacetime. It acts as a "dip stick" in the em "waves" and listens to what is there. It has far too little mass to even consider altering the trajectory of that em energy. An antenna by definition is a passive element listening to what is incident upon it (on the receiver side). Ross From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 19:17:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA28739; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:56:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:56:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:00:28 -0800 Message-Id: <199701240300.TAA31227 netserve.kfalls.net> X-Sender: me2 kfalls.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ME2 KFALLS.NET (Don Evans) Subject: grav-shield Resent-Message-ID: <"jmmN4.0.x07.mJ2wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >this is to inform you how to set up the gravity shield experiment >and how i did it. > >one 1/4" wood dowel purchased at any home improvment store >this is to be used as a balace beam. > >two 1/8" glass rods or similar material aprox 6" long connected to the dowel ends and hung vertically from the dowel ends with a cotton sring attached with hot glue > >a power suppy consisting of a 6amp 12volt battery charger > >a coil of 300 turns of #26 wire wrapped around a 1" plastic pill bottle > >a samarium cobalt rare earth magnet 1/2" dia. > >a digital lab scale to measure wieghts and deflection on the balance beam. acuracy of 1/100th gram > > >i constructed the balace beem with the wood dowel& balanced it with one end in the pan of the scales to measure weight deflection it had plastic cover on all sides except the bottom wich was 3/4 inch particle board . > >i constructed the coil and and set it up under the particle board so no influence would interfer with the liquid nitrogen vapors no metal parts where used in any of the project > >i filled the pill bottle with liquid n2 and let it cool down i then inserted a 1" ybco superconductor and let it cool down i then inserted the magnet and then inserted another ybco superconductor on top there was a slight fluctuation in the glass rod hanging above the particle board at this time in the order of .1% of the wieght of glass rod i did not notice any wieght gained simply aloss of existing wieght i then hooked up the power to the coil and noticed imediatly a loss of aprox 1% to glass rod i was able to hold this with slight fluctuation for aprox 6min if i had replenished the n2 i think i could have held the shielding effect indefineatly. i am currently trying to device a variable votage supply with variable frequency capability to log any effects of frequency and voltage have anything to do with the shielding effect also i am making a larger coil and longer tube to hold as many as 13 disks with a magnet in each layer i am also putting a coil with iron core underneath to vary the missner effect if possible > >i am getting ready to reconstuct the experminet and have a video made of the procedure and to record the efffects it will also include the method of power generation and what it looks like i will be designing this next set up to be used continously with amethod of replenishing the n2 without much turblance . > >please note this was achieved not with a rotating superconductor but a pulsed rectified ac current induced in the coil on the outside of the pill bottle and around the superconductor. > >more in the future don evans > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 19:31:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA00385; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:21:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:21:24 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 22:22:04 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: First atom-splitting, computers, etc. Message-ID: <970124032203_72240.1256_EHB91-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"skgOy1.0.x5.ng2wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3586 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Chris writes: Apparently, although cryptanalysis has progressed enormously since WWII, some of the underlying approaches used in the hugely successful code-breaking were pretty clever and devious; HM Govt was pretty wary of opening the can of worms at all. Right. That is why the Bombes are still secret but ENIAC is in the Smithsonian. ENIAC was used to compute artillery trajectories. There is nothing secret about that job. No devious tricks were required, so the design was quickly declassified and used to build the next generation machines, which soon led to the first commercial computers. But I reckon you are trying to have it both ways. Rutherford's splitting of the atom was very much public knowledge . . . Well . . . I'll grant it is a continuum. But I think we can draw a line at the first self-sustaining fission reaction. I'll bet that's what Clinton's speech writers had in mind. Anyway, most of the top people in the Manhattan project were transplanted Europeans, so you lot get the credit either way. (Assuming Britain is in Europe. Isn't it?) Hitler and Mussolini did us a great favor driving those people out of the country. Stalin would not have made that mistake. He would have liquidated them. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 19:40:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01668; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:28:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:28:33 -0800 Date: 23 Jan 97 22:22:20 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: the west and western method Message-ID: <970124032219_72240.1256_EHB91-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"kBJmc3.0.-P.Vn2wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex People who question the role of rationality in science are not completely out of line. Of course rationality and logic are at the heart of science and technology, but other things are in there too, some of them irrational. Aesthetics, inspiration, craftsmanship, humanities, and tradition play important roles, especially in technology. The computer would not work without logic and hard-headed engineering, but you would not be able to understand it or use it, were it not for graphic design and the programmer's intuitive feel for psychology and "human engineering" (a grossly mislabeled discipline). Science in the abstract is based upon pure logic, like mathematics. But in the form it is actually practiced in the real world, it cannot be separated from the traditional crafts from which it sprang. It is rooted in culture. You cannot do "value-free" science, or medicine, or anything else. Not because that is logically impossible, but because you are a human being and a primate, and you bring your culture and instincts to everything you say, think and do. Scientific research is carried out on a daily basis in one country very differently than in another. It is possible to think scientifically in Japanese, but it is quite impossible to think *the very same thought, with the same vocabulary and shades of meaning* as you would in English. You cannot treat people quite the same way, or make a statement in a meeting, or work together in quite the same fashion. Modern methods of doing research, writing, thinking, and organizing research are quite different from those of the 18th and 19th centuries. The social relationships between the researchers; credit & responsibilities; the public's attitudes and expectations of science; the order in which things are published; the kinds of information we communicate, and many other aspects of R&D have changed tremendously. Most important, the purposes of science have changed, and this shapes the work. This was described by Loren Eiseley: A very ill-defined thing known as the scientific method persists, but the motivations behind it have altered from century to century. The science of the seventeenth century, as many historians have pointed out, was essentially theoretical and other-worldly. Its observations revolved largely about a world regarded as under divine control and balance. As we came into the nineteenth century, cosmic and organic evolution began to effect a change in religious outlook. The rise of technology gave hope for a Baconian utopia of the New Atlantis model. Problem solving became the rage of science. Today problem solving with mechanical models, even of living societies, continues to be popular. The emphasis, however, has shifted to power. From a theoretical desire to understand the universe, we have come to a point where it is felt we must understand it to survive. Governments expend billions upon particle research, cosmic-ray research, not because they have been imbued suddenly with a great hunger for truth, but for the very simple if barbarous reason that they know the power which lies in the particle . . ." - L. Eiseley, "The Man Who Saw Through Time," (Scribner's, 1973), p. 105 - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 20:33:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA11449; Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:23:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:23:23 -0800 Message-ID: <32E837AA.1DAF mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:46:42 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: DNMEC generator version 3 simulation results. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nVnB1.0.Oo2.ra3wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3588 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, Enclosed are the simulation data for my DNMEC generator version 3. These results can be verified by requesting the zip file GWOU3.ZIP. It has ALL the necessary Quick Field files to run the model. The elements changed during the simulation run are the number of Air and Ferrite blocks in the tooth (to simulate the tooth moving toward the air gap) and coil current (to attempt to maintain coil flux constant). A = Tooth block is Air. F = Tooth block is Ferrite. As most of the flux changes occur in the left side of the coil, I used its value as a goal to hold constant. Blocks Pull Coil Current Left flux Right Flux ---------------------------------------------------------- AAAAF 295N 0AM -0.018613Wb -0.006047Wb I now alter a block from air to ferrite and rerun the simulation. AAAFF 362.56n 0AM -0.018686Wb -0.006254Wb Flux flow in the magnetic circuit has increased due to the approach of the ferrite. Pull has increased due to the ferrite being closer to the gap. I now try different coil currents in an attempt to reduce the left hand flux back to its original value. The final result is. AAAFF 363.56N 750AM -0.018612Wb -0.006283Wb Left hand flux is now back to its original value due to the opposing flux flow from the coil current. Note that pull on the ferrite block has increased! The following follows the same sequence. ---------------------------------------------------------- AAFFF 514.78N 750AM -0.018739Wb -0.006525Wb AAFFF 516.54N 2000AM -0.018614Wb -0.006578Wb ---------------------------------------------------------- AFFFF 704.24N 2000AM -0.018835Wb -0.006852Wb AFFFF 706.6N 4250AM -0.018604Wb -0.006954Wb ---------------------------------------------------------- FFFFF 934.79N 4250AM -0.018932Wb -0.007231Wb FFFFF 938.06N 7200AM -0.018618Wb -0.007376Wb ---------------------------------------------------------- The results show the DNMEC generator producing electrical and rotary power directly from the magnetic fields of aligned domains. Or is it from the "Spinning electrons" in the iron atoms that produce the field. Where ever it comes from, its there to be used. OK Evan? Comments? Please reply to the freenrg list server or to me directly if you would like to receive the Quick Field zip file. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 22:16:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA20563; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:09:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:09:33 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:08:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Resent-Message-ID: <"dCqI12.0.S_4.ZMcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Chris Tinsley writes: >> A dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director >> components of a UHF antenna) picks up much more energy than >> incident upon it. > >Some prattle and some real prattle. I didn't know the above >information about a dipole antenna. It startles me. >Anyone have an explanation or other thoughts about this? >An antenna is a "passive" device -- a piece of metal. >How can this happen? > >Regards, >Robert Stirniman Not 'energy out of nowhere'. He means that the antenna's physical cross section, eg its length times the diameter of the conductor in the case of a wire dipole, is very small, yet it intercepts energy out of about (half a wavelength)^2 of the incident wave. This is related to the way the currents and charges in the antenna modify the incident EM field in this volume, though I've never studied it in detail. Once again, the equations of electromagnetism (Maxwell's equations) CONTAIN conservation of energy, so there is no 'free energy' to be had there. The director elements in Yagi antennas work much like a narrow point of land sticking out from shore to bend waves toward the downstream rocks or elements as the case may be. There is a shadow behind even a simple dipole antenna. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 23 23:04:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA28179; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:38:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:38:05 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:38:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199701221938.LAA07708 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis? Resent-Message-ID: <"hKEFX.0.At6.wncvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3559 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Many have claimed inventor's phenomenon on allot of what is discussed here. I >do not dispute your claim, but how do you plan to *demonstrate* it? A >repeatable effect could help us understand how to factor in or filter out this >influence (if it exists) in our experiments. There may actually be allot of >background "help" being applied in many situations. Reality shaped by >concentrated or widespread belief? If matter really is condensed energy >resonance, why not? Indeed, if matter consists of standing waves, then radiating from all objects is a huge amount of energy. Likewise, converging into those objects is the same huge amount of energy. The mass in my head is greater than the energy content of the photons arriving from the sun and falling on the earth over a 24 hour period. So that my brain possesses enough KE in the form of standing waves to "Move a mountain", is a very simple thing to show. The mass in our bodies is very very much more energy laiden than the energy released in our largest atomic weapons. And our minds are holographic structures of neutral nets. So if there was a way that we could focus the acoustic emissions at the QVF level then we would be able to apply that convergence of energy in a way similar to how a phased array radar beam works with a small amount of energy that is collimated along a line, or how it can work if you instead induce it to converge. the latter is more akin to the action imposed by a magnifying glass as sunlight passes through it and the paper beneath it is burnt by a little child. I do not know how to accomplish it, but I do know that the energy is there waiting to be tapped. More than ample. It makes me wonder about the biblical definition of the word, "Faith". I think that all "religions" are attempting to get in touch with this sort of energy source and that we physicists are out in left field ignorant of the very nature of matter in our thinking in terms of uncertainty and in terms of pea like particles. As a wave filled continuum, we are essentially channeling that wave energy through our matter. And so perhaps there is a way to induce a convergence of wave energy by using out "thoughts" and our brains as a 3D version of a phased array radar antenna where the "radar" is instead, quantum vacuum fluctuations of acoustic wave energy in the ocean of aether that is our home. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 02:13:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA18566; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:03:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:03:07 -0800 Message-ID: <32E88507.29C8 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 20:16:47 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: DNMEC generator version 3.1 simulation results. Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------1502C5573EF" Resent-Message-ID: <"DHHy_.0._W4.PZ8wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------1502C5573EF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, Enclosed are the simulation data for my DNMEC generator version 3.1. Attached is the updated model file gwou3a.mod. The only change is a finer mesh structure to allow a finer detail around the tooth and coil. The coil currents are higher due to the finer mesh. Replace the old model file with this file. You should then be able to verify the following data. These results can be verified by requesting the zip file GWOU3.ZIP. It has ALL the necessary Quick Field files to run the model. The elements changed during the simulation run are the number of Air and Ferrite blocks in the tooth (to simulate the tooth moving toward the air gap) and coil current (to attempt to maintain coil flux constant). A = Tooth block is Air. F = Tooth block is Ferrite. The linking flux was calculated using the coil block, I used its value as a goal to hold constant. Blocks Pull Coil Current Linking Flux ---------------------------------------------------------- AAAAF 318.48N 0AM -0.012354Wb 176.6 Deg I now alter a block from air to ferrite and rerun the simulation. AAAFF 465.24N 0AM -0.012488Wb 172 Deg Flux flow in the magnetic circuit has increased due to the approach of the ferrite. Pull has increased due to the ferrite being closer to the gap. I now try different coil currents in an attempt to reduce the linking flux back to its original value. The final result is. AAAFF 472.27N 4,750AM -0.012349Wb 172 Deg Linking flux is now back to its original value due to the opposing flux flow from the coil current. Note that pull on the ferrite block has increased! The following follows the same sequence. ---------------------------------------------------------- AAFFF 675.95N 4,750AM -0.012540Wb 172.5 Deg AAFFF 684.06N 11,125AM -0.012353Wb ---------------------------------------------------------- AFFFF 953.16N 11,125AM -0.012618Wb 169.6 Deg AFFFF 962.95N 20,800AM -0.012332Wb 169.2 Deg ---------------------------------------------------------- FFFFF 1,231.4N 20,800AM -0.012689Wb 153.8 Deg FFFFF 1,246.1N 32,000AM -0.012349Wb 153.2 Deg ---------------------------------------------------------- The results show the DNMEC generator producing electrical and rotary power directly from the magnetic fields of aligned domains. Or is it from the "Spinning electrons" in the iron atoms that produce the field. Where ever it comes from, its there to be used. OK Evan? Comments? Please reply to the freenrg list server or to me directly if you would like to receive the Quick Field zip file. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au --------------1502C5573EF Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Gwou3a.mod" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Gwou3a.mod" RU0gMzAwtIHpMgAAXABBAB4ACQCOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIA/AACAPwAAAAAAAFlAAADuAQAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAADAGsAAgALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAwABAIYA CycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAMAgwAGAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgADAAUAbQALJwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAMA//8TAIkACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEAP//JQAfAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwD//yEA PQALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIA//+vAB0ACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAP//DwAUAAsnAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAD//xEACAALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//8SABYACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP// VAAaAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//08AHAALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEA//+UABgACycAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAABAP//SgAQAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//0YAIAALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA //8LACIACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAP//DABCAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//w0AJgALJwAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//8KACoACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//QwBiAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAD//0cALAALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//9QAKkACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//UQAeAAsn AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//7UAnQALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYA//81ADAACycAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAP//eAAyAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//3MAmQALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//9JALAA CycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADAP//OQA8AAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQD//0UAJAALJwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAcA//8tAG8ACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//PwAuAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwD//0QA ogALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIA//8jADsACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAP//LwAnAAsnAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAABQD//ykAdgALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgA//8ZAHEACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAP// kwC2AAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgD//00AGwALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYA//8rAEEACycAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAHAP//ZACcAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAD//xUAWwALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA //95AFgACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAP//ZQBaAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//4UAXAALJwAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//9VAF4ACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAP//ZgBgAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AQD//4sAVgALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//9IAKsACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAP//NwBXAAsn AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//10AaAALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMA//9nAH4ACycAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAABAAMABwAAAA8nAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQD//5cAagALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//9wAEAA DycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//pwCSAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgD//7IANgAPJwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAA//8zAD4ACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//OACtAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgD//1MA YQALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//+bAHIACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAP//jgCMAAsnAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAD//5YAigALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEA//+NAJ4ACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAMA AwAEAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgD//5UAWQAPJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEA//+CAKUACycAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAP//kQCuAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgD//6EAXwALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQA //99AIAACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP//fACkAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//4cAiAALJwAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//9LALQACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACAP//FwCzAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAD//2kAnwALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAcACAB6AFIACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAP//MQCYAAsn AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABwAGADQAmgALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//+BAGwACycAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAABAP//dwB/AAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQD//ygApgALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//+PAJAA CycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAP//owBuAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgD//7EAdQALJwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAEA//8OAKwACycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFAP//YwCgAAsnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD//wkA qgALJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEA//86AKgADycAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADAP//twCEAA8nAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAABwD//0wAdAAPJwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUA//9OAHsABycAAIA/AACAPwEAzcxMPv// BycAAAAAAACAP4MAzcxMPv//BycAAAAAAAAAAAUAzcxMPv//BycAAIA/AAAAAAAAzcxMPv// AyeamZk+ZmZGPwgAzczMPf//AyeamZk+mpk5PxEACoCxPf//AydmZgY/Z2YGPx8A5h0nPP// AycUrgc/Z2YGPyEA7Q0+PP//AyeamZk+zcwsPxUACi6WPf//BycAAAA/zcwsPxkAj8L1PP// AycAAAA/mpk5Px0AOe4UPf//AycUrgc/MzPzPj0A7Q0+PP//AydmZgY/MzPzPiUA5h0nPP// Aye4HgU/MzPzPicA4C0QPP//AycK1wM/MzPzPisAs3vyO///AycK1wM/Z2YGP0EAs3vyO/// AycK1+M+MzPzPnsADcnJO///AycK1+M+mpnZPnMAqYb9O///AyeuRwE/mpnZPjUAPQ4DPP// AyeuRwE/MzPzPjMAkbjHO///Aye4HgU/Z2YGPy8A4C0QPP//AycAACA/AADAPq0A2+EvPf// CydcjwI/7Q0IP6cAWG73O///CyeamRk/AAAAAAcAzcxMPv//AyfNzCw/AADAPo0AXP5DPf// AyfNzCw/ZmZGP6QARs6CPf//AyeamZk+aGZmPmcAzczMPf//AyeamZk+zcyMPl0ACoCxPf// AyeamZk+ZmamPlsACi6WPf//BycAAAA/ZmamPmEAj8L1PP//AycAAAA/zcyMPl8A6dQVPf// BycAAAA/mpnZPlMAppvEO///BydmZuY+mpnZPjcAppvEO///BydmZuY+ZmamPlcACtcjPf// BydmZuY+Z2YGP00ACtcjPP//BycAAAA/Z2YGP5MAppvEO///BydmZuY+zcwsPxgACtcjPf// ByczM7M+zcwsPxcAj8J1Pf//ByczM7M+ZmamPlkAj8J1Pf//BydcjwI/Z2YGPz8AppvEO/// BycpXA8/Z2YGPyMACtejPP//BycpXA8/AAAgPygAj8L1PP//Ayf2KBw/AAAgPykATKshPf// BydcjwI/MzPzPi0AppvEO///BycpXA8/MzPzPjsACtejPP//BycpXA8/AADAPjkAj8L1PP// Ayf2KBw/AADAPjgAnKIjPf//CyeamRk/AACAPwMAzcxMPv//AyfNzCw/AAAgP30A2Ls/Pf// AycAACA/AAAgP6sAQE0tPf//AycAACA/zcyMPn8A/DVZPf//BycAACA/aGZmPmkAj8J1Pf// AyfNzCw/zcyMPp4AYTdsPf//AyfNzCw/aGZmPp8A4q+JPf//AycAACA/w/VIP5EAFAV6Pf// AyfNzCw/mpk5P3wABplkPf//AycAACA/mpk5Pw4AnPlVPf//AyfNzCw/w/VIP6UAU7OHPf// BycAAAA/MzPzPp0AppvEO///BycAACA/ZmZGPwkAj8J1Pf//BydmZuY+MzPzPpsAppvEO/// BydcjwI/AAAgP6MAj8L1PP//BydcjwI/AADAPrEAj8L1PP//CycAAAA/jBMIP0sAffDmO/// CyczM7M+AAAAP5UAj8J1Pf//AScAAAAA//////////8BJwAAAAD//wAAawD//wUnCgBhACMA //9tAAAABSdNACQBIAD//5gABAAFJwAAFwANAP//RgABAAUnBwA4ABMA//9JAAEABScBABQA CgD//2AABAAFJwAAEwALAP//CwABAAUnAwAaAAoA//8cAAQABScAABsADwD//1EAAQAFJxAA XQAYAP//TwAHAAUnBwAoAAsA//8MAAEABScPAFYAFgD//2QABAAFJwcASAAbABMAcQAAAAUn AQAYAAwA//+vAAIABScAAB8AEQD//zAABQAFJwwAVwAbAP//rAAEAAUnJQCoAB4AEwC2AAAA BScAAB8AEQD//zYABQAFJwcAPgAWAP//swAAAAUnAAAXAA0A//9UAAQABScGAD0AFwATALIA AAAFJwAAFQAMAP//fgACAAUnAAAlABQAEwBwAAAABScAABkADgD//3YAAgAFJwcARAAZAAIA bAAAAAUnBwA4ABMA//+pAAIABScJAD4AEwD//6YAAgAFJwAAHwARAP//UAABAAUnBwBWACIA EwB1AAAAAACAP83MTD4AAIA/zczMPgAAgD+amRk/AACAP83MTD/NzEw/AACAPwAAAADNzEw/ AAAAAJqZGT8AAAAAzczMPgAAAADNzEw+zcxMPgAAAADNzMw+AAAAADh5yz5mZkY/KF73PmZm Rj/0/w4/ZmZGP2ZmBj/sUfg+ZmYGP6Rw/T5mZgY/r0cBP2ZmBj8L1wM/FK4HPzQzAz8Urgc/ AAAAPxSuBz+amfk+rAUUP5qZOT89aAk/mpk5P6Yl5z6amTk/sfLFPpqZOT/aYs8+zcwsPwAA AD+B5DI/EQALP2dmBj+uRwE/WLLdPq5HAT8lo+E+rkcBP4Vt5T6uRwE/7hLpPq5HAT/JlOw+ rkcBP3H07z4pXA8/hs7OPilcDz+mL9w+KVwPP5hG6D4RAAs/MzPzPlyPAj9mZvY+XI8CP5qZ +T5cjwI/zcz8PlyPAj8AAAA/XI8CP5qZAT9cjwI/NDMDP1yPAj/NzAQ/KVwPP7TcCz8pXA8/ LegRPylcDz+9mBg/KVwPPyMiAj8pXA8/vLv7PrgeBT9FRAQ/uB4FPyMiAj+4HgU/AAAAP7ge BT+8u/s+uB4FP3h39z72KBw/EWMVP/YoHD+owAo/9igcP8EYAD/2KBw/tNbqPvYoHD/gcNU+ AAAAPxGqJT8AAAA/5JYfPwAAAD/qaho/AAAAP8EDFj8AAAA/KkQSPwAAAD84Ew8/AAAAP7pb DD8AAAA/oAsKP2iW/D5nZgY/LN/4PmdmBj9p0/Q+Z2YGP5pr8D5nZgY/kZ/rPmdmBj9mZuY+ ETQJP2Zm5j7ongw/ZmbmPlrJED9mZuY+Xd0VP2Zm5j4YDhw/ZmbmPuaZIz8K1wM/btv2PgrX Az+pg/o+CtcDP+Qr/j4K1wM/D+oAPwrXAz8svgI/CtcDP0qSBD+amek+mpnZPs3M7D6amdk+ AADwPpqZ2T4zM/M+mpnZPmZm9j6amdk+mpn5PpqZ2T7NzPw+mpnZPpqZmT5I4Ro/mpmZPsP1 CD+amZk+exTuPpqZmT5xPco+2mLPPmZmpj424MU+zcyMPmoW5z7NzIw+AAAAP+s7mj5mZuY+ aj3WPmZm5j5WodE+ZmbmPmhOyz5mZuY+aqHCPmZm5j53urY+OHnLPmhmZj4oXvc+aGZmPvT/ Dj9oZmY+zcxMPwAAAADpwCU/u9cRPgrX4z4G5O8+CtfjPsV47D4K1+M+gPDoPgrX4z5DSuU+ CtfjPg6F4T4K1+M+25/dPgAAAD+NStY+AAAAP4og0j4AAAA/9+LMPgAAAD+aSsY+AAAAP8r9 vT4AAAA/t4uzPs3MLD/UPCw/zcwsPwOYpz7NzMw+AACAP83MTD4AAIA/MzOzPiMi4j4zM7M+ RETEPjPJJT8lEV0/O/0TP83MjD51YAk/zcyMPs3MLD/wTxM/zcwsP5KRBj/NzCw/rInzPs3M LD9U09k+MzOzPt7dHT8zM7M+7+4OP2Zm5j4AAPA+ZmbmPs3M7D5mZuY+mpnpPmZm5j5mZuY+ ZmbmPjMz4z5mZuY+AADgPmZm5j7NzNw+zcz8PjMz8z6amfk+MzPzPmZm9j4zM/M+MzPzPjMz 8z4AAPA+MzPzPs3M7D4zM/M+mpnpPjMz8z4AAAA/zczcPgAAAD8AAOA+AAAAPzMz4z4AAAA/ ZmbmPgAAAD+amek+AAAAP83M7D4AAAA/AADwPgAAID/fv6c+w/UIPwAAID9cjwI/WG0ZP1yP Aj9PNBQ/XI8CP+cNED9cjwI/uMEMP1yPAj/vIgo/XI8CP1ElzT5cjwI/ZJfXPlyPAj8z5N8+ XI8CP5F85j5cjwI/JLrrPlyPAj8m5O8+AAAgP0AgLD8AACA/H2YVPwAAID+NxQo/AAAgP0Ue AD8AACA/huDqPgAAID8Fd9U+w/UIPwAAwD4Rk98+j1L0Ps8J2D5DTvY+RbnKPj/P+T6uKAA/ nc8EP3BRAD8GOAM/R3oAP6GfAT8zowA/bwYAPzPMAD/g2Pw+R/UAP0Sj+T5wHgE/Cmz2Pvzh 5T5U0AM/2mflPqdtAT8y9+Q+w3T+PkmP5D6qZfo+ci/kPjyn9j5FAJsAAQAEAAMASQAFAJ8A BwChAAkApQALAKcADQCtAA8ArwARALEAEwC9ABUAvwAXAMEAGQCQABsAjgAdAIwAHwCGACEA hAAjAIAAJQBYACcAWgApACwAKwBHAC0AdgAvAHgAMQByADMAUgA1AFQANwBuADkAtAA7AGYA PQBMAD8ATgBBAGIAQwCYACoAXQACAJ0APgBoAEAASwBgAE0ANAB0ADYAUQBsAFMAJgB+ACgA VwBGAFkAWwB8AE8ApgBCAF8AlgBhADwAtgBKAGUAqABnAFUAjQA4AGsAsgBtADIAegBQAHEA iwBzADAAfQBwAHcAhQB5AC4AfwBcAIEAVgCDACQAewCCAIcAIgCJACAAdQCIAGoAigCPAB4A kQAcAJMAGgC4AGMAoABEAJUAAACXAJkASACaAAYAnAAIAJ4AowCUAAoAogAMAKQAqQBeAKsA aQAOAKoAEACsABIArgC7ADoAuQBkALMAsAC1AG8AwAC3ABQAugAWALwAGAC+AJIAqWEzPmZy FD5oADtGMz6X7lo/iwAtXhg/KlJQP1cAFGG1PkTjCz5fACmFST4nwp0+tgC7gUk+ciAxP5MA HA61PthFXT+JAFoNBT+2x14/gwA2KQY/v48LPpUAd/pLPjEAAD+5AD8ARAABAG4AAwDOAAUA WgEHAEABCQC6AAsAYAANAFQADwBWABEAXAATALAAFQAuARcAGgEZAKIAGwCWAB0ATgAfAFAA IQCSACMACgElALIBJwCYASkA9gArAIQALQBIAC8ASgAxAIAAMwDsADUAhgE3AGwBOQDYADsA cgA9AEIAPgB0AAAAQQBsAEMALgCGADAARwB+AEkAHgCYACAATQCQAE8ADgBiABAAUwBaAFUA VwBoABIAWQCuAFsADAC8AFIAXwBmAGEAYwDCAFgAZQC0AGcARQB6AAIAawDMAG0APADaAEAA cQB4AHMAdQDgAGoAdwDSAHkASwCMADIAfQDqAH8ALAD4AEYAgwCKAIUAhwD+AHwAiQDwAIsA UQCeACIAjwAIAZEAHACkAEwAlQCcAJcAmQCqAI4AmwAOAZ0AGgAcAZQAoQCoAKMApQAiAZoA pwAUAakAXQC2ABQArQAsAa8AaQDIAKwAswA0AbUACgBCAV4AuQDAALsAvQBIAWQAvwDGAMEA wwBOAbIAxQA6AccAbwDUAAQAywBYAc0AewDmAMoA0QBgAdMAOgBuAXAA1wDeANkA2wB0AXYA 3QDkAN8A4QB6AdAA4wBmAeUAgQDyADQA6QCEAesAjQAEAegA7wCMAfEAKgCaAYIA9QD8APcA +QCgAYgA+wACAf0A/wCmAe4AAQGSAQMBkwAQASQABwGwAQkBnwAWAQYBDQG4AQ8BqwAoAQwB EwG+ARUBGAAxAaAAGQEgARsBHQHMAaYAHwEmASEBIwHsARIBJQHEAScBsQA2ARYAKwEYAS0B LwHKAbcAPAEqATMByAE1AckAVAEyATkB7gE7AQgAXQG4AD8BRgFBAUMB1AG+AEUBTAFHAUkB AALEAEsBUgFNAU8BCgI4AVEB+AFTAc8AYgEGAFcBPgFZAVsB0gHVAGgBVgFfAdABYQHnAIAB XgFlAQICZwE4AIkB1gBrAXIBbQFvAdwB3ABxAXgBcwF1ARQC4gB3AX4BeQF7AR4CZAF9AQwC fwHtAI4BNgCDAWoBhQGHAdoB8wCUAYIBiwHYAY0BBQGsAYoBkQEWApMBKAC1AfQAlwGeAZkB mwHkAfoAnQGkAZ8BoQEoAgABowGqAaUBpwEyApABqQEgAqsBCwG6ASYArwGWAbEBswHiAREB wAGuAbcB4AG5ARcBxgG2Ab0BKgK/ASkB9gG8AcMBNALFATABzwEeAckB6gHLATcB6AFcAdcB RAHRAf4B0wFjAfwBiAHfAXAB2QESAtsBjwEQArQB5wGcAeEBJgLjAbsBJALNAe8BJAHpAfQB 6wHOAfEBPQHyAe0B+QHCAfMBOgL1AfAB+wFVATgC1QEDAkoB/QEIAv8B1gEFAmkBBgIBAg0C UAEHAkcCCQIEAg8CgQFFAt0BFwJ2ARECHAITAt4BGQKVARoCFQIhAnwBGwJDAh0CGAIjAq0B QQLlASsCogElAjACJwLmAS0CwQEuAikCNQKoAS8CPwIxAiwCNwLHATwC9wFGAjYCOQIzAjsC PQIiAj4CHwJAAg4CQgILAkQC+gGGQ+k+fFrwPnQAcyn9Pi5W8D6GACYl/T5AcNw+mAA4P+k+ jnTcPmIAfy3sPgk53D5oAJYF6T7MZN8+vADKvus+6PPePsIAswnpPkls7T56AHE17D4ylPA+ 2gDxx+s+JtvtPuAA8zz6PhSQ8D6MANdk/T5XZO0++AAur/o+ANLtPv4Av2D9PtRc3z6eAPw0 +j7xNNw+pAAIpvo+w+rePqoA8k33Psz62z4cAezl9z7Bft4+IgEcE+8+nPzbPrYA0nzuPtSE 3j7IAETM6D7gS+I+QgG8VOs+HLThPkgBfQPuPpM04T5OASHO6D62huo+1ADXWus+Nh3rPuYA WB3vPo7N8D5uARiK7j5MRe4+dAGzDe4+r5brPnoBO1j3PrHL8D7yADfz9z4xP+4+BAEGn/0+ enzqPpoBRhv7Pu8P6z6gAc5v+D57jOs+pgE2nf0+l0HiPhABMxX7PtGm4T4WAZpl+D5fKuE+ KAEliPQ+EcLbPjEBk0r1PsH43T7MAYGu9T7OfuA+7AHt2PE+SsDbPjYBihbxPr363T48AYW4 8D5Xg+A+VAGRk+g+rRHlPl0B5M7qPnZP5D7UAbtY7T626+M+AALgSfA+13TjPkcC05HoPubA 5z5iAebQ6j6Ag+g+aAFGXe0+seHoPoABLePxPkEG8T6JAZol8T4my+4+3AGjxfA+fEHsPhQC jFDwPmxQ6T5DAm6S9D7/B/E+jgGoWfU+JMnuPpQBn7v1PvE87D6sAcHX/T6ltuc+tQFIofs+ cXToPuQBaRv5PpTU6D4oAiAs9j7BSek+PwKI2f0+ZAflProBTJ/7PmFA5D7AAd8W+T6X3uM+ xgF2JfY+LG7jPvYBkjDzPi5m3T7PAUY76j5saeY+1wGDPvM+t17vPt8BzjP8Pnpb5j7nAXEy 8z4ac98+8QEtNvM+EkniPvsBkkvsPrZn5j4FAgok7z4XZOY+RQIuQPM+k07tPhkCDz/zPjh2 6j5BAgwn+j73WeY+LQIyUfc+NFvmPjwCzzrzPnhf5j45AhkAGwABAB8AAwAjAAUAJwAHACsA CQAMAAsALAANACoADwAmABEAIgATAB4AFQAaABcAAAAYAB0AFgACABwAIQAUAAQAIAAlABIA BgAkACkAEAAIACgALQAOAAoAJQAqAAEAMQADAD0ABQBZAAcAZAAJAD4ACwBAAA0AQgAPAEcA EQBtABMAWgAVAFwAFwBSABkASgAbADgAHQAyAB8ALAAhACYAIwAoACQALQAAACcAAgApACIA LwAgADQAKwA2AC4AOQAwADMABAA1AB4AOwAcAEwANwBPAAwARQAOAD8AEABBAAoAZgBDAGkA GgBUADoASQA8AEsATQBXABgAXgBIAFEATgBTAFUABgBWAGEAFgBuAFAAWwBYAF0AXwBiAAgA awBEAGMARgBlAGcAEgBgAGwAaABvAGoAFABslRU/BI7VPi8AppQUP/uo6z5MAJqYFD/D7Rc/ ZgCBHBQ/wJz5PlQAbRgVP5ymAj9eAC5rEz8uPwg/WwABLRU/Qq4PP2sAEwAYAAEAGwADAB0A BQAkAAcAIAAJAB4ACwAOAA0AHwAPACUAEQAWABIAHAAAABUAAgAXABkABAAaACYADAAhAAoA IwAIABAAIgAnAAYAFADE5fU+ELqZPhUAFQAXAAEAGwADAB8ABQAjAAcACgAJACQACwAiAA0A HgAPABoAEQAWABMAAAAUABkAEgACABgAHQAQAAQAHAAhAA4ABgAgACUADAAIABMAGAABABsA AwAdAAUAJgAHAB4ACQAgAAsAIgANAC0ADwAzABEAFgASABwAAAAVAAIAFwAZAAQAGgAyAAoA JQAMAB8AKgAhAAgAKAAkAC8AIwAnAA4AKQArADEABgAsAC4AEAAwABQAz+j1PnYjMz8VAEaP sD7fMjM/JQC8csY+IzMzPy8AHQAfAAEAIwADACcABQArAAcALwAJADMACwAOAA0ANAAPADIA EQAuABMAKgAVACYAFwAiABkAHgAbAAAAHAAhABoAAgAgACUAGAAEACQAKQAWAAYAKAAtABQA CAAsADEAEgAKADAANQAQAAwALwA0AAEAOwADAH0ABQCWAAcArgAJAGwACwBEAA0ARgAPAEwA EQBYABMAZgAVAFwAFwA+ABkAQAAbAFIAHQCOAB8AnAAhAJ4AIwCYACUAeAAnAHIAKQA2ACsA MAAtADIALgA3AAAAMQACADMALAA5ACoAdAA1AHYAGABeABoAPQBQAD8ADABuAA4AQwBKAEUA RwBxABAASQBWAEsAQQBhABwATwCMAFEATQCEABIAVQBkAFcAFgBpADwAWwBOAF0AXwCCAFkA hgAUAGMAWgBlAGcAgAAKALEAQgBrAEgAbQBvALcAOAB5ADoAcwAEAHUAKAB7ACYAkgB3AJQA aACIAGAAfwCKAIEAYgC4AH4AhQCmAIcAUwCRAB4AiwCiAI0AgwCkAHwAmQAGAJMArACVAHoA mwAkAKAAIgCjAJoAnQCqAJ8AIAClAI8ApwCQAKkAiQCyAJcAswAIAKsAagCtAK8AcAChALUA qAC2ALAAuQC0AFQA6HrzPjGMIz85AGC2/T7ekgc/XgDp8ek+eEUIP24Ab7nuPrP5CD+5AIkx /T6UGAk/ggDhGfM+OAkIP1UAptf6Pq3tBz9pAOz79j7gKgg/YwCseOo+cW0KP7EA7if1PvRU Gj97AC61+T7OAgo/iABjhvQ+Ok8KP4UA4e38Pq8FCz+RAGDM8z7o2BI/oAAhu/k+mp4NP6kA Qd3uPnMVDT+1ABUAGgABAD4AAwA0AAUALAAHAC4ACQAmAAsAKAANAEYADwAeABEAIAATABgA FAAjAAAAFwA8ABkAEABIABIAHQAWAB8AIQA6AAoAMQAMACUARAAnAAYANgAIACsAJAAtAC8A OQAEAEEAKgAzADAANQA3AEoAGwBDAAIAOwAyAD0APwBPACIATQAOAEsAHABFAEIARwApAE4A SQBAAEwAOAAsvAk/1C4EPyMAdlUMP8duAz9IAA9VDD/MEPk+OQBnvAk/ypL3PjYA+P4JP9Td /D5PAET/CT9NiQE/TQAukAw/d/r/PksAKwAwAAEAXAADAKAABQCAAAcAPgAJADgACwA6AA0A PAAPAEMAEQB+ABMAiAAVAIsAFwBSABkANAAbADYAHQBOAB8AagAhAHYAIwBuACUAYgAnAEYA KQAuACoASAAAAC0AWgAvABoAVAAcADMATAA1AAwAPwAOADkAEAA7AAoAQQAIAHoAPQB8ACgA ZAAsAEUAWABHADcAVwAeAEsAaABNABgAjQAyAFEASgBTAFUAjwAxAF8AAgBZAKIAWwBJAKYA JgBwAEQAYQCoAGMATwCRACAAZwB0AGkAJAB5AGAAbQCqAG8AawCWACIAcwBsAHUAdwCZAEIA gQASAHsAhgB9AEAAgwAGAJoAfwCcABQAhQAWAIcAiQBQAIoAVgCMAGYAjgCUAJAAngByAJMA eACVAJcAcQCEAKEAkgCbAKcAnQCCAKMABAClAF0AnwCkAKkAXgCrAGUAmABoMOk+MXDXPkgA A8P9Ppww1z5UADQ48z56fLY+QQCchew+cVjXPmQAj9/6PjMs1j6PANYk/T6qW9Q+jQCMAus+ pYXUPl8AKTrvPmbq1z5wAOTZ9j67XNY+kQDog/E+O/vXPpkAHdrzPuC61z6WAERW8z4PusU+ gwByFfk+egvQPoUAHUrxPsMo1T6rANxA7j7yZc8+pQA1AAIAAQA3AAMAPQAFAEEABwBFAAkA SQALAE0ADQBXAA8AggARAGYAEwBoABUAagAXAGIAGQBkABsAdAAdAFoAHwBcACEAXwAjAH8A JQBSACcATAApAEgAKwBEAC0AQAAvADwAMQA4ADMANgAAADkANAA7ADIABAA6AD8AMAAGAD4A QwAuAAgAQgBHACwACgBGAEsAKgAMAEoATwAoAFQAJgCBAE4AUQAOAFMAVQCMAB4AdwAgAFkA IgBbAF0AfAAYAG0AGgBhAHIAYwAUAG8AFgBnAGAAaQBrAIYAEgCEAGUAiQAcAHEAWABzAHUA egB2AIsAXgB5ACQAewB9AFAAfgCOAG4AjQBsAIMAcACFAIcAeACIAIAAEACPAFYAigBRJwU/ CgAkP4EAxqgEP3aMMj93AD1SFj8Gui8/hgCs4Rc/9O0lP28AnaIMP9NeMT+JAJD7BT+bBCs/ iwB6eA0/f7gnP48AFwAcAAEAHwADACgABQAkAAcAIAAJAAwACwAhAA0AJQAPACkAEQAtABMA LwAVABoAFgAeAAAAGQACABsAHQAuAAoAIwAIAA4AIgAnAAYAEAAmACsABAASACoAFAAsABgA aMEYPwAAQD8ZACEAIwABACUAAwAnAAUAKwAHAC8ACQAzAAsANwANADsADwASABEAPAATADoA FQA2ABcAMgAZAC4AGwAqAB0AJgAfAAAAIAACACIABAAkACkAHgAGACgALQAcAAgALAAxABoA CgAwADUAGAAMADQAOQAWAA4AOAA9ABQAEAA1AGwAAQB2AAMApAAFAJoABwCQAAkAhgALAHwA DQBaAA8ATAARAE4AEwBQABUAWAAXAIUAGQCPABsAmQAdAKMAHwB4ACEAbgAjAGQAJQBEACcA PAApADYAKwA4AC0AOgAvAEEAMQBIADMAYgAsAD0ALgA3ADAAOQAqAD8AKABAADsAQwA+AEYA QgBLADIARQBgAEcAJgBeABIAUwAUAE0AVgBPABAAVABRAFsAFgBVAIAAVwBSAF0ADgB+AEkA ZQA0AF8AagBhAEoAZwAkAGgAYwBvAAAAaQB0AGsAZgBxACIAcgBtAHkAAgBzAKoAdQBwAHsA IACsAFwAgwBZAH0AGAB/AAwAiACBAIoAggCNAIQAhwAaAIkACgCSAIsAlACMAJcAjgCRABwA kwAIAJwAlQCeAJYAoQCYAJsAHgCdAAYApgCfAKgAoACrAKIApQB6AKcABACtAHcAqQBmZiY/ lvxCPz8ARGYmP9xGMD9LABJmJj9nZoU+UwDKZSY/sgCbPl0AiGQmP13RJT9nAO5bJj+9Qho/ cQD4KSY/JAgPP3sAYGUmP4Ctsz6DACpkJj+Psss+jQDWWyY/QTPjPpcA9CkmP3/K+T6hAIwG JT+O4AU/rQA7AEQAAQBWAAMAYgAFAHQABwB6AAkADAALAD8ADQB/AA8AtwARALwAEwDEABUA ygAXANAAGQDWABsA7AAdACAAHwA9ACEA8QAjAAABJQD0ACcAmAApAGYAKwBOAC0ASAAvAEoA MQCIADMAggA1AGwANwBaADkAQgAeAO8ACgB9ADoAXAAAAEEAVABDAC4AUAAwAEcAhgBJACwA aABGAE0AjABPAEUAlAACAFMAYABVADgAbgBAAFkAkgBbAFcAoAAEAF8AcgBhACoAmgBMAGUA 5ABnADYAhABYAGsApABtAGMArAAGAHEAeABzAHUAsgAIAHcAPgB5AHsADgB8ALUANACKAGoA gQDaAIMAMgCNAIAAhwDgAIkASwCPAFEA3gBdAKYAUgCRAJ4AkwAoAPYAZACXAEwBmQCVAPwA XgCdAKoAnwBvANwAkACjAPoApQChAAwBcACpALAAqwCtALgAdgCvAH4AsQCzABAAtAC6ALYA vwASALkAwgC7AK4ADwG9ABEBFADBAMgAwwDFABwBFgDHAM4AyQDLACoBGADNANQAzwDRAC0B GgDTAOoA1QCFAOIAogDZABQB2wCLAOUA2ADfAEgB4QCOAOcAaQBKAdcABAEcAOkAPADrAO0A IgDuAP4AJgACAZYA8wA3AfUApwAWAZwA+QAKAfsAJAAFAfIA/wA0AQEB8AAHAegALwH9ACAB qAAJAb4ACwENAcAADgEaAd0ARgH4ABMBHgEVARABIgHGABkBKAEbAQgBJQEYAR8BOAEhARcB QAEdAToBzAAnAdIAKQErAQYBLAEyAS4BPAEDATEB9wAzATUBTgEmAT8BMAE5AUQBOwEjAUIB PgFHAT0BQQE2AUMBJAFJARIBSwHjAE0B5gBPAZsARQGNaeo+BTAEP1wAfen9PkNRBT9QAACR /T5a+QM/aAAOmek+7+EBP5QAyPbuPhhoBD9uAO3Y6D6JPf8+oAAdWf0+UTkCP5oADUzzPpuT BD+EAC4M6D4a8Po+rAAMP+c+L+32PrIAHWH3PoDBBD+KAI4R+z4eBQU/jwBz4+0+jUgCP6YA ds/9PtloAD83AdYI7T4kBQA//AAtBfI+bKoCP9wA9/LrPlJ3+z4MAWys6j5KLvc+rwAzYu4+ BV/3Pg8Bfy/yPlQl9z4RARrB9T7si/Y+HAFMfPg+QMP1PioBGIL7Ptpp9j4tAXwT9j795QI/ 4gB/E/o+qEkDP+cA2xD/PoqI9j7pAArQ/j5m6/0+NAFWLPE+TZ0APxYBNO79PoxW+j4vAY6n 8D6/Fvw+CQFmnPQ+qkoBPxMBUxL1Pu2M+j4iARS99D4X5f4+JQFWKPk+bXv5PicBUnD7PlSU /T5EAY7i9z43Pv0+PwF9//g+Cd8AP08BIQAjAAEAJQADACcABQArAAcALwAJADMACwA3AA0A OwAPABIAEQA8ABMAOgAVADYAFwAyABkALgAbACoAHQAmAB8AAAAgAAIAIgAEACQAKQAeAAYA KAAtABwACAAsADEAGgAKADAANQAYAAwANAA5ABYADgA4AD0AFAAQACsAVQABAFcAAwBxAAUA CAAHAC0ACQB1AAsAdwANAHkADwB7ABEAbAATAGoAFQBoABcAZgAZAFoAGwA+AB0ANAAfADYA IQA4ACMAMAAlADIAJwBKACkAUgAGAHMAJAA7ACYALwBIADEAIAA9ACIANQAuADcAOQBCAB4A QAA8AEUAOgA/AEYAQQAcAFwAMwBNACgARwBQAEkAQwBfAEsAZAAqAE8AAABRAFMAAgBUAG8A GgBgAEQAWQBMAFsAXQBiAF4AZwBOAGEAVgBjAFgAaQAYAGsAFgBtABQAegBlAAQAbgAsAHAA CgByAAwAdAAOAHYAEAB4ABIAvAnJPotEIT9CAJqL2z5cZiM/PQAhndk+Lt0ZP1wAMjXLPqHd Ej9fAMiryD7/LQU/ZAA6Dt0+b7gRP1kAP6ffPm44BT9tABkAGwABACEAAwAlAAUAKQAHAC0A CQAMAAsALAANACgADwAkABEAIAATABwAFQAaABcAAAAYAB0AFgAfABQAAgAeACMAEgAEACIA JwAQAAYAJgArAA4ACAAqAAoALQB4AAEAZgADAGAABQAIAAcALwAJAFoACwBAAA0AQgAPADgA EQA6ABMAPQAVAE0AFwBSABkAVQAbADIAHQA0AB8AbwAhAHEAIwBzACUAdQAnAHcAKQB5ACsA AAAGAFgAHABXAB4AMQBtADMAEABFABIANwAUADkAOwBKAAwAXAAOAD8ANgBBAEMASABEAF8A PABHABYASQBLAFAATABjABgATwAaAFEAUwAwAFQAawAKAGEAPgBZAEYAWwBdAE4ALgBlAF4A ZwAEAGIAZABpAAIAVgBoADUAagAgAGwAIgBuACQAcAAmAHIAKAB0ACoAdgAsACTl4j4kw94+ awCujNs+QWK3PkUAHPHIPq+1vD5cAMOw2T44ack+XwClP94+rAvcPmkA25PKPhJi2j5lABcA GQABABsAAwAdAAUAIQAHACMACQAnAAsADgANACgADwAmABEAIgATABwAFQAAABYAAgAYAAQA GgAfABQABgAeAAgAIAAlABIACgAkACkAEAAMACcAAgABACkAAwAtAAUAMQAHADUACQA5AAsA PQANAEEADwBFABEASQATABYAFQBIABcARAAZAEAAGwA8AB0AOAAfADQAIQAwACMALAAlACgA AAArACYABAAqAC8AJAAGAC4AMwAiAAgAMgA3ACAACgA2ADsAHgAMADoAPwAcAA4APgBDABoA EABCAEcAGAASAEYAFAAbAB0AAQAfAAMAIwAFACcABwArAAkALwALAA4ADQAwAA8ALgARACoA EwAmABUAIgAXAB4AGQAAABoAAgAcACEAGAAEACAAJQAWAAYAJAApABQACAAoAC0AEgAKACwA MQAQAAwAMQBGAAEABAADADUABQBCAAcARAAJAGYACwB+AA0ATAAPADgAEQA6ABMAFgAVADMA FwA/ABkAUwAbAFUAHQBXAB8AWQAhAF4AIwBhACUAeQAnAHAAKQByACsAbAAtAGoALwBoABQA PQACAEAAEABOABIANwAyADkAOwAYADwAUQAGAEcACABBAGQAQwA0AEkAAABiAA4AgAA2AEsA PgBNAE8AGgBQABwAUgAeAFQAIABWAFwAWACFACIAWwAkAF0AXwAmAEUAaQAKAGMAfABlAEgA awAwAG0ALgBvACwAdAAqAHcAbgBxAIIAcwAoAHsAYAB2AHgAhgAMAIMASgB9AFoAfwBnAIcA gQB6AHUAhABK8lA/JitbP04AMXZRP5qaFz5JAKpJRj9uQjA/gAB6Njg/7REMP4UANGhJP+Nq pD50AJtJOj/XmeE+ewD9slU/k8f/PocAJQAqAAEAbgADAFwABQBeAAcAQAAJAEIACwA8AA0A NgAPADgAEQA6ABMATwAVAFIAFwAwABkAMgAbADUAHQBrAB8AbQAhACYAIwAoACQALQAAACcA AgApACIAbwAYAFQAGgAvABwAMQAzAGUAEAA9ABIANwBMADkADgA/AAwARAAKAEcAPgBBAEoA QwAIAFgARQBWADsASQAUAEsATQBQABYAVwAuAFEAYwBTAE4AWQBIAFsARgBgAAYAZwBaAF0A VQBfAGEANABiAGkABABkAGYAHgBoACAAagAsAGwAKwD4UwM/LgvxPm8ANNYKPzaC7D5jAO/h CD8jRMo+RACfOAY/vTfWPkcA9hcLPxOl1T5JADChCT90vOA+YACY+AU/zGzoPmcAJQAqAAEA SAADAFgABQBbAAcAcwAJADwACwA+AA0AQAAPAEMAEQB2ABMAdAAVADQAFwA2ABkAOAAbAGIA HQBMAB8ALgAhADAAIwAoACQAMwAAACcARgApACAATgAiAC0AJgAvADEARAAYADsAGgA1AGAA NwAWAGgADAB6AA4APQAQAD8AQQB4ACsASwACAEUAVgBHADIAUAAsAFMASgBNAFQATwAeAGUA SQBdAAQAVQAGAFcAWQBvAFEAZwA5AGoAHABfAFIAYQBjAFwAZABsAF4AcQBmAGkAWgBrAG0A CAA6AHIAbgB1AHAAdwAUAHkAEgB7AEIACgBcNwY/8s8bPzMA0IYKP1SsGj8tAJIyCz9rnAk/ OwD4UwM/anoHPz0A8XUGPyz4Fj9QAOzKCj9mqhQ/ZQBFGgY/TQkRP2wAPfEKP/TPDj9fACXX Bj/Kygs/cQAhACMAAQApAAMALQAFADEABwA1AAkAOQALAD0ADQAQAA8APAARADgAEwA0ABUA MAAXACwAGQAoABsAJAAdACIAHwAAACAAJQAeACcAHAACACYAKwAaAAQAKgAvABgABgAuADMA FgAIADIANwAUAAoANgA7ABIADAA6AA4AQwBFAAEARwADAEkABQBNAAcAUQAJAFUACwBXAA0A WwAPAHYAEQB4ABMAkQAVAJMAFwCXABkAmQAbAKoAHQCGAB8AbAAhAG4AIwBwACUAgAAnAGYA KQBoACsAXgAtAGAALwBjADEApQAzAKkANQCSADcAegA5AFYAOwBQAD0ATAA/AEgAQQAAAEIA AgBEAAQARgBLAEAABgBKAE8APgAIAE4AUwA8AAoAUgAMAFQAWQA6AA4AWAB0ACwAawAuAF0A MABfAGEAngAoAIIAKgBlAFwAZwBpAJwAIgBzACQAbQB+AG8AIACIABAAewASAHUAjwB3AFoA fQA4AHkAJgCFAGQAfwCaAIEAcQCKAHIAjQCEAIcAoACJAB4AqAB8ABQAjgAWAJAAlQA2ABgA lAAaAJYAHABqAKEAYgCbADIAnQCDAKMAiwCkAJ8ApwCiADQApgCrAIwAmACJOBg/pRa0PmsA crkWP+qcoD6CANrKBD9Rw5s+cwCuRwE/sQvWPn0A4w0NPyUSnj6KADxaBj9mR64+jQCsHA8/ 2iywPqMAAQBBaXIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQBQZXJtYWxsb3kgNjUAAAAAAQBQbGV4aS1nbGFz cwAAAAAAAgBaZXJvIEVkZ2UAAAAAAAAAAQBTdGVlbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQBDb3BwZXIAAAAA AAAAAAAAAgBDb2lsIFIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQBBTE5JQ08g3AAAAAAAAAAAAgBDb2lsIEwAAAAA AAAAAAAA --------------1502C5573EF-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 02:22:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA21539; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:14:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:14:13 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:11:03 -0800 Message-Id: <199701221911.LAA05143 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: range of force interaction Resent-Message-ID: <"lWTW61.0.hC5.9Qcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank knows not what he has said here, because if he did, he would not have to ask what we think. He would know he was on target. > I got started in this direction by noting that the electromagnetic forces >seemed to behave differently within systems containing condensed charged. Todays particle physics use laws designed to describe the interactions of two particles. We take these laws and apply them to groups of particles with our math, but that is not how the derivations were found or the behaviors observed. Single ions are always sent in and interacted with one or more other particles, individually. Because particles are standing waves, this sort of thing will work perfectly for single particle collisions. But when you have group behaviors, it will not. Thus, the group behaviors of charge clusters or of electrons in semi conductors will not be well explained and we will resort to "Uncertainty" principles to describe the behaviors like tunneling of electrons through the semi conductor lattice. >Then I mat Puthoff he had arrived at essentially the same conclusion. I >then applied the same train of thought to gravitational systems and came up >with some predictions that nobody believed. Now Dr. Noever is in the process >of demonstrating these strange gravitational phenomena. What strange gravitational phenomena? Maybe put that in a separate thread. Finally I applied >the same reasoning to nuclear interactions and found that the range of the >nuclear interaction should increase from 10 -13 cm to up to many cms in >length. Of course it does. In fact, the range of the nuclear force is the same as the range of all other forces, infinite. A standing wave derives its internal KE from the surrounding fluid, or in your venacular, the quantum vacuum, quite an odd name for **something** as opposed to **nothing**. (ie, how do you quantize nothing? The whole set of premises of QM, despite working fine mathematically for a lot of purposes, are ludicrous if you open your eyes and just look) > >This was a hard nut for even I to swallow. Everyone knows that nuclear decay >(interactions) are not sensitive to pressure, temperature, and environment. I for one do not know this :-) The three critical factors for nuclear fusion reactions are precisely P, T, and time of confinement to allow reactions to proceed. But I assume you mean in our lower temperature ranges and the relation for normal materials is very very weak indeed. > How then can condensed electrons effect the massive nucleus in such a >dramatic way? Ordinary nuclear / electronic interactions result only in a >hyperfine line splitting of the ground state spectrial lines. This is >certainly a very week interaction indeed. In electromagnetic and >gravitational systems I know that the exchange of angular momentum changes >the range of force interaction. I must therefore assume that the exchange of >angular momentum by phonons also accounts for the sttange nuclear phenomena. You are accounting for phonons of the charges in space, but you are ignoring the phonons of the quantum vacuum which IMO are far more important. >Theory: > Condensed electrons form Bosons. Bosons do not obey the any exclusion >principles. They can and do drop down directly upon the nucleus. They >interact with the nucleus by exchanging angular momentum (what else would I >say). This in itself is week interaction that only results in an allignment >of nuclear spins. radial pulsations also have a phase angle, and so you could instead say that the surrounding amplitude of the radial oscillations of the quantum vacuum surrounding the nucleus have been altered by the charge cluster which by its coincident geometry led to a focusing of that acoustic QVF energy in the region of spacetime occupied by the nucleus. Mathematically angular momentum is still how you would describe it, but physically, it is different in structure. >This allignment of nuclear spins has a big effect on the range of force >interaction. We now know the direction of all of the nuclear magnetic >moments. We know much about the angular MOMENUM of the nucleus. Hysenberg >tells us that we now can know know very little about the nuclear positions. > That's what I am thinking. The position of the the nucleons can lie >anywhere within the charge cluster. The range of the nuclear force has >effectly been increaced to the dimensions of the cluster. If the nucleus is a standing wave, then the dimensions of that nucleus are infinite. But that wave energy, as it extends out away from the interior where the nucleus rips spacetime into the spherical symmetries of the central standing waves making up the nucleus, becomes diluted as it reaches out into the surrounding spacetime, or, quantum vacuum if you prefer. The timing of the nucleus is very precise, but the structure of spacetime nodes does not allow for that wave energy to constructively interfere at greater distances. To see this, consider a sort of Moire' pattern where you have a series of concentric circles which interfere with a rectilinear pattern of dots over a large area. A sort of psychadelic or Escher like progression from the circles to the squares. You see, the timings are wrong along the diagonals, and any cyclic wave energy is going to lose its phase coherency with the surrounding spacetime as soon as the intense "spacetime curvature" around the nucleus becomes diluted by the arriving wave energy from the rest of the universe which is what is the basis of the energy forming what we call spacetime in the first place. But if you have a charge cluster around the nucleus, that charge cluster is interacting with the resonances and the harmonics of the surrounding universe which are driving the internal oscillations of the nuclei and the electrons (at the Planck scale of about E45 Hz). The charge cluster of electrons represents a break down in the positively timed phases of wave energy otherwise headed into the nucleus. Yes, the nucleus will tend to bloat out in a sense because the charge cluster has warped the local spacetime into more of a spherical structure, but of energy of the wrong phase angle for the positive nucleus. The mix should lead to some interesting reactions of the nuclei and bumping into one another more easily is a good possibility IMO. but I haven't studied the applications of charge clusters closely in my model to date. What you might do though, is to think of the electrons in the charge cluster as individual speakers in a spherical array of phased array emitters where all of your emitters are broadcasting their wave energy at a phase angle in opposition to the phase angle of the nucleus (ie nucleus or positive charge is assigned 0 degrees phase angle and thus the electrons are at 180). So, you ought to have a very intense beam of that negative phase energy in the region of the nucleus for all the same reasons that you would have an intense beam of radar energy in a phased array antenna. The difference is that here your "antenna" is spherical, and the beam is not directed along a line via the timing delays, but instead all of the emitters are in phase match to their local spacetime and thus they are all beaming their acoustic QVF energy in a convergent focused beam directed at the center of the charge cluster. If the nucleus happens to be there, then you are getting a huge amount of amplitude in that tiny region of spacetime. ie, you have the masses bashing the one nucleus. The notion of Uncertainty ought to be shot and retired as a relic of a day when we did not understand what matter was all about. Learn about standing waves and you will begin to see all sorts of things you never imagined, and when you look into the universe, you will see that we find these things going on. Quite a gratifying effort I must say. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 02:22:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA21011; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:11:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:11:14 -0800 Date: 24 Jan 97 04:53:58 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Related to Tessien Aether Hypothesis Message-ID: <970124095358_100433.1541_BHG156-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"P5ULz3.0.D85.1h8wo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross writes: > And our minds are holographic structures of neutral nets. Piffle. Neural nets were inspired by the brain, but this is a typical example of time-bound thinking. Once the brain was 'like a clockwork automaton' and then it was 'like a telephone exchange' and then it was 'like a computer' - and certainly if you look at the neurology behind the retina you can see the gating arrangements. In a sense, the brain is 'like a neural net', or rather bits of it are; but the brain is not one, nor can we assume that the mind is simply a function of the brain. Note that the gross anatomy of the brain has not even been MAPPED yet! My son refers to much of the modern fashion for 'neurobabble' as 'the new phrenology', and he wants one of those porcelain phrenology heads so that he can use it to brighten up his lab. I'd really like to see some comment on my attempt to summarise the 'new physics', especially comments on the question of the transmission of em radiation. On the matter of antennae, let's agree to disagree. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 03:11:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA21438; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:13:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:13:39 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:11:07 -0800 Message-Id: <199701221911.LAA05152 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Resent-Message-ID: <"-Mon2.0.TC5.8Qcvo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >The idea is that we have no 'pull' forces, only 'push' forces. And >'particles' are themselves just manifestations of the 'vacuum energy'. >We know that two ships parked close together in choppy seas will be >pushed together by the fact that longer waves are excluded from the >space between them, and the idea seems to be that this kind of action >explains all the forces? Brilliant analogy, thanks I'll use that one. You just described how and why the Casimir effect works. But a subtle point you may have missed is that the two ships have natural resonant frequencies that are similar, and so they tend to attenuate and reflect wave energies that are not in frequency match with their oscillations up and down. Of course will large ships, virtually all of the wave energy is out of match with their oscillations so we tend to ignore this point. But when you get into the frequency locking of things like pendulums or JJ's or quarks in a nucleus, then you cannot ignore this point. > >And there is really only one push force? What we see as electrostatic >attraction, or gravity, or that which overcomes inertia, are all really >the same thing, and analogous to the two ships being pushed together. Absolutely. But be careful that you are not tricked by the difference in physical geometry of a spherical standing wave we call matter which is an underdamped oscillator that sort of rips the local spacetime into the geometry suited to its resonance, and the other set of standing waves that permeate the universe and which we call spacetime. This other set is essentially rectilinear and there is not a one to one alignment possible for a set of spherical standing waves with a set of rectilinear standing waves. They can mesh into one another like an Escher distortion of spacetime nodes at the Planck scale over a large number of orders of magnitude, but they lose coupling effeciency of the wave energy. ie, a lot (almost all) of the wave energy a great distance away from a nucleus is out of phase with the resonances of another nucleus in that distant location. Thus, we say that there is a much weaker interaction between those ions and we call this weaker interaction the electric force. But in both cases, you are dealing with exactly the same wave energy. It is just that the jumbling of the phase angles leads to a marked drop in the coupling effeciency of the wave energy, and thus in a drop in the intensity of the thus derived thrust which we call the change from nuclear to electric forces. (Gravitational thrust is due to a pervasive shift to the frequency of the oscillations due to the Hubble flow of the distant galaxies. It is the arrival of that distant energy and the interaction of our matter here with that distant wave energy that is thrusting us downward against the surface of the earth, which has filtered some of that energy. But note an important thing about this, that wave energy is as well, just the same standing wave energy emitted by matter way out there. It is the interaction of our matter with the nuclear resonances of that distant matter, and of that distant spacetime as well due to the Doppler shifting of that wave energy and thus the interference of our matter resonances which cannot synchronize to that energy.) >Magnetic forces are a variation on electrostatic force, seen when a >charged mass moves. Not when they move. When they accelerate, or, change the velocity at which they are moving!!!! Note that the particles are always coupled to that energy, but if some of them change their velocities, then the Doppler shifted energy is now going to be arriving at a new timing. And so there is a bit of a shift in the timings of the QVF local to the particle. But this simplistic explanation falls short of a full explanation because despite the particles altering their velocities, there had to be something that forced them to do so. And both of those are coupled to the quantum vacuum locally, and both lead to shifts in the phase and timing of local QVF oscillations. >Mass is just the kinetic energy of the 'particles', >which therefore interacts with the vacuum, and charge is something like >having spin on the 'particle' - I know I'm misusing terms, but as I >understand it mass is something like a 'static' form of energy, or a >'randomised' one, whereas charge is something which has some kind of >spin or vector with it? Mass is the amount of aether trapped in the standing wave. In a sense, it is a measure of the increase in the density of the spacetime in the region of our spacetime we call, "a particle". The reason we made the error at the turn of the century in interpreting Einsteins equation E = mc^2 as the "equivalency of mass and energy", is because we failed to acknowledge the presence and important role of the aether. The reason a particle "has energy" is because it is not a static pea. It is a kinetic standing wave. And if you allow some of that internal KE to escape via a breach of confinement, then you will get a thrust to be applied to that particle just like if you have a rocket ship that is blasting its burnt fuel out its tail pipe. The problem is that you must have a breach in confinement of the matter standing wave in order for this to happen. And the other thing is that what you are emitting from such a standing wave is exactly the same stuff the entire universe is all made of in the first place. So, if you induce an exothermic reaction, the aether confined in the standing wave will breach out through a region in the standing wave of least amplitude, ie, it will breach in the direction of some arriving energy that is interfering with its internal resonance. And that aether that is shot out, will become "space" since it is just the same aether as the ocean of a universe we live in. That is an important point as it leads to the effectiveness of thrust from such a reaction being doubled. The separating particles are shooting their own spacetime out their tail pipes, and that means that they essentially have a backstop to push off of. If this were not the case, then the KE would have been given by mc^2/2 and my theory could not be right if the energy released from those standing waves in Einsteins equation was found to have been given by this equation. Fortunately for the standing wave theory, mc^2 is what we find to manifest from the depletion of "mass" in "particles". I'm pleased to leave the strong force out of >all this for the moment, because I'd be happy with an atomic nucleus >which behaves as it does. No can do, because the nucleus is the focal point of the standing wave energy and the center of that at the Planck scale is where there resides a tiny droplet of primordial condensed aether left over from the big bang. That is why this whole thing got going in the first place, the universe is expanding and vaporizing the aether inside. Thus, all exothermic reactions are aether emitting and space creating. After all, since Thatcher scrapped that >rather nice outfit in the UK which was working on nuclear structure, >there doesn't seem to be a huge level of interest in that subject >anyway. And just because when you zap a nucleus it produces bits, that >doesn't (to me) mean that it contained those bits before it got zapped. Brilliant and correct. Just because you buzz the surface of water and see a bunch of standing waves form doesn't mean they were really there before hand either. Thus, you can form an entire zoo of shapes on the surface of water if you buzz it in different ways, and likewise you wind up with a zoo of "particles" when you smack and clang tiny regions of the ocean of aether we live in. > >The attribute of mass or charge interacts with the vacuum to produce a >distortion in some quality it possesses, and thereby 'shields' another >mass or charge from the push which otherwise would be symmetrical? Yes, very good. All you have to see is that mass is the amount of aether in excess of the ambient density of the ocean we live in ( or the quantum vacuum if you prefer). And that "charge" is simply a measure of the phase angle of a given resonance relative to the spacetime manifold, or the spacetime standing wave structure. This is the sum of wave energy arriving from all across the universe, here, now, and constructively and destructively interfering to form a structure of pressure nodes permeating the quantum vacuum. It is this structure from which matter standing waves (underdamped oscillators), derive and amplify their resonances. > >The anisotropy of space, which appears to fit well the 'curvature' used >to describe it in General Relativity, is just a localised distortion (by >masses or charges) of its permeability/permittivity ratio? In essence yes. If you go back to the work of Maxwell and others, you will find that permittivity and permeability are properties that are fluid mechanical. Specifically, they are the rigidity and the density of the aether, but I forget which one is which off the top of my head without looking it up. And one of them is inverted and flipped around to be more convenient with how we use it to imply electric properties. So you need to get back to the "action" units to see that these are fluid mechanical properties. > >Now, I've never been thrilled with photons, because there seems to be a >breach of the principle of parsimony here. We know matter reacts with >em radiation in a quantised manner, but that doesn't seem to me to mean >it has to travel in quantised form. And we have to have an infinite >variety of photons, to allow for their infinite possible energies. But >we then have the problem that light of wavelengths very much greater >than the size of an atom will interact with that atom - or the other >difficulties which the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering seem >to present. Photons are wierd. I worked hard on them for 9 months and still have difficulties with certain behaviors. But if you have read about the cosmological problems in GR of an open or a closed universe, then there is a way to see what the structure of a photon is out in free space. It is essentially a density gradient in the ocean of aether. It is sort of like a closed universe to which you additionally add translation. ie, it expands outward and then collapses back inward. If you think of a spherical resonance out and in and out and in, then you sort of have the general motion. Then, if you allow that density resonance to additionally translate in a linear direction while at the same time expanding and contracting, you will almost have the shape and structure of a photon. As it passes through center, it is at extreme pressure and density, but in a small volume. And then as it expands outward, the density of the aether ocean becomes rarefied due to that outward directed KE of the expansion. that leaves a void behind and so the greater pressure of the quantum vacuum reverses the expansive momentum and you get a convergent flow all over again which again converges into a high pressure at the center and then again outward. This is an unpolarized photon. If you then pass that photon through a series of slats like a picket fence, the fence can absorb some of the pressure fluctuations and damp them out. You will then wind up with a photon that is performing the same dance, but now in a sort of vertical orientation and it will look more like a sine wave than a sine wave of rotation which is what the original photon looked more like. But notice that if all of that is due to simple expansion of a higher pressure region flowing into a lower pressure region, it should strike you that I cannot have such a thing as a "perfectly" polarized photon. the best I could ever hope to do is to get something akin to a bow tie. And this fact is what I think will lead one day to an explanation of the Bell paradox. > >But, hey, I've not seen a quantum treatment of long waves. Like, how do >we fit antenna design into quantum theory? How do we count the em >quanta coming into that antenna from a 1500m radio transmission? A >dipole (leave alone one assisted by the director components of a UHF >antenna) picks up much more energy than is incident upon it. Could an >atom act as a dipole? Or could nearby atoms act as director >sub-antennae? It is really very easy. Just treat each electron as an individual speaker on a huge phased array radar antenna. And treat each positive charge in a nucleus as another speaker. Let the positive charges be emitting sine waves at 0 degree phase angle, and the negative charges be emitting sine waves with pressure fronts at 180 degrees phase angle, (ie spherically expanding shells of wave energy). Then, try to imagine any of the assymetries from the relative motions of those emitters. You must note that the electrons and the protons are both coupled to spacetime which is a manifold of nodes of acoustic energy. It is that energy that the matter standing waves absorb and which amplifies their internal resonances to the huge values they have (low viscosity fluids are underdamped and that leads to the amplification of harmonic oscillators. Matter waves are just underdamped resonances of the aether, that is all. But you must see that they are coupled to "spacetime" and that is where they get their energy. So they can wander a bit from the spacetime nodal structures phase angle center, but not too far or they begin to breach confinement and thrust themselves back into center of the arriving energy.) >From the above, what you can do is to look at how accelerations of the various ions leads to a Doppler shifting in the arrival times of the wave energy emitted from those ions in another region of space. In so doing, it doesn't matter if you want to study quark to quark interactions, or long wave radio emissions from an antenna. It is all in essence the same thing. Of course for an accurate determinations you will need to account for the distortions to the local spacetime of the standing waves you are studying. And there is almost no distortion to spacetime induced by an antenna, but there is a huge distortion to spacetime induced by the standing wave structure inside of a nucleus. So to consider interactions you must consider not only the waves being emitted but as well the local geometry of the spacetime nodal structure. In em phenomena, you can ignore this added complexity, but in nuclear forces you cannot. And in SR and GR effects you cannot either. > >In the 'new physics', I suppose that em radiation must be a travelling >distortion of the natural zp fluctuations. No real 'aether' as such, >which was a virtually inelastic fluid, more some kind of bucket-chain >with distortions being passed on. Yes, and it could be polarised and >all the rest of it. Exactly. but why bother saying there is no real aether? There is. You can call it zp fluctuations, you can call it a quantum vacuum, or any of a number of names. A rose by any other name..... The bucket brigade is more apt than you likely know. that is exactly what spacetime is all about. The buckets are at the Planck scale at about E-35 meters in spacing. And rather than being handed down a line, they are instead each one exploding outward into the voids surrounding them. but since they are evenly spaced throughout spacetime or the ocean of aether, the expansion of one set of nodes will collide in the adjacent lower pressure regions. but that collision leads to a hydraulic jump in the pressure and thus what was a low pressure is now at high pressure and what was at high pressure is now at low pressure. So the process reverses again, indefinitely. It is powered by a continual evaporation of the remaining droplets of aether in what we call exothermic reactions which are aether emitting. And it was set in motion by the big bang breach in confinement of a huge core of aether condensate when a black hole into which an entire universe had flowed could no longer be held confined inside as the inflow began to slow in momentum. Thus, space is flowing out of our sun, and that is why SOHO saw that O and H ions had been accelerated to the same velocity dispersions this past year. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 04:18:52 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA30552; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:02:30 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:02:30 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:05:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The west. Lots of email. A chord struck. Conclusion? In-Reply-To: <970123192801_100433.1541_BHG116-1 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Qw-311.0.IT7.KJAwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Subscribers, We all seem to have struck a chord about our lives, our freedom to explore in God's wonderful universe and that which affects our freedom directly - the Government (you get the system you deserve). Thanks for all the email, its been educational. Enough politics and philosophy (= lovers of sophistry, or as R.P.Feynman put it - philo-sov-figal) for now? I know where my main interest lies and I think I know how to get the girl I love and save her (she's so young 17->18, sweet and talented) from a crappy sense of life brought on by the teachings of Guru Khrisnamurti and the English 'intellectual' scene. I'm fired up for everything! Gotta go. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 05:06:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA04359; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:57:16 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:57:16 -0800 From: RMCarrell aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:59:53 -0500 Message-ID: <970124075952_241136265 emout02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The 'new physics' -- computers Resent-Message-ID: <"5-V6h1.0.z31.h6Bwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3592 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 97-01-22 17:52:41 EST, Barry Merriman wrote: > If I recall, the atom was first split in the induced fission sense > by Germans in the mid thirties; the first electronic computer was due > to a soviet name Anestasov (sp?) in the 30's-40's (or > you could attribute it to Babbage in England). Barry, Russians did emigrate to the US, including the ancestors of Dr. Atanasoff who with Clifford Barry did indeed build the first electronic computer, but at Iowa State College in 1939. It used binary logic, vacuum tubes, with a rotating drum electrostatic storage device. During WW2 Dr.Spedding's ion exchange chemistry was producing at Iowa State the bulk of the purified uranium used in the Manhattan project, which got most of the attention and the college never got around to patenting the Atanasoff development, which would have been one of the most important patents of the century. However, the Atanasoff development scuttled attempts by Eckert and Mauchley to patent ENIAC, for there had been conversations and visits with Atanasoff. There were nearly parallel developments by Turing in Engand and another in Germany, but Atanasoff and Barry were there first. Other notable Russian immigrants in electronics include Vladimir Zworykin, responsible for major developments in television, and David Sarnoff, who headed RCA and led the development of the th radio and TV industry. Credit for the concept of the programmed numerical calculator goes to Babbage for the design of the Analytical Engine, which was never built. It used punched cards and could modify its operation based on intermediate results. The matematical prodigy Ada Lovelance, a friend of Babbage, wrote the programs. The DoD program Ada was named for her. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 05:55:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA11825; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:46:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:46:37 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:49:45 -0500 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199701241349.IAA02488 spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l eskimo.com In-reply-to: <970124032203_72240.1256_EHB91-1 CompuServe.COM> (message from Jed Rothwell on 23 Jan 97 22:22:04 EST) Subject: Re: First atom-splitting, computers, etc. Resent-Message-ID: <"fcFx_2.0.gu2.xqBwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3593 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell (72240.1256 CompuServe.COM) said: > Right. That is why the Bombes are still secret but ENIAC is in the > Smithsonian. ENIAC was used to compute artillery > trajectories. There is nothing secret about that job. No devious > tricks were required, so the design was quickly declassified and > used to build the next generation machines, which soon led to the > first commercial computers. Nonsense. The difference is between special purpose computers and general purpose computers. There was a recently declassified paper on the ENIAC, and the usefulness of general purpose computers. Why was it classified so long? Hint: Why was it printed in Cryptologia? Because one of the sections discussed using ENIAC to solve the same problem as the Bombes, but much faster. (If you go find the paper, there are a couple mistranslations that are confusing. Two to the 63rd power and a two to the 64th power should be 26 cubed and to the fourth power respectively.) Note that when I say much faster, I mean that one ENIAC would have been faster than a large array of Bombes. Another lesser known fact...The largest array of Bombes was located in the Navy building in Washington DC. The cooperation between the US and Britian eventually led to a split where all the Japanese work and the Kreigsmarine (German Navy) codes were broken in Washington and the Luftwaffe, Army, SS, and German diplomatic codes were done at Bletchly Park. The Kreigsmarine used four disk Enigmas for communicating with ships at sea, in particular U-boats. So the combination of a need for fast results and four disks instead of three meant that they wanted to be able to throw dozens of Bombes at a single message. I think they eventually had a hundred machines there. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 06:26:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA17222; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:17:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:17:01 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:20:11 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: RMCarrell aol.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The 'new physics' -- computers In-Reply-To: <970124075952_241136265 emout02.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"N3k6x3.0.zC4.RHCwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Carrell, Did you know that Ada Lovelace was the daughter of none other the Lord 'Mad Bad Dangerous to Know' Bryon? (Do you care (-: ) Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 07:18:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA25873; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:01:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:01:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:02:53 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701241502.JAA22657 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. Resent-Message-ID: <"45WCC3.0.cJ6.fwCwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:21 1/22/97 EST, Chris wrote: >In the 'new physics', I suppose that em radiation must be a travelling >distortion of the natural zp fluctuations. I thought photons were the one common element between the new and old physics. My picture of the zero-point field (ZPF) is that it IS em radiation...it is a "sea" of photons going every which-way traveling through absolutely empty space. When we fire up a radio set and broadcast our own em waves, we are generating genuine photons. They just superimpose on the background ZPF and fly away from our antenna at c. Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 11:01:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA14083; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:45:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:45:03 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 17:36:17 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Reply letter to Mathm. Physt. Clive Kilminster on 'Heat not dead end...' Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"DQCsE2.0.xR3.jCGwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Subscribers, Via a former lecturer of mine I sent my paper 2 to the mathematical physicist Clive Kilminster. The review is confidential subject to me asking if I can distribute it. In his review I think he got the point of what I was trying to do but got bogged down in mathematical correctness (quite rightly) but wasn't quite able to see the intuition behind it. What follows is in my response to him quite nicely ties up the thoughts in the group yesterday about - the Western analytic method, logical correctness (absolutes, axioms, causality), but flexibility in thought needed to take that intuitive leap into the unknown and of course, experiment. Interested parties that have been reviewing my email should take note of this (I know its long) as it contains additional insight into the paradox - letter last paragraph. ************************************************************************** Once again, the standard disclaimer: Please make no attempt to contact these people if you do not know them. They have their careers and we must respect their confidentiality and time. Good leads are easy to lose by abuse of good faith. ************************************************************************** The textual code is UPPER case for underlined and *between asterix for italics* as it was prepared on a word processor and converted to text for you. (The email is different to filter vortex-l from lighter traffic) Remi Cornwall Alumni Dept. of EEIE City University Northampton Square London EC1V 0HB r.o.cornwall city.ac.uk Fri. 24/1/97 ref.: Paper sent by Dr Faruq Abdullah enc. Paper 1 and 'Hygroscopic Membrane separation of water' Dear Sir, Thank you very much for your time devoted to reviewing my paper. I found your comments just and helpful. Please excuse Faruq's and my impertinence for sharing a letter to Faruq if it was your intention for it to be confidential. >From the first paragraph I think you see what I'm getting at. I enclose my first paper that was submitted to the Journal of Physical Chemistry USA but rejected without good review because of its contentious challenging of known thermodynamics. I would be very pleased if you could take some time to see it. Mathematically it is more coherent and correct:- Pages 3-4 a bit more on phase changing catalyst, a new thermodynamic cycle explicitly stated. Appendix, same thing done with chemical potential to model mass flow too. My thoughts on the second paragraph agree. Here the analysis is at an early stage and I should be using FLUCTUATION and ERGODIC THEORY to explain how the random imbalance of temperature in the gas leads to heat flow; parts of the gas that are similarly (by same effect) cooler receive the heat and then do work. My definition of the thermodynamic system should be more clear. The whole gas is the SYSTEM and parts randomly fluctuating within it are the SUBSYSTEMS. Subsystems rising in the gravity field *are* doing work against gravity. Subsystems falling in the field are doing work on the SYSTEM. Overall the work terms cancel so the gas *macroscopically* neither gets hotter or colder but one cannot deny that the *microscopic* subsystems comprising the gas are transferring heat or doing work in a SYSTEM that overall is at constant temperature (Paper 2 Theorem). 'Imagine that I am a being whose faculties are so heightened as to be able to see individual molecules in motion' (so went the introduction to Maxwell's Demon in Theory of Heat) I insist that if I see molecules moving upwards that they are doing work against gravity; if they are moving downwards, they are accelerating, on collision with the rest of the molecules of the SYSTEM their kinetic energy becomes internal energy. I consider this an *absolute, irreducible argument* - yes mathematics should describe it, at present I haven't the skill to depict this. The whole point of the theorem (paper 2) was to show that work can be done by SUBSYSTEMS in a constant entropy SYSTEM. This then I want to generalise to devices giving real *macroscopic* work. I enclose a second document as to the PRACTICAL aspects of how I conjured up the idea and how I see the paradox in terms of practical devices which a physicist or engineer might ask - 'now just why wouldn't that work?'. Top diagram PAGE 3 is a case in point: the tall vessel is performing reverse osmosis but the head of water providing the pressure comes from vapour condensing at height. Insert the vessel into a closed, isolated (i.e. constant entropy system, paper 1 page 3, paper 2 page 7) with a water reservoir and water vapour atmosphere. Provided that the pressure of the water vapour at the top of the column is sufficient (increase the pressurisation of vapour in closed system) then vapour will condense at the top of the vessel and with sufficient head push liquid water out at the bottom of the vessel. Result, a MACROSCOPIC self perpetuating flow: vessel at top depletes atmosphere, vapour evaporates from reservoir, water falls from vessel back to the reservoir. One might object to the, increase of pressure in the system, argument to ensure that vapour condenses at the top of the very tall vessel (barometric pressure law) - the pressure at the bottom of the column would stop water flowing out of the vessel through the membrane. No, this cannot be, as an equivalent column in height of water solution will be heavier than the corresponding vapour's (paper 1's corollary pg. 11 - apologies for misspelling in paper 2). An argument that this is perpetual motion and this can't happen would require, ironically, a *demon* in the system to realise that at disparate ends of the column that it's actions to prevent this are: . stop condensing water at the top of the vessel so that water wouldn't evaporate from the reservoir to 're-stock' the atmosphere surrounding the device so that the . pressure head of the column of hygroscopic solution wouldn't push pure water out in a reverse osmosis fashion back to the reservoir and around the cycle again. NATURE MAY HAVE ITS CHECKS AND BALANCES, BUT THIS WOULD TAKE SOME COMPREHENSION. Also in the second document (pages 3-4) is a more practical implementation of the 'phase changing catalyst' by billions of semi-permeable bubbles filled with hygroscopic solution. I believe that there would be a 'free-water-volume'. May I again thank you for your time and I would be most pleased if you could look at the two enclosures and respond should you so choose. Prof. P.T. Landsberg has seen my work and understands the point I am trying to make. I have been informed that you know him. Contacting him, if you so wish, could provide some comment. I would be pleased if you let him see this letter as it contains additional insights about correct analytical choice of systems and sub-systems and how the column device might require a 'demon' conspiring in a most unlikely, non-local way to stop the macroscopic flow in the system. Yours faithfully, Remi Cornwall. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 12:12:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA00739; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:59:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:59:07 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:59:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970124134106_1544922081 emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: range of force interaction Resent-Message-ID: <"nw1VT3.0.RB.9IHwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank knows not what he has said here, because if he did, he would not have to ask what we think. He would know he was on target. ........................................................................ You bet I know what I have said but I got a lot of help from some geniuses. Puthoff personally told me some years ago about the charge clusters. Miley personally told me about the Multi-body reactions. Noever by e-mail informed me about the Tempere effect. .............................................................................. .... With that background as a base, I put my 2 cents in added 1 + 1 and got four. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 12:29:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA06737 for billb@eskimo.com; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:28:56 -0800 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:28:56 -0800 X-Envelope-From: tessien pop3.oro.net Fri Jan 24 12:28:51 1997 Received: from li.oro.net (root NewsLink.oro.net [198.68.62.43]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA06696 for ; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:28:49 -0800 Received: from IMPULSE (tessien.oro.net [204.119.228.118]) by li.oro.net (8.7.4/8.8.96-smj) with SMTP id MAA30692 for ; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:31:56 -0800 Old-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:31:56 -0800 Message-Id: <199701242031.MAA30692 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien pop3.oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: The 'new physics'. X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Chris; Well, I am sorry that my comments on the holographic nature of the mind were considered a bunch of hocum, but then we did not go into that discussion very deeply to describe the notions I have been working on in that arena. But as I haven't really worked a lot on that, and as that isn't really up the alley of our objectives here, I will try again to focus on the em fields which your latest post seemed to imply was left less than optimally explained, which is of course going to be the case in a little forum like this on a complicated subject like that. So, back to the more important stuff about which I can speak more directly. *************************************************************** >In another post Chris wrote; > >I'd really like to see some comment on my attempt to summarise the 'new >physics', especially comments on the question of the transmission of em >radiation. On the matter of antennae, let's agree to disagree. ****************************************************************** I assume that the antennae disagreement comes from your thinking that the antenna attracts the energy into it. And so since I absolutely disagree that anything attracts any other thing intrinsically, we can agree to disagree on this point. I would say though that if an antenna were to create a depression in the energy surrounding it, that the higher "pressure" energy of photons or waves travelling past the antenna could then curve into the antenna. And in a manner sort of like active noise cancelation in acoustics, it would be possible to induce this sort of effect. But in general, this is not the case and the antenna is a passive device which some of the energy passing by will converge into if it arrives in the domain of the electrons that can set up macroscopic resonances in the antenna. But I can agree to disagree on these notions as secondary to the overall notions. >The idea is that we have no 'pull' forces, only 'push' forces. And >'particles' are themselves just manifestations of the 'vacuum energy'. >We know that two ships parked close together in choppy seas will be >pushed together by the fact that longer waves are excluded from the >space between them, and the idea seems to be that this kind of action >explains all the forces? In my last post I dealt with this sort of action from the ideas of gravitation. Let me now show that one can use the same notions of resonances to describe both em and nuclear forces. The trick is to think about how matter in the form of standing waves would behave in an ocean of aether, aka our universe. And to think of that, you must think in terms of acoustic energy in three dimensions. But since this is hard to do, lets instead work with the ships notion that Chris put forward above. The ships are like an short circuit to any incident wave on the ocean. In coaxial cables or with light, or even with a wave in a rope tied to a pole, if you send the wave down the line and it hits a short circuit it reflects completely, and in the negative orientation to the incident wave. Thus, with the two ships, waves incident on the exterior of their hulls are reflected and the energy of reflecting those waves is kinetically (action reaction) imparted to the ships hulls. Waves are arriving from outside the ships, but waves are not arriving in between them, and so the two ships are both receiving a thrust toward one another and that is why they tend to move toward one another if not forced apart by some other means. Now while that analogy is good and it shows that one does not need any pull to be imposed from in between the two ships, and while that analogy is an excellent description of what happens with the Casimir effect, it is not a good analogy of what is going on with matter standing waves and I will show you why in a minute. But lets look just a bit more closely at those ships in light of the Casimir "attraction" force. In a Casimir cavity, you have two metal plates that are reflective and as such they will tend to induce interference with any em radiation that is not in frequency match with the cavity. Thus, those waves are damped out in between the two plates. and additionally, as a result, if you sum up the wave energy that the plates can preclude, you find that the Casimir force is precisely that amount of thrust. But the mirrors of the Casimir cavity are not perfect reflectors. They can only reflect radiation down to certain wavelengths. Below that, the metal becomes transparent and there are no reflections and that short wave energy is **not** precluded from existing between the two plates. Thus, there is no thrust imposed on the plates by energy that they cannot damp out from existing inside. Also, there are waves that are so long that they will also just pass through the cavities or go around them because the cavity is smaller than the wave. ie, a 1,000 ft wavelength radio wave is not going to be effectively shielded by that Casimir cavity and so you will not add up the thrust of compression from that wavelength of energy. But notice that our ships are the same. Waves That are really short (ie sound), will be able to be transmitted into the metal, or head down underneath the ships and escape being damped out. As well, waves that are very long, ie take the rising tide locally which is a very long wavelength waveform that is travelling around the earth, will not be damped out or effectively reflected at the interface of the ships. So you see, there is only a certain range of wavelengths that the ships are effective at precluding from existing between them. And so the energy imparted to the ships is a function of how much such energy is striking the sides and being either reflected, or attenuated and thermalized. There is also the energy of waves that are in existence between the ships that you must consider. And the two ships will tend to form a reflective cavity, and you will have waves that are multiples (harmonics) of the distance inside between the hulls. These can become standing waves and will be pushing the two ships apart to the degree that their energy is reflected back and forth inside. The net thrust is the difference between the compression pushing them together, and the compression inside pushing them apart. But no where in this system is any wave reaching out from one ship to the other and pulling. Now the difference between this being a good analogy for matter, is that matter is oscillating in the presence of waves. ie, matter has a natural frequency of resonance that is close to the primary frequency of oscillation of the quantum vacuum, or, spacetime. As such, matter exists (in my theory) as an **underdamped** oscillation of the aether ocean which is our universe. On the open ocean, you wind up with characteristic wave spacings due to the fluid dynamics of the ocean and the winds. If you have a flotilla of small boats that have a natural bobbing frequency close to that of the incident wave energy, then they will bob up and down in cadence with that energy. They will tend to damp it out only if it is not in phase and frequency match with their oscillations. Otherwise, that energy will be transmitted right on through unimpeeded. So my entire theory is in essence, a study of how a bunch of standing waves distributed all over the place in a huge ocean of aether, will couple energy back and forth. It is a study of how they will interfere with that energy and by that interference how they will be accelerated away from the incident energy just like the ships were accelerated away from the open ocean due to the waves hitting their sides. The only tricky thing to get past is that if you have a waveform that is matched to the resonance of something coupled to that wave form, that "something" will not be thrust in any direction. It will stay right there and just bob up and down. It is only when the phase angle or the frequency of the incident wave energy is altered that it will be thrust in one direction or another. And the direction will depend on how the energy incident was altered. For example, if you red shift the energy you can impose a condition of shear on the oscillating standing wave. The standing wave will be accelerated until the Doppler shifting that results winds up allowing the standing wave to again be in phase and frequency match with the incident wave energy. But, if you had some independent stationary frame of reference and were watching that object, you would notice that it had been accelerated, and that it then settled into a new velocity of translation as compared to before the energy arrived. Notice an important thing about that as pertains to the em field interactions. The acceleration only occured while there was a changing field of energy. Once the field stops changing, the standing wave is again in synchrony with the incident waves and so it is no longer accelerated and it continues to translate. There is another more subtle point that may be missed. And this one is really wierd to discuss, but it is the origin of the notions of Special Relativity. I am talking about this standing wave which you can think of as a boat on the ocean if that helps. It is oscillating in cadence with the incoming wave energy and if the incoming wave energy is phase or frequency shifted, the standing wave must re-synchronize with the new energy composition. but, the standing wave has two independent ways of doing this. 1) It can alter its velocity by moving through "spacetime". 2) It can alter its internal resonant frequency (this deals with the internal KE that is supposed to be "equivalent" to "mass") I guess I could also say that the boat or standing wave could suddenly be tugged some distance to put it back into phase synch if that were what changed, and if that happened in zero time (ie a spacelike motion), then it would again be in phase match. But since real matter doesn't move from here to there in zero time, this third possibility I am going to leave out. Thus, I described item 1 already in that the standing wave can be accelerated back into phase and frequency match if the incident energy changes its structure over time. And while the energy is changing and the standing wave is responding, the standing wave will be accelerated. When there is no more shifting of the energy incident on the standing wave, it will continue to oscillate in cadence with the incident waves. But item 2 is very interesting. You see, an underdamped resonator or oscillator is a structure that is excited by a small amount of energy, but at the natural resonant frequency of the structure. And that excitation is amplified until the non linearities of the medium involved offset the build up in amplitude. This happens in electrical and mechanical systems. A child on a swing is a perfect example. You get the child going with repeated small taps, not with one big smack. But if the oscillator can change its resonant frequency, then it can Doppler shift its resonance by translation, or it can alter its internal properties such that the natural resonant frequency is shifted. Either way, it could re-synchronize with incident energy that is changing in frequency as observed at the "particle" standing wave. Now if you have a spherical standing wave in a fluid, the density of that fluid will be forced to build up due to the convergence of the wave energy. thus the structure of the standing wave is such that there is a density gradient that is spherically symmetrical with the greatest density at the center. the build up is on the order of a E = Eo*(Ro/R)^4 where Eo is the initial energy density of an incident spherically convergent acoustic wave at radius Ro, and Ro and R are the initial radius and the radius where you want to consider the energy density. So the standing wave is nothing but a region of the very same fluid ocean it lives in, but where that region is resonating in a special way. Thus, space and matter are virtually the identical substance if you wish to call it a substance, or they are both made of "quantum vacuum fluctuations" if you prefer a name that does not carry the baggage of aether. but either way, the empty vacuum of the universe and the standing waves of matter have the same internal structural makeup. And how could it be any other way if matter is obviously coupled (inertia) to spacetime as are em fields as are nuclear fields and on and on. And if they are all obviously coupled, then how could they possibly be different things? But if they are all just the same thing, then maybe all that is different about one field as compared to another is that the way that the wave energy is coupled is different. ie, maybe there is a greater phase and frequency effeciency of coupling from an electron over here to a proton over there depending on whether the electron is in the next galaxy, or within a few feet, or inside of the weak nuclear interaction envelop. If there are differences in the way that waves couple from one standing wave to another, as compared to how those waves couple to space, and then how they travel across space, then you could get three different interactions from one and the same phenomena. All due to the relative coherencies of coupling the phase and frequencies of the standing waves of one particle to another. As for charge, charge is just an observation that two standing waves that are in phase opposition will tend to be thrust toward each other, while two standing waves that are in phase match will tend to thrust away from each other. >Magnetic forces are a variation on electrostatic force, seen when a >charged mass moves. Magnetic forces are a rotational precession of the oscillating pressure fronts inside the aether ocean. The EM static fields are just a measure of the amplitude of the pressure front oscillations at 0 degrees phase angle (arbitrarily assigned as positive), and the oscillations at 180 degrees phase angle (arbitrarily assigned as negative). >Mass is just the kinetic energy of the 'particles', >which therefore interacts with the vacuum, and charge is something like >having spin on the 'particle' - I know I'm misusing terms, but as I >understand it mass is something like a 'static' form of energy, or a >'randomised' one, whereas charge is something which has some kind of >spin or vector with it? Mass is the "mass" of aether that was forced to be confined in the standing wave in **excess** of the ambient aether density of the local universe (quantum vacuum). If you sum the build up in aether mass attributable to a given standing wave, and then subtract the amount of aether mass that would have occupied that region if the standing wave had not been there, then that is the mass of the "particle". Charge is the amplitude of the radial acoustic oscillations of the single standing wave. thus, if you have a given standing wave and you accelerate it with charge, you are going to be accelerating it with one unit of measure of oscillation amplitude with which you can interfere with the standing wave under consideration. Because pulsational oscillations can be described with phase diagrams, ie sinusoids, you can think of charge like a spin. But I would recomend avoiding that and to think in terms of a pulsation along a radial line. Magnetism is induced when the location of a given oscillator is changing because the location of convergence of the wave energy that left that oscillator (electron) and which arrived at another such charged particle will be precessing in space due to the motion. But all matter will tend to phase and frequency synchronize to the local structure of the arriving wave energy. And as a result, if you want to "accelerate" a waveform over there, you must accelerate some charged particles over here if you are interacting with EM energies. The gravitational field does not work this way because the particles that emitted the energy inducing the effect are way out in the universe, and we are just interfering with them. If this were not the case, then I would expect to find huge effects due to the rotations of objects but we don't find this. >The attribute of mass or charge interacts with the vacuum to produce a >distortion in some quality it possesses, and thereby 'shields' another >mass or charge from the push which otherwise would be symmetrical? Pretty much correct. The only thing you must be careful with here is that you may think that a ball will shield another object effectively and thus one other the other should weigh a lot less if we bring one thing near another. But you must realize that you are attempting to sheild the energy of the quantum vacuum which has a wavelength of about E-35 meters. So you are not going to be very effective when you use distortions to spacetime that are spaced a whopping E-15 meters apart (nuclei) or E-10 (atom to atom spacings) at shielding that tiny wavelength wave energy. But the "push" is really an "interference". And the quality of space is the structure of pressure standing waves permeating the quantum vacuum. And "shields" is really just a "filtering" process which leads to the waveforms being synchronized with local oscillation frequencies. Imagine what would happen to waves on the ocean if you had a huge flotilla of buoys that each had a natural resonant frequency that was close to the wave energy frequency. Any wave energy that was slightly shifted would induce an interference and thrust the buoy in some direction to better match resonances. But if there were lots of those guys, the energy leaving one would tend to better match the resonance of another. And so after passing through all of that huge group of resonators, the wave energy coming out the other side would be filtered and quite clean and at the natural resonant frequency of the buoys to the outside of the group. thus, they would be thrust toward the group by the "noisy" energy arriving from the open ocean, and they would ****not**** be thrust away from the group becuase the waves that made it out were in phase and frequency match with local oscillations. > >The anisotropy of space, which appears to fit well the 'curvature' used >to describe it in General Relativity, is just a localised distortion (by >masses or charges) of its permeability/permittivity ratio? GR is a result of density variance in the aether ocean of the universe. But GR fails to discuss any flowing of spacetime and I have discovered that this also occurs. Spacetime flows out of our sun. And spacetime will be flowing into a black hole (ie aether). This is because aether must be conserved if aether is all there is. And so if the mass of a standing wave that underwent nuclear fusion is reduced, the excess of aether confined in that new standing waveform is also less than the sum of the reacting particles. Thus, that missing mass had to become a part of the aether ocean we call spacetime. And thus spacetime is flowing out of our sun. SOHO has confirmed this but the observations are not accepted as being a result of this behavior as of yet. More data is on the way and should be published this spring. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 13:23:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA12035; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:51:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:51:57 -0800 Date: 24 Jan 97 15:44:04 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Hot fusion news available Message-ID: <970124204403_72240.1256_EHB83-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"bXXJ.0.vx2.i3Iwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Christopher Leedy, of Business Publishers Inc., gave me a Web Site address for information on hot fusion: http://www.bpinews.com/egy/pages/fpr.htm He offers two sample issues of a newsletter devoted to this topic. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 24 15:35:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA11273; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 15:20:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 15:20:03 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:22:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970124181346_39933102 emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: I went the opposite way Resent-Message-ID: <"Jyuvo2.0.3m2.VEKwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The world went one way for 300 years and I went the other for 10. Man's knowledge of matter came from his probing ever deeper into its structure. The first probings came at levels of a few electron volts. Compounds were split into elements. It became apparent that properties of a compound's were not a combination of the properties of the individual elements. The compound was something new, unique, and had its own identity. Man's direction of search continued along in the direction of higher energy. The atom was discovered and split. As in the case of the compounds it was discovered that a split neutron gave off a proton and neutron. It was realized that the neutron was something different than the particles that composed it. Next the proton was split at higher energy levels producing all sorts of new particles. These particles are composed of quarks, something different indeed. Some say that quirks may someday be split. Each advance in science is measured by more energy. Each step along the "path of progress" has yielded increasingly dangerous emissions. The latest step, "The Superconducting Super Collider" was sure not to produce any usefully products. Yet there was still the feeling that if you break something apart you will find out what it is made out of. Yes, if we reach into a bag a candy will will find the candy that makes up the bag. Scientific probing, however, is more like looking into a can a gasoline with a lighted match, you will see something. That something was not there before you looked. Realizing this I went the other way in my quest for answers. I realized that when matter condenses (electron condensation) that something new is produced. This new layer of matter is very different from the parts that compose it. Something fundamentally new is created. The condensation is, in fact, a macroscopic elementary particle. Fundamental changes occur within the condensation. The range of the nuclear force increases to CM in length. The length of the gravitational force reduces to meters. Energy levels are only in the order of a volt or two. The most dangerous emission that can be produced is perhaps a 21 CM microwave. Great economic opportunities await man at these energy levels. Man can get his fingers and machinery to interact directly with the nuclear and gravitational forces that bind the condensation. That idea was the basis of my 1985 patent application. I was to far ahead of my time. I do believe that Miley and Puthoff are now beginning to understand what is happening. My patent is still very valid. Frank Znidarsic.  From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 13:24:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA11339; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:13:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:13:38 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970125211553.008ebf54 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:15:53 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"pghiA.0.rm2.-Tdwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In getting ready for the spring assault on cold fusion/transmutation experimentation, I am looking for a liquid flow sensor which has a 0-5VDC output proportional to the flow (say 50-500 ml/min flow) that can take 80-90 deg C without damage to the sensor. The only one I found so far is one sold by Cole-Parmer (Cat. No. E-32704-02), but which they claim has a temperature limit of 50 deg C. The wetted materials, polyphenylene sulfide, glass, sapphire, Viton, and Ryton, can take temperatures much higher than 50 deg C. Can this sensor be used at higher temperatures or will I damage the electronic circuitry at 90 C.? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 13:39:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA11357; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:13:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:13:45 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970125211555.008d57a8 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:15:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Matched Thermistors Resent-Message-ID: <"trafN2.0.Mn2.5Udwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If I measure the resistance of a number of thermistors at ambient temperature and at 100 deg. C, and sort out the ones that have identical resistance readings at each of the two temperatures, can I assume that the mid-range resistance readings (say at 70 deg C) of these selected thermistors will also be the same? If true, this would save time in not having to calibrate every thermistor individually. I now calibrate each thermistor at three different temperatures and solve for the constants with MathCad. The central reading is the hardest to get accurately. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 14:33:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA23582; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 14:22:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 14:22:13 -0800 Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:23:33 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow sensors In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970125211553.008ebf54 freeway.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"AjnMk3.0.Im5.JUewo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3604 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed, Get the Sensor magazine buysers guide. Now page through the 30 issues from present, back. Each issue has a small secion of 'new products'. The sensor type you do NOT want has impeller. Two types that may work for you: a] doppler .... ultrasonic shift VS flow b] vibrating tube, just what it said... the flow goes through thin usully metal "U" shaped tube, tube is caused to vibrate, its manner of vibration changes with flow. OR You can sample manually. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 16:54:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA16849; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:44:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:44:27 -0800 Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:47:28 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701260047.SAA26075 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Matched Thermistors Resent-Message-ID: <"zVqUX3.0.A74.eZgwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:15 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Ed S wrote: >If I measure the resistance of a number of thermistors at ambient >temperature and at 100 deg. C, and sort out the ones that have identical >resistance readings at each of the two temperatures, can I assume that the >mid-range resistance readings (say at 70 deg C) of these selected >thermistors will also be the same? I have observed minor diffs in slope and linearity all over the range in my thermistors. I always have to characterize the offset between two thermistors at the specific temp I'm going to use them at. > I now calibrate each >thermistor at three different temperatures and solve for the constants >with MathCad Don't you have factory values for the A, B, & C coeffs (in the Steinhart-Hart eqn)? I always use the factory values and then just add on a correction term for precise delta-T work....seems to work well. Of course, I'm using thermistors that are guaranteed to be 0.2C "interchangeable". They sure are nice for general purpose use...just wire them in to your system, measure the resistance (with your computer ADC system), calc the eqn, and presto, you have their temperature within 0.2C. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 17:39:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23542; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:29:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:29:20 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: I went the opposite way Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 01:32:46 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32ed95ab.10145486 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <970124181346_39933102 emout01.mail.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <970124181346_39933102 emout01.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WaNX62.0.dl5.iDhwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:22:15 -0500 (EST), FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: [snip] > Realizing this I went the other way in my quest for answers. I > realized that when matter condenses (electron condensation) that > something new is produced. This new layer of matter is very > different from the parts that compose it. Something > fundamentally new is created. The condensation is, in fact, a > macroscopic elementary particle. Fundamental changes occur > within the condensation. The range of the nuclear force > increases to CM in length. The length of the gravitational I presume that by this you mean that the cluster is bound by the equivalent of the nuclear force. > force reduces to meters. Energy levels are only in the order of > a volt or two. The most dangerous emission that can > be produced is perhaps a 21 CM microwave. Great economic > opportunities await man at these energy levels. Man can get his > fingers and machinery to interact directly with the nuclear and > gravitational forces that bind the condensation. That idea was Are you implying here that the nuclear and gravitational forces are related? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 17:39:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23513; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:29:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:29:15 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: type to fast Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 01:32:44 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32eb9183.9080883 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <970125095418_1926620007 emout10.mail.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <970125095418_1926620007 emout10.mail.aol.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sKDcV2.0.Gl5.fDhwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:54:19 -0500 (EST), FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: >I ment to say that a neutron decays into a proton, positron, and >antineutrino. I hope the meaning of my story still came through. > >Frank Z > > Frank, Try proton, electron and anti-neutrino. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 19:24:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA12320; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:13:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:13:36 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970126031551.008dd7ec freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:15:51 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Matched Thermistors Resent-Message-ID: <"XkmLw2.0.M03.Tliwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3608 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:47 PM 1/25/97 -0600, Scott Little wrote: > >Don't you have factory values for the A, B, & C coeffs (in the >Steinhart-Hart eqn)? I always use the factory values and then just add on a >correction term for precise delta-T work....seems to work well. Of course, >I'm using thermistors that are guaranteed to be 0.2C "interchangeable". >They sure are nice for general purpose use...just wire them in to your >system, measure the resistance (with your computer ADC system), calc the >eqn, and presto, you have their temperature within 0.2C. > My first thermistors I purchased from Omega; they did not supply the coefficients but rather supplied the Steinhart-Hart equation in their catalog. I have since acquired stainless steel jacketed thermistors from All Electronics at a very reasonable price. A test of a couple of these showed them to be as good as the Omega thermistors after calibration. Based on results of your findings I will proceed to calibrate each thermistor. Thanks for your response. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 22:55:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA08646; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:27:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:27:18 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:30:23 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701260630.AAA15203 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"dhg-22.0.072.5blwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:15 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Ed S wrote: >In getting ready for the spring assault on cold fusion/transmutation >experimentation, I am looking for a liquid flow sensor... I sorta gave up on having a live, accurate flow signal. Yes, it's possible but it's not easy and not cheap. Besides, usually for calorimetry it's nice to have a constant flow rate so thermal stability can be achieved. Once you've got constant flow, a live flow signal is not really required. You can just measure the flow manually periodically to ensure that it remains constant. I have tried three kinds of constant-flow pumps: gear pumps, peristaltic pumps, and a thing made by FMI called a Q pump which has a little reciprocating and rotating piston in it. The peristaltic is not strictly constant-flow as it relies upon the rebound of the elastomer tubing for its suction. However, the better elastomers (i.e. Norprene) give very satisfactory flow constancy. Low cost approach: get one from Cole-Parmer for about $70 (pump head only) and rig up yr own constant-speed drive using a sync. AC gearmotor. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jan 25 23:57:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA19648; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:34:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:34:21 -0800 From: tim.vaughan trex.ccc-infonet.edu (Tim Vaughan) Subject: Correa PAGD energy devive Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:37:18 GMT Message-Id: <854264238 trex.ccc-infonet.edu> Organization: Yosemite Community College District To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"Gbwix.0.uo4.xZmwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3610 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Is there any recent news (after info in Latest Issues of Infinite Energy Magazine) about the invention of Paulo Correa, the Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge device ? I sent for all three of the patents Paulo and Alexandra Correa (US Patents # 5502354, 5449989, 5416391). They are very detailed and informative. The fact that Correa is claiming to have have a device that charges one set of batteries from another and repeats indefinitely is very clear. The patents are very clear that this is an "over unity" device. These patents make no appearance of being obscure. They give great amounts of technical detail and experimental results. The PAGD device sure looks very much like Dr. Moray and the Radiant Energy device all over again. Why couldn't Correa charge one capacitor from another and then reverse them just like they do the batteries ? This is what Moray apparently did. Could the plasma discharge gain have something to do with idea of charged particles, such as protons, being spontaneously accelerated by the vacuum fluctuations as proposed by Sakharov & Puthoff when they are not closely coupled to opposite charges (electrons) ? Ref: (I found this on a Web site, have not tried calling yet) Labofex Experimental and Applied Physics (Paulo Correa & Alexandra) R&D of PAGD (Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge) plasma technology. Ontario Canada. Paulo N. Correa TEL 905-660-1040, FAX 905-738-8427 Tim From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 07:20:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA07584; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 06:56:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 06:56:48 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:59:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970126095933_1446184879 emout16.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The range of the forces Resent-Message-ID: <"M_QLA2.0.Qs1.l2two" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Are you implying here that the nuclear and gravitational forces are related? ................................................. No not related at all...except that they suffer the same fate within a charge cluster...their usefull range of interaction changes... The nuclear force becomes large due to the condensation of nuclear spin states. The momentum of the state is known..the location of the state can therefore be anywhere within the cluster. Near field gravitational effects also become apparent. I can explain this but not properly over an E-mail. See my paper The Source of...on elektromagnum or just think of the charge cluster as a macroscopic elementary particle. We are seeing effects that normally occur just on atomic levels. Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 07:52:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA14475; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:29:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:29:47 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970126153205.008e3d84 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:32:05 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"lvmcK2.0.1Y3.eXtwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:30 AM 1/26/97 -0600, you wrote: >At 04:15 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Ed S wrote: > >>In getting ready for the spring assault on cold fusion/transmutation >>experimentation, I am looking for a liquid flow sensor... > > >I have tried three kinds of constant-flow pumps: gear pumps, peristaltic >pumps, and a thing made by FMI called a Q pump which has a little >reciprocating and rotating piston in it. > >The peristaltic is not strictly constant-flow as it relies upon the rebound >of the elastomer tubing for its suction. However, the better elastomers >(i.e. Norprene) give very satisfactory flow constancy. Low cost approach: >get one from Cole-Parmer for about $70 (pump head only) and rig up yr own >constant-speed drive using a sync. AC gearmotor. > I guess I will try harder on getting a constant flow system; somehow something happens that results in a change in flow. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 07:52:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA14449; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:29:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:29:43 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970126153203.008e5198 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:32:03 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"O-DNF1.0.aX3.bXtwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:23 PM 1/25/97 -0500, John Schnurer wrote: > > > Ed, > > Get the Sensor magazine buysers guide. Now page through the 30 >i > a] doppler .... ultrasonic shift VS flow > b] vibrating tube, just what it said... the flow goes through >thin usully metal "U" shaped tube, tube is caused to vibrate, its manner >of vibration changes with flow. > > OR > > You can sample manually. > > > J > I tried manual sampling but I haven't found a pump that will give constant flow, maybe I should try this approach more. Thank you for your response. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 07:55:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA14837; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:32:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:32:51 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:39:14 +0100 Message-Id: <199701261539.QAA25948 mail.bbtt.com> X-Sender: harti bbtt.de X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: harti bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) Subject: Re: Correa PAGD energy devive Resent-Message-ID: <"P5vA_.0.hd3.Xatwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3614 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > >Is there any recent news (after info in Latest Issues of Infinite >Energy Magazine) about the invention of Paulo Correa, the Pulsed >Abnormal Glow Discharge device ? =20 > >I sent for all three of the patents Paulo and Alexandra Correa=20 >(US Patents # 5502354, 5449989, 5416391). They are very detailed and >informative. The fact that Correa is claiming to have have a device >that charges one set of batteries from another and repeats indefinitely >is very clear. The patents are very clear that this is an "over unity" >device. These patents make no appearance of being obscure. They give >great amounts of technical detail and experimental results. =20 > >The PAGD device sure looks very much like Dr. Moray and the Radiant Energy >device all over again. Why couldn't Correa charge one capacitor from >another and then reverse them just like they do the batteries ? This is >what Moray apparently did. > > >Could the plasma discharge gain have something to do with idea of >charged particles, such as protons, being spontaneously accelerated by >the vacuum fluctuations as proposed by Sakharov & Puthoff when they are >not closely coupled to opposite charges (electrons) ? > >Ref: (I found this on a Web site, have not tried calling yet) > >Labofex Experimental and Applied Physics >(Paulo Correa & Alexandra) >R&D of PAGD (Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge) plasma technology. >Ontario Canada. Paulo N. Correa TEL 905-660-1040, FAX 905-738-8427 > >Tim > > I guess, the Correa invention does ALSO apply to a chnage in capacitance when the glow discharge appear. When capacitor plates dimensions are dynamically changed over time, you get d(CU)/dt which is CdU/dt and UdC/dt. This is also, what happens inside the Correa devices. It is simular to the Methernitha Testatika, but here it happens just in a nonmoving device. This gets extra energy into the system. Have a look a Dieter Bauer=B4s first article on my theory WEB page: http://www.overunity.de/theory.htm Regards, Stefan. -- Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 08:43:12 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA23017; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:20:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:20:39 -0800 Date: 26 Jan 97 11:21:28 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Flow sensors Message-ID: <970126162127_100060.173_JHB137-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Uyx8G1.0.Zd5.LHuwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Edwin, >> I guess I will try harder on getting a constant flow system; somehow something happens that results in a change in flow. << My 2 pennorth FWIW. Even if you do manage to get a constant volumetric flow you still have the problem of correcting for temp. changes to get the mass flow measurement. I would go for direct weighing and timing of the flow. At least that would remove a regular source of criticism from the skeptics, and there is one less piece of equipment to go wrong. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 11:11:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA17244; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:01:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:01:15 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970126190335.008efdd0 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:03:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"DaA1y2.0.KD4.vdwwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 AM 1/26/97 EST, Norman wrote: >Edwin, > >>> I guess I will try harder on getting a constant flow system; somehow >something happens that results in a change in flow. << > >My 2 pennorth FWIW. > >Even if you do manage to get a constant volumetric flow you still have the >problem of correcting for temp. changes to get the mass flow measurement. I >would go for direct weighing and timing of the flow. At least that would remove >a regular source of criticism from the skeptics, and there is one less piece of >equipment to go wrong. > >Norman > That is an excellent suggestion; I will do that. Thank you. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 11:21:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA19480; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:10:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:10:50 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:13:41 -0800 Message-Id: <199701261913.LAA24002 oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: The range of the forces Resent-Message-ID: <"iHpcd1.0.Em4.qmwwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >The nuclear force becomes large due to the condensation of nuclear spin >states. The momentum of the state is known..the location of the state can >therefore be anywhere within the cluster. In a long line of coupled oscillators like JJ's, the vibrational frequency of the group also becomes known. And as well, if we didn't hard wire the oscillators and they were free to move, they could be Doppler shifted due to their motions, and yet still be frequency locked into a uniform "state" of resonance. Take that notion to 3 dimensions and it applies directly to your charge clusters where you are saying that the force range is extended out around all of the charge. And as well, if you look at the wave energy coming out of the group, you will not be able to pinpoint the location of any individual electron because all of their waves are overlapping in 3 space, and time, ie spacetime as viewed from all outside locations. > We are seeing effects that normally occur just on atomic levels. I completely agree. But try to get to the root of what the effects are, not just the expectations based on what is or is not supposed to be "Uncertain" due to the principles we currently hold valid. Keep in mind, that something is blatently in error with a theory that can only predict what happens at the sub atomic scale when our universe and gravitation is made up of those very sub atomic particles. Gravitation is absolutely the same mechanism as the nuclear force as far as the origin of the energy. But we have two kinds of structures in our universe. We have matter structures. And we have a spacetime structure. Matter is obviously coupled very rigidly to spacetime as evidenced by the property of inertia etc. If spacetime and matter both couple, how could they possibly be different things? This would only be the case if we throw up our arms and state that there exist "forces", and then follow that statement when the two year old asks "what is a force?", by, "I dunno". All the charge clusters have done is to set up a macroscopic resonance with the outside environment (universe, or aether ocean). They did it by (as you correctly say, IMO) all getting their resonant phase angles rotated into the same orientation so that they are all coupled together like a bunch of JJ's in a precision frequency reference. And because they did this, they are ***NOT*** interfering with one another ***AS MUCH AS** they are interfering with wave energy arriving from outside their little ball. And this is exactly what is happening in a bar of steel due to the interatomic "attractive forces" as the bar of steel is compressed and the tension a result of our releiving that compression. And it is exactly the same as gravitation of the earth where the matter in and on the earth are all in a more precise vibrational state and coupled to our local frequency and phase angles of resonance. Thus, matter near other matter **DOES NOT** interfere as well as matter interferes with wave energy arriving from matter very far away. The wave energy from very far away, though, is exactly the same wave energy that is present in the electric, and the nuclear forces. The only difference is the timing of arrivals of those waves as viewed from the particle to which whatever "force" is supposed to be applied. Figuring this part out is the tough part because you must consider the structure and time delays imposed by the spacetime structure as well as the resonances of the matter pumped by those spacetime resonances as underdamped oscillators. So, I agree with Franks notions about the charge clusters and the spreading out of the nuclear force to large dimensions. But this is because IMO, all forces are due to the wave energy that originated at the innermost regions of the matter standing waves, far below the scale of the nucleus at the Planck scale. Thus, nuclear electric and gravitational forces to me are all identical in the *origin* of their energy. It is only phase and frequency mismatches for the coupling of that energy which make a difference to the amplitude of the waveforms. And in a sense, the charge cluster distorted the local spacetime into a spherical curvature (GR curvature) locally and this led to an improvement in the coupling of the energy, or, a "spreading out of the nuclear force". Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 12:00:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA28816; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:50:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:50:15 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:53:17 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701261953.NAA11008 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"1t7cF.0.227.pLxwo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 AM 1/26/97 EST, Norman wrote: >Even if you do manage to get a constant volumetric flow you still have the >problem of correcting for temp. changes to get the mass flow measurement. >I would go for direct weighing and timing of the flow. Indeed this is a good method for measuring the flow. Accurate weighing is much easier than accurate volume measurements. On a rather large water-flow calorimeter we built a few years ago, we arranged a rubber tube that delivered the water back into the reservoir so the discharge end of it was moved horizontally (so there would be zero pressure head change) by a solenoid controlled by a precision timer. In the rest position the tube dumped its water into a chute that conveyed it smoothly down into the reservoir. In the actuated position, the end of the tube was positioned over a plastic collection bottle. Weigh the empty bottle, put it in position, actuate the timer circuit and wait for the cycle to complete, weigh the filled bottle, calculate the mass flow rate. The point about the temp changes in water density is usually negligible. The ratio of water's density at 70C to that at 25C is 0.981. Offsetting that a bit is the specific heat which increases with temp but the 70/25 ratio is only 1.002. So, if you just stick with a volumetric flow measurement, the 70C/25C ratio of volumetric specific heat of water is 0.983...i.e. a 1.7% relative error if you totally ignore it. If you succeed in constructing a water-flow calorimeter in which a 1.7% relative error is clearly identifiable...congratulations! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 20:07:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA04196; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:26:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:26:18 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The mystery of vortex-l Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:12:11 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32eeef31.12116362 mail.netspace.net.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Xb6dG.0.J_.T02xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3619 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I frequently get answers to other people's questions before they are asked, but I never get answers to my own questions before they are asked. Why is that? ;-^)}}} Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 20:27:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA11105; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:51:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:51:27 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970127005312.00665d08 sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:53:12 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Subject: Morrison electron screening? Resent-Message-ID: <"096VM3.0.Zg2.aN2xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortex: I wonder if there are any physicists out there who can elucidate the meaning of Douglas Morrison's comments on Kasagi's accelerator experiment, in which high energy protons and alphas were unexpectedly observed: >> Secondly, the protons emitted in the dd ----> pt reaction, were measured. After correcting for the potential barrier, the astrophysical S22 factor was obtained. It was found that at the lowest energy, the rate increased, by 10% for Ti metal and about 30% for Yb. Expressing this as an electron screening factor, Ue, values of 19 +/- 12 eV and 60 +/-10 eV were found for titanium and Yb respectively - they said these are higher values than expected - and a CERN expert confirmed these were very high. If confirmed, these results could have importance for the problems of the Standard Solar Model where the screening factors are poorly known and indeed this uncertainty constitutes a major source of error in the determination of the solar neutrino flux which may be different from the measured flux.<< Obviously Morrison seems to believe that this a very important finding, although I personally have only a vague understanding of what he means. Does anyone understand what an "astrophysical s22 factor" is and why it could affect the solar neutrino flux? As I understand it, the screening factor permits deuterons to come closer together than they would normally, and thus might enhance the nuclear reaction probabilities. But what does Ti and Yb have to do with solar processes? Or is he simply arguing that deuterons may be able to see a smaller effective coulombic barrier owing to the presence of high density deuterons in the sun, resulting in an enhanced fusion rate? If so, why would the solar neutrino flux depend on that? BTW, I asked Morrison himself about this, but as yet have heard no reply. Best regards, Elliot From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jan 26 22:08:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA02502; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:45:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:45:05 -0800 From: RMCarrell aol.com Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:47:53 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970127004752_1826205631 emout08.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Correa PAGD energy device Resent-Message-ID: <"G_5PL2.0.0d.W34xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3623 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 97-01-26 02:46:00 EST, Tim Vaughan wrote: > Is there any recent news (after info in Latest Issues of Infinite > Energy Magazine) about the invention of Paulo Correa, the Pulsed > Abnormal Glow Discharge device ? The Correas have put up a Web page whose URL is http://www.globalserve.net/~lambdac The Correas have had conversations with a number of potential investors. I expect that when there is something definite to report it will be announced on their Web site. Meanwhile the Correas are continuing a program of experimentation and theoretical work flowing out of their detailed study of the PAGD phenomenon. >I sent for all three of the patents Paulo and Alexandra Correa > (US Patents # 5502354, 5449989, 5416391). They are very detailed and > informative. The fact that Correa is claiming to have have a device > that charges one set of batteries from another and repeats indefinitely > is very clear. The patents are very clear that this is an "over unity" > device. These patents make no appearance of being obscure. They give > great amounts of technical detail and experimental results. I'm pleased that you found the Correa patents as substantive as I did. Others who did not take pains to study them found them obscure. > The PAGD device sure looks very much like Dr. Moray and the Radiant Energy > device all over again. Why couldn't Correa charge one capacitor from > another and then reverse them just like they do the batteries ? This is > what Moray apparently did. The reason that capacitors don't work is that the energy in the PAGD pulses is very large and must be dumped into a voltage sink. In one case illustrated in Fig 4 of my article, the reactor delivered over 400 joules, which would charge a one farad capactor to 400 volts, which is too high, and would prematurely quench the discharge. And a one farad 400 volt capacitor would be quite, quite big. The Takahashi supercapacitors would be interesting, but I know of no commercial source, nor whether they could absorb that much charge quickly. Note that in the Correa test circuit, even the charge pack batteries are bypassed by large capacitors to absorb the very large instantaeous current peaks. Presumeably, operation at a higher pulse rate would reduce the size of the receiving energy buffer, but it also reduces the total energy output. The PAGD phenomenon operates by its own rules, which must be accomodated by users in application configurations. In my view, there are significant engineering considerations which may limit the range of suitable applications. I believe the Correas have worked on this problem, but the details have not been released. > Could the plasma discharge gain have something to do with idea of > charged particles, such as protons, being spontaneously accelerated by > the vacuum fluctuations as proposed by Sakharov & Puthoff when they are > not closely coupled to opposite charges (electrons) ? Harold Aspden deals with the PAGD phenomenon in one of his Energy Science Papers (I don't know the number right now, I lent my file to a colleague). The energy most probably comes from the vacuum, or aether. That paper may at some time be available at the Correa's Web site, but it isn't there now, although there is a short commentary by Aspden. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 01:35:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA05714; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:09:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:09:34 -0800 Message-ID: <32EC37DF.4C4E advertronix.com> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:06:39 -0800 From: Carl Leonard Reply-To: carl advertronix.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: the west and western method Hal Phutoff please comment References: <970123192801_100433.1541_BHG116-1 CompuServe.COM> <9701231607.ZM8933@me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MmND53.0.9P1.BY3xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3621 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I guess that I missed this when I read it for the first time... John Steck wrote: > > > I agree with your disagreement. I do not contest *correct* logical analysis > and the rules of logical thought. I speak regarding the premise/conclusion > structure that revolutionary ideas are shot down with. I speak regarding the > false absolutes that are inadvertantly created that many rally their banners > behind without question. > Look at what we do to unfortunate individuals > who reveal UFO experiences or ESP. > > -- > John E. Steck Hey, Hal Puthoff did you feel "unfortunate" while you were spending the governments money doing the remote viewing experiments of 15 or so years ago?? It's qualifies as ESP does it not. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 01:52:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA32540; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:30:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:30:06 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32EC765C.167EB0E7 math.ucla.edu> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:33:16 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The mystery of vortex-l References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YHYja1.0.Ky7.SM7xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3624 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > > Better to let creative material stay virtual, rather than > risk possible dangerous side effects of extracting literature > directly from the vacuum? > I think much of the writing appearing on vortex _is_ extracted directly from the vacuum :-) -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 02:48:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA06215; Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:12:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:12:38 -0800 Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:13:49 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The mystery of vortex-l In-Reply-To: <32eeef31.12116362 mail.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"iSlx82.0.zW1.3b3xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3622 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > I frequently get answers to other people's questions before they are asked, > but I never get answers to my own questions before they are asked. > Why is that? ;-^)}}} The macro acausality effects in the net packet echoes are ruled by conservation of solipsism. We discount the genuine timewarp effects we detect in messages other than our own because it never happens to ours, and so personal reality approches unity. Certain mental states can break symmetry; my best material arises when I read it before I've written it, and can type it in before it hadn't existed. I figure that if I wait long enough, quantum fluctuations might let me publish an entire book without input of energy. But I fear that taking advantage of the phenomenon might simultaneously generate an equal amount of writers' block and cancel out a similar book elsewhere. Better to let creative material stay virtual, rather than risk possible dangerous side effects of extracting literature directly from the vacuum? .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 05:37:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA28433; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 05:27:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 05:27:12 -0800 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:30:25 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970127082836.2cb7bf44 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Correa PAGD energy device Resent-Message-ID: <"H0l7k.0.By6.lqAxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3625 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:47 AM 1/27/97 -0500, Mike Carrell wrote: >The reason that capacitors don't work is that the energy in the PAGD pulses >is very large and must be dumped into a voltage sink. In one case illustrated >in Fig 4 of my article, the reactor delivered over 400 joules, which would >charge a one farad capactor to 400 volts, which is too high, and would >prematurely quench the discharge. And a one farad 400 volt capacitor would be >quite, quite big. The Takahashi supercapacitors would be interesting, but I >know of no commercial source, nor whether they could absorb that much charge >quickly. Note that in the Correa test circuit, even the charge pack batteries >are bypassed by large capacitors to absorb the very large instantaeous >current peaks. > >Mike Carrell > Dont think so. Q = CV E = 1/2 C V^2 and 400 Joules is energy. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 06:03:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA00120; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 05:54:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 05:54:09 -0800 Date: 27 Jan 97 08:53:39 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Flow sensors Message-ID: <970127135339_72240.1256_EHB86-3 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"QHYG1.0.i1.0EBxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3626 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I think that you must have a flow sensor for mass-flow calorimetry, unless you are willing to settle for plus/minus 10% accuracy. Gene and I found surprising large variations in the flow in our Takahashi replication. I think the primary cause was hot water. It makes the pipes expand, increasing the flow. Maybe hot water is a better lubricant? You can hear and see the flow change in my kitchen tap as the water heats up. Gene found that the ones with impellers can get clogged up with sand or debris from the circulating water. Dennis Cravens has a nifty flowmeter, with no moving parts. It works by channeling the water down a tube a few centimeters long. Periodically, the machine heats the water in a quick pulse, at a spot near the inlet. The mass of warmer water travels down the tube where it is detected near the outlet. Flow is computed from the travel time, the cross section of the tube . . . and pressure, I guess. Manual measurments of the flow show it is remarkably accurate. Precision on the digital display is better than a milliliter per minute. Dennis says the gadget cost mucho money. I don't recall the make or model; ask him directly if you are interested. You must always check the performance of a flowmeter by manually measuring the flow. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 06:37:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA05803; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:45 -0800 Message-ID: <32ECBC00.223C interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:30:24 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Correa PAGD energy device References: <970127004752_1826205631 emout08.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5KlVA.0.ZQ1.XiBxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3627 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: RMCarrell aol.com wrote: (snip) > the reactor delivered over 400 joules, which would > charge a one farad capactor to 400 volts Mike, a one farad capacitor at 400 volts would contain 80,000 joules of energy. I have about o.96 farads of electrolytic capacitance - rated at 350 volts - in my cap. discharge rig. (400 joules would charge a one farad capacitor to about 28.3 volts) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 08:15:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA02071; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:02:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:02:28 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:06:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"jtGvn2.0.DV.I6Dxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3628 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Norman replied to Edwin: >My 2 pennorth FWIW. > >Even if you do manage to get a constant volumetric flow you still have the >problem of correcting for temp. changes to get the mass flow measurement. I >would go for direct weighing and timing of the flow.... Density change with temperature is only a percent or two for water solutions at the temperatures in question. And even they can be ovbercome by running your flow around a few loops outside the cell to cool the lolution before you let it fill your calibrated volume. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 08:33:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA07229; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:19:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:19:47 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:24:16 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flow sensors Resent-Message-ID: <"2sn_81.0.sm1.XMDxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3629 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >>The peristaltic is not strictly constant-flow as it relies upon the rebound >>of the elastomer tubing for its suction. However, the better elastomers >>(i.e. Norprene) give very satisfactory flow constancy. My experience with a peristaltic pump is that its flow was very steady over periods up to about 1 week. Eventually the rate began to vary. I think that the elastomer wall changes (weakens), because if left running long enough, it would finally split and leak. So I think that a peristaltic pump is good for experimental runs up to about 1 week, especially if you sample the flow rate occasionally. However, note that the jperistaltic pump requires considerable torque to turn it, and the torque requirement varies as the rotor "takes on' and releases a section of tube. It takes a hefty geared motor. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 15:24:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA09397; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:10:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:10:35 -0800 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:13:06 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970127181115.2d2724e2 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"aGYK91.0.fI2.ZNJxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3630 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:34 AM 1/21/97 GMT, Robin wrote: >On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:43:32 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >[snip] >> There has been switch from magnetostatic to electrostatics. >> In the electrostatic regime, this does not involve resonance. >> Although some may speak of "resonance" with high voltage DC electrode >>systems and water, FYI dielectric techniques use RELAXATION and not RESONANCE. >>The absorption curves are totally different, as are the effects. >[snip] >There may be a connection nevertheless. If the plates act as a capacitor, >then they could convert some of the feed signal into sonic vibrations in >the water. These vibrations could in turn couple to the afore mentioned >magnetic resonance (or not ?). > >Regards, >Robin van Spaandonk > > There may be a connection. You might also include speed voltage in your terms if you are including sonic effects. Mitchell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 17:11:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA25900; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:07:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:07:07 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970128001056.0066b69c sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:10:56 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Subject: Re: The mystery of vortex-I Resent-Message-ID: <"_OqhT1.0.cK6.fCKxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3631 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>I frequently get answers to other people's questions before they are asked, but I never get answers to my own questions before they are asked. Why is that?<< The reason is that you post your messages too quickly. Try waiting an extra day and see if that makes a difference. Best regards, Elliot PS. I was going to post this message yesterday, but didn't get around to it. Sorry. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 17:13:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA28689; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:20:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:20:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:21:44 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: The mystery of vortex-I In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970128001056.0066b69c sparc1> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9Cqpa2.0.607.7PKxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3632 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There was a young lady named Bright Who travelled much faster than light She left here one day In a relative way And returned the previous night On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Elliot Kennel wrote: > >>I frequently get answers to other people's questions before they are asked, > but I never get answers to my own questions before they are asked. > Why is that?<< > > The reason is that you post your messages too quickly. Try waiting > an extra day and see if that makes a difference. > > Best regards, > Elliot > > PS. I was going to post this message yesterday, but didn't get around to > it. Sorry. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 21:56:27 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA26413; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:44:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:44:54 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:48:15 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32f178e7.15625652 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <2.2.16.19970127181115.2d2724e2 world.std.com> In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19970127181115.2d2724e2 world.std.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"00oqP1.0.bS6.G9Pxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3633 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:13:06 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: [snip] > There may be a connection. You might also include speed voltage in your >terms if you are including sonic effects. [snip] What is speed voltage? Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 22:27:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA00631; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:16:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:16:45 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970127222120.009c548c mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:21:21 -0800 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Epitaxy Subject: AIDS virus is electrosensitive Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"R7M0w3.0.g9.9dPxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3634 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This has nothing to do with FE, but is interesting enough to be posted here. I've just seen a program on public TV channel (KBTC) about the AIDS virus being sensitive to electric current. They showed electron microscope photographs of the virus subjected to 1 hour of 2 uA at 30 V. (in nylon tube apx. 3mm ID, 100mm long). The protein envelope distortion was quite apparent. (in comparison with a control sample) The narrator claimed that exposure to electric current and subsequent distortion of the virus' envelope makes the virus more susceptible to the human immune system. This electrosensitivity was apparently noticed after some hospital patients using TENS units for muscle rehabilitation tested negative for HIV after previous positive test. If this is true this method probably could be applied in vivo without discomfort to the patient considering the low current necessary for the virus's protein enveloped distortion. The best path for the current flow is through major blood vessels in legs or arms encompassing the largest blood volume (ie. from ankle to ankle). One would have to reverse the polarity of the current once in a while to prevent skin irritation caused by electrolysis. I remember reading somewhere that telephone repairmen are a group of people that are the most often subjected to low level electrical shock. Maybe somebody should do a statistical study to see if their HIV infection/remission rate is lower/higher. I bet no pharmacological company will sponsor such study :-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jan 27 22:53:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA06966; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:42:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:42:49 -0800 X-Sender: josephnewman earthlink.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:47:27 -0600 To: newman-l emachine.com (Newman-l) From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: BULLETIN.......... Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, neotech@xbn.shore.net Resent-Message-ID: <"JSub_.0.ii1.b_Pxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3635 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BULLETIN.......... Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will be featured on the Roger Fredinburg Show at 8:00PM (Pacific Time) this Thursday, January 30, 1997. The Roger Fredinburg Show will be carried Coast-to-Coast on 170 radio stations on the TALK RADIO NETWORK (AM). This is the same network which carries the Art Bell Show. Please consult your local radio stations in case (re)broadcast times may vary from city to city. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 01:17:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA31621; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:05:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:05:11 -0800 Date: 28 Jan 97 04:05:58 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Flow sensors Message-ID: <970128090558_100060.173_JHB108-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"eBpRv1.0.-j7.65Sxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3636 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> You must always check the performance of a flowmeter by manually measuring the flow. - Jed << I'm all for keeping things simple if at all possible. There is a difference between a flow SENSOR and a flow METER. If you are concerned that there might be some blockage in the fluid circuit then a flow SENSOR is all you need for that (like a simple propeller). If you need to measure the average rate of mass flow of the fluid then it is cheaper, simpler and more accurate to time and weigh directly at intervals. As Jed says, you've still got to calibrate and check whatever flowmeter you install at regular intervals and at different temperatures and pressures. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 03:56:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA18370; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 03:27:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 03:27:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 11:31:02 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Can europe receive U.S. A.M. radio? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vke-v1.0.yU4.aAUxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3637 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subscribers, I know of Voice of America, forgotten the frequency. What other stations do you have that cross the Atlantic? Do the conditions have to be particularly perverse? I saw someone's bulletin about an inventor on U.S. talk radio net, sounds interesting. Thanks. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 05:16:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA29146; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:06:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:06:08 -0800 From: RMCarrell aol.com Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:09:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970128080903_1245706637 emout03.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Correa PAGD energy device, mea culpa Resent-Message-ID: <"9OlD82.0.G77._cVxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3638 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I had the right idea, but lousy math, and Mitchell Swartz and Frank Stenger both pounced to straighten me out, for which I thank both. Mitchell said, --------------------- << Dont think so. Q = CV E = 1/2 C V^2 and 400 Joules is energy. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) >> ----------------------------------- It did help, Mitchell, thank you. And Frank said, --------------------------------------- the reactor delivered over 400 joules, which would > charge a one farad capactor to 400 volts Mike, a one farad capacitor at 400 volts would contain 80,000 joules of energy. I have about o.96 farads of electrolytic capacitance - rated at 350 volts - in my cap. discharge rig. (400 joules would charge a one farad capacitor to about 28.3 volts) Frank Stenger ------------------------------------------------ I had thought about using capacitors instead of the batteries to absorb the energy pulses, and discussed the approach with Correa. He said that he had tried capacitors of various types and encountered the problem that the bulk and cost of sufficiently large capacitors made batteries the better choice for the work he was doing. Particularly in the self-sustaining mode, it is necessary to capture energy into a voltage sink and then reconfigure that sink to provide the voltage necessary to condition the reactor for the next pulse. In principle, this can be done by reconnecting capacitors with relays, but it is a bit messy, and does not lead cleanly to a marketable system. Since not all pulses contain the same energy, nor do they occur with precise timing, the design of a suitable energy sink is not a trivial exercise. In my conversations and correspondence with Correa, it is clear that he is well aware of the diffculties and had already explored the various paths I could suggest, and had come again to batteries as the most practical solution for the purposes at hand. My own view is From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 05:17:01 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA29175; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:06:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:06:21 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:59:18 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <32edf82a.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Can europe receive U.S. A.M. radio? Resent-Message-ID: <"pRGdo1.0.m77.BdVxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3639 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997 03:27:33 -0800, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: > I know of Voice of America, forgotten the frequency. What other stations Remi, You can find this info at: http://www.voa.gov Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania Home: 064-174976 E-mail: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro , peterg@oc1.itim-cj.ro From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 05:33:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA31276; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:22:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:22:45 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:25:56 -0500 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970128082405.107f5642 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: water resonance Resent-Message-ID: <"-8gPW2.0.be7.ZsVxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3640 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:48 AM 1/28/97 GMT, you wrote: >On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:13:06 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >[snip] >> There may be a connection. You might also include speed voltage in your >>terms if you are including sonic effects. >[snip] >What is speed voltage? > > >Robin van Spaandonk >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* >Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on >temperature. >"....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > Q = CV [coulombs,farads,volts respectively] I = d/dt(Q) = d/dt(CV) = C dV/dt + V dC/dt Speed voltage is the second term, often neglected, that results from the chain rule of calculus in the derivation of current. Since sonic waves, and other effects could make C = C(t) then speed voltage should be considered. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 05:52:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA02602; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:41:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:41:45 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:44:29 -0800 Message-Id: <199701281344.FAA07576 dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: Can europe receive U.S. A.M. radio? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Resent-Message-ID: <"4nIac2.0.We.M8Wxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3641 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: January 27, 1997 You wrote: > >What other stations do you have that cross the Atlantic? Do the >conditions have to be particularly perverse? VOA is usually on short -wave frequencies that relies on ionosphere bounce to propagate the wave long distances. Also turn your question around: How many european stations do you pick up on the AM band where you are located? The same conditions that work for american AM works for european AM. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 06:28:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA10655; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:15:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:15:53 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:19:07 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701281419.IAA21425 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: speed voltage Resent-Message-ID: <"kx_IR1.0.Pc2.NeWxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3643 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:25 1/28/97 -0500, Mitchell wrote: > I = d/dt(Q) = d/dt(CV) = C dV/dt + V dC/dt > Speed voltage is the second term, often neglected, >that results from the chain rule of calculus in the derivation >of current. Also, for the record, "speed voltage" is a common term in motor/generator engineering and it refers to the voltage induced across a conductor when it moves through a magnetic field: V = vlB where V = voltage, v=speed, l=length, and B=magnetic flux density (assuming v, l and B mutually orthogonal). Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 06:31:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA10073; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:13:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:13:47 -0800 Message-ID: <32EE0A79.39A0 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 09:17:29 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: ATOM LASER Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"jGlAQ2.0.AT2.PcWxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3642 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My son called me last night and mentioned that he had seen a news report about an "atom laser"! Sounds like a device to generate a particle beam rather than a photon beam. Anyone know what's up? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 07:10:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA20994; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:58:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:58:36 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701280857.ZM18928 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:57:07 -0600 In-Reply-To: "Francis J. Stenger" "ATOM LASER" (Jan 28, 8:15am) References: <32EE0A79.39A0 interlaced.net> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ATOM LASER Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"1Pbte.0.s75.PGXxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3644 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Jan 28, 8:15am, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > Subject: ATOM LASER > My son called me last night and mentioned that he had seen a news > report about an "atom laser"! Sounds like a device to generate a > particle beam rather than a photon beam. Anyone know what's up? > > Frank Stenger > >-- End of excerpt from Francis J. Stenger UPI Science News WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 (UPI) -- The world's first atom laser which shoots highly controlled particles of matter rather than light has been built at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, physicists reported Monday. Experts suggest the achievement may lead to more precise navigation equipment and machine tools as well as smaller, more efficient computer chips. The Cambridge, Mass.-based researchers published their findings in the current issue of Physical Review Letters and in Thursday's issue of the journal Science. Wolfgang Ketterle, senior researcher on the project, described the discovery as ``exceeding all expectations.'' The laser is based on predictions made 70 years ago by Albert Einstein and Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose, but no one was sure such a device could ever be made. The more familiar photon laser, which shoots particles of light, was discovered in 1960. Thirty-five years later, its presence is nearly ubiquitous in grocery scanners, CD players, communications, etching machines, cosmetic surgery, and other applications. In contrast, the new laser shoots atoms. Both kinds of lasers, however, line up the particles into what Ketterle calls ``one coherent dance.'' They are synchronized in wavelength and phase rather than randomly flitting around The atom laser uses ultracold particles of sodium. At temperatures more than a million times colder than outer space, atoms lose their individuality and begin acting as one. This new state of matter, called Bose-Einstein concentrate or BEC, was first reported in July 1995 by physicists at the National Institute for Standards and Technology and the Unversity of Colorado. ``I don't think any of us thought this (atom laser) would happen, if ever, for at least several years,'' said Randall Hulet of Rice University in Houston. ``It's a really incredible demonstration.'' Atoms in BEC state require a magnetic trap inside a vacuum chamber to isolate them from the ``scorching'' temperatures of the everyday world. The achievement of Ketterle's group was to extract sodium BEC from the magnetic trap in a controlled fashion and show that they were still coherent. Ketterle's graduate student, Michael Andrews, said BEC particles ``all like to be in the same state of motion, or do the same thing'' because even particles of matter share some of the wave-like behavior of light, radio waves, and other types of energy. Normally, the atoms are too far apart and their wavelengths are much too small for this characteristic to noticeably influence them. But as atoms are cooled to near -460 degrees Fahrenheit (-273 degrees Celsius) -- called absolute zero, where all motion stops -- their wavelengths eventually match the distance they are to one another. They fall into synch, and begin behaving as one entity. And when particles are coherent, they become highly predictable and controllable. What Andrews describes as ``the ultimate control of matter'' will help physicists better isolate and understand the influences that atoms experience. ``Atomic clocks are essential for state-of-the-art navigation systems,'' Andrews said. Global-positioning satellites use these highly precise timekeepers to pinpoint locations, for example. Ever finer calibrations will reduce margins of error. William Phillips of NIST in Gaithersburg, Md., said he currently sees the best opportunity in nanotechnology. The tiny wavelength of the atom laser may ``do better writing on permanent structures such as computer chips,'' he said, packing in more memory or functions on chips of current technology. Even nanomachines -- molecular structures with moving parts -- may cross the threshold from science fiction to reality. ``I don't know how realistic that is, but we're now at the stage where we can find out,'' Phillips said. ``No one knew what a photon laser was good for in 1960 either.'' Copyright 1997 by United Press International. -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 07:35:57 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA27681; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:24:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:24:27 -0800 Message-ID: <32EE1AFA.6ED1 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 10:27:54 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Remi Cornwall CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ATOM LASER References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kbPwT3.0.Qm6.feXxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3645 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Remi Cornwall wrote: > > Francis, > > Yes there is such a thing. LASERs produce coherent radiation, same > reasoning applies to matter behaving as de Broglie waves (wave particle > duality). If you can do a search, try last year's back issues of > Scientific American or the British pub. New Scientist - I can't remember > issues and even then they were journalistic reports not features. If I > have time I might search for you to give you an issue. > > The main application is for the micro-electronics industry where it would > lead to higher performance circuitry from smaller device geometry and > more ideal performance. Other applications escape me right now. > > Remi. Thank's, Remi! Looks like the device he had in mind - did'nt realize it was old news. Any fusion ideas associated with the device? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 07:56:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA01208; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:45:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:45:17 -0800 Message-Id: <199701281545.HAA01182 mx1.eskimo.com> Date: 28 Jan 1997 10:07 EST Sender: "Gene Batten" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Gene Batten" Subject: George Wiseman ??? Resent-Message-ID: <"oM1ob.0.oI.ByXxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3646 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Does anybody on this list know what is going on with George Wiseman? Early in December I ordered some publications from him and I have not received a reply yet. I even sent a follow up letter in early January and still no reply. Back in the summer, I orderd some publications and the order was filled promptly. I hope things are well with George and he is not sick or something. Thanks for any updates. Gene Batten mdleb nortel.ca From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 08:07:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA03546; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:55:28 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 07:55:28 -0800 Message-Id: <199701281558.KAA01115 mail.enter.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robert G. Flower" Organization: Applied Science Associates To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:04:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: ATOM LASER Reply-to: chronos enter.net Priority: normal In-reply-to: <9701280857.ZM18928 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> References: "Francis J. Stenger" "ATOM LASER" (Jan 28, 8:15am) X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.52) Resent-Message-ID: <"PBXaF2.0.zs.h5Yxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3647 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is the original AIP press release, with some journal references. The fine print, reveals some very serious technical limitations to this so-called "dramatic improvement" -- which the United Press dispatch didn't mention. - ------- Begin forwarded message ------- >For more information, including a copy >of a related Physical Review Letters paper, >please contact Ben Stein (301-209-3091; bstein aip.acp.org) >or Phillip Schewe (301-209-3092; pschewe aip.acp.org) >at the American Institute of Physics. > > >PHYSICS NEWS PREVIEW > >***RUDIMENTARY ATOM LASER CREATED AT MIT*** > >--PHYSICISTS AT MIT HAVE BUILT AN ELEMENTARY VERSION OF A >LASER THAT YIELDS BEAMS OF ATOMS RATHER THAN BEAMS OF >LIGHT. >--THE MIT RESEARCHERS HAVE VERIFIED THAT THEIR ATOM BEAM >HAS AN IMPORTANT PROPERTY KNOWN AS "COHERENCE," WHICH IS A >KEY ATTRIBUTE OF OPTICAL LASER BEAMS. >--IN ADDITION TO PROMISING DRAMATIC IMPROVEMENTS IN PRECISION >MEASUREMENTS AT THE QUANTUM LEVEL, THE "ATOM LASER" IS >LIKELY TO LEAD TO SIGNIFICANT ADVANCES IN NANOTECHNOLOGY, >THE FABRICATION OF STRUCTURES AND MACHINES AT THE >SINGLE-ATOM SCALE. > >College Park, Maryland---January 23, 1997--No one could have foreseen >all of the laser's applications when the first working model was >built in 1960, but it went on to revolutionize telecommunications, >medicine, information storage, and many other areas of science and >technology. Get ready for a new revolution. Physicists at MIT have >created a rudimentary version of an *atom laser,* a device that does >for matter what ordinary lasers do for light. In a pair of upcoming >papers, the MIT researchers describe their device and verify a key >property, known as coherence, essential to demonstrating that they >have a bonafide atom-laser beam. In addition to dramatically >improving measurements with atoms, the atom laser may lead to major >innovations in nanotechnology, the manipulation of matter at the >atomic level. > >ORDINARY LASERS > An ordinary laser produces an extremely special form of light >vastly different from that which emerges from a light bulb or even >the Sun. Unlike all other light sources, the laser creates photons >(particles of light) that are in exactly the same quantum state. >Laser light is also coherent, meaning that its wavefront varies >predictably in time and space. Light from a lightbulb, in contrast, >is incoherent: later wavefronts have no predictable relationship to >earlier ones. In most conventional laser designs, light builds up >inside the laser by reflecting many times from mirrors at either end >of the laser. Extracting the light is possible because one of the >mirrors is only partially silvered and lets some of the light escape >to produce an output beam. The beam travels in a single, well-defined >direction, unlike sunlight or lamplight, which shines in all >directions. This combination of unique properties makes a laser beam >more intense than an equivalent stream of light emanating from the >Sun. > >THE MAIN INGREDIENT FOR AN ATOM LASER >Since 1995, scientists have been making the main ingredient for an >atom laser: a Bose-Einstein condensate, a collection of gas atoms >with temperatures just billionths of a degree above absolute zero, >colder than anything observed before. In the 1920s, Albert Einstein >and the Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose showed that when a >sufficiently densely packed group of particles becomes very cold they >would, under certain conditions, collectively enter a single quantum >state and act as a single, coherent wave, central requirements for a >laserlike beam of atoms. Although previous experiments provided clear >evidence for the formation of a Bose-Einstein condensate, they could >not directly verify that the condensate formed a single coherent >wave. In addition, they were unable to extract a beam of atoms from >the Bose-Einstein condensate, which exists as a fragile clump of >atoms trapped by magnetic fields. In a paper to be published in the >27 January issue of Physical Review Letters, Wolfgang Ketterle and >his colleagues at MIT have created an "output coupler" which allows >them to pluck a controlled fraction of atoms from a BEC of sodium >atoms to produce a beam that falls in the direction of gravity. >Meanwhile, in a paper to appear in the 31 January issue of Science, >the same group demonstrates that the beam has coherence properties >analogous to those of a laser light beam. Demonstrating coherence was >"the most important step," says Ketterle, "to show that a Bose >condensate with an output coupler acts as an atom laser." > >PROPERTIES OF THE MIT DEVICE >The MIT device delivers coherent bursts of atoms that form a single >quantum state--a feat never even remotely approached in previous >atomic beams. Whereas the atoms in conventional beams are >distributed over a wide range of quantum states, those in an atom >laser occupy a single state. And whereas most atom beams can only be >considered as a collection of particles, the MIT atom beam can act as >a single "matter wave" which can be manipulated and controlled in >important ways just like light waves from a laser. Indeed, these >matter waves can be split up into wavelets and recombined to display >interference patterns which provide highly precise information on the >atoms. Like an optical laser, the MIT atom beam is bright, in the >special sense that it delivers a powerful, directional stream of >atoms in a single quantum state, rather than a beam of atoms that are >dispersed over many different quantum states. > >CREATING A BEAM OF ATOMS >In the upcoming Physical Review Letters paper, Ketterle and his >colleagues describe their *output coupler," which allows them to >extract a controlled fraction of atoms from a Bose-Einstein >condensate of sodium atoms. The researchers extract atoms by >applying radiofrequency (rf) radiation to the BEC, which is held in a >magnetic trap. > (A figure showing how the output coupler works will be available at >http://www.aip.org/physnews/special.htm) Each of the atoms acts as a >tiny magnet in the presence of the trap's magnetic fields. The atom >possesses a property known as *spin*; the value of spin describes how >it will respond to an external magnetic field. Initially, the atoms >all have the same spin value, corresponding to a state in which they >are all pushed towards the center of the trap. But the rf radiation, >which contains magnetic fields of its own, will make some of the >atoms *flip* their spin. This reverses the magnetic forces on them, >and these atoms are expelled from the trap, forming a beam that falls >in the direction of gravity. > >DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AN ATOM LASER AND AN OPTICAL LASER >MIT's Wolfgang Ketterle explains some of the differences between a >laser producing beams of atoms and a laser producing beams of >photons. "Photons can be created, but not atoms," he says. "The >number of atoms in an atom laser is not amplified. What is amplified >is the number of atoms in the lowest-energy quantum state, while the >number of atoms in other states decreases." In addition, he says, >"Atoms interact with each other--this creates additional spreading of >the atom-laser beam. Unlike light, an atom-laser beam cannot travel >far through air." Unlike photons, which are massless, "atoms have >mass," Ketterle points out. "They are therefore accelerated by >gravity. An atom-laser beam will fall like a beam of ordinary >atoms." > >EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE ATOM LASER >The foundation of the atom laser rests on an astonishing discovery >that French physicist Louis de Broglie (1892-1987) made as a Ph.D. >student. We usually think of atoms as solid objects having definite >locations in space. But in his 1923 Ph.D. thesis, de Broglie >hypothesized that atoms--and all matter in general--can also act as >waves that spread out in space and combine with other waves to >produce interference patterns and exhibit other wavelike phenomena. >De Broglie introduced a famous formula which states that the >wavelength of a particle is inversely proportional to the product of >its mass and its speed. De Broglie's equation and the wavelike >nature of matter have been confirmed in countless physics experiments >that have followed. > In the 1950s, Charles Townes of Columbia University and > Arthur >Schawlow, then at Bell Laboratories, build the first maser, a laser >for microwave light. The maser was the precursor to the optical >laser. Theodore Maiman of Hughes Aircraft Corporation created the >first working optical laser in 1960. At the time of its invention, >most physicists could not foresee any practical applications for the >laser. Yet, optical lasers now make up a multibillion dollar >industry, having profoundly changed telecommunications, data storage, >and numerous areas of medicine and surgery. > In July, 1995, Eric Cornell, Carl Wieman, and their coworkers > at >the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the University >of Colorado created the first Bose-Einstein condensate in a dilute >gas of atoms. Shortly thereafter, Randall Hulet and his coworkers at >Rice University, and Wolfgang Ketterle and his colleagues at MIT >produced Bose-Einstein condensates of their own. In the present >work, Ketterle and his colleagues have created a technique for >extracting a beam of atoms from the Bose-Einstein condensate and for >verifying that their beam has properties directly analogous to an >optical laser beam. > >COHERENT ATOM WAVES > Ketterle and his colleagues have shown that their atom beam >possesses important wavelike properties. The atoms in the beam are >so cold that the ordinarily miniscule wavelengths associated with >atoms increase to the point at which their wavelike properties become >potentially detectable. A true atom-laser beam would by definition >be "coherent"--the individual waves of the atoms would combine in a >consistent, predictable fashion to form a single intense wave. An >atom wave is a quantum-mechanical wave which can never be observed >directly, but only when it combines or interferes with similar >quantum-mechanical waves to produce a pattern of light and dark >fringes. When two atom waves interfere, an atom making up one wave >can cancel out an atom from the other wave. "When matter waves >interfere destructively," explains Ketterle, "it is as if one atom >plus one atom gives zero atoms. Of course, the matter is not >destroyed, and appears elsewhere. Nevertheless, the interference of >streams of atoms from separate sources is a dramatic phenomenon." > >BOSE-EINSTEIN CONDENSATES ARE COHERENT >In their upcoming Science paper, the MIT researchers showed that the >Bose-Einstein condensate--from which their atom beam is extracted--is >coherent, something that has never demonstrated before. The >researchers observed coherence by creating two Bose condensates in a >special trap which uses magnetic and optical forces and has two >separate pockets. When the trap is switched off, the two condensates >fell down, expanded, and finally overlapped. The overlapping produced >an interference pattern of light and dark fringes--like a pattern of >a zebra stripes--which was detected with an electronic camera. >Such a high-contrast pattern is possible only if the atoms in each >condensate formed intense single waves--with the overall atom wave of >one condensate interfering with the atom wave of the other condensate >to produce a fringe pattern. The MIT team determined that the atom >wave associated with each Bose-Einstein condensate had a wavelength >of 30 microns, a million times larger than the wavelengths associated >with room-temperature atoms. > The MIT scientists report that they have also demonstrated >coherence in the beams of atoms that are produced by their output >coupler. The researchers again create two independent Bose-Einstein >condensates, then produce a beam of atoms from each condensate. The >two beams fall down, expand and create interference patterns recorded >by a camera. > >FUTURE DESIGNS OF ATOM LASERS >Work on the atom laser has just begun. Ketterle and his colleagues >are already thinking of improvements to their device. For instance, >the atom laser currently only produces a beam that falls in the >direction of gravity. Future steps are to make the atom beam travel >in other directions by combining the output coupler with "atom >mirrors" that use optical or magnetic forces to direct the atom. In >addition, the MIT atom beam diffracts, or spreads out, somewhat as it >emerges from the trap; upcoming designs may reduce such diffraction >effects. Finally, the current design produces only bursts of atoms; >future designs may produce continuous beams. > >SOME ANTICIPATED APPLICATIONS >Just as the laser has greatly improved optical experiments, the atom >laser promises to increase the precision of many atomic beam >experiments. For instance, it may be possible to improve >dramatically the already impressive precision of atomic clocks. It >may enable more powerful tabletop tests aiming to determine the >relationships between the fundamental forces in nature. It is likely >to increase the precision in measurements of fundamental physical >constants. In particular, it promises to improve the technique known >as atom interferometry in which an atom from a conventional beam is >split into wavelets and recombined to form interference patterns >which provide precise information about the atom. Using atoms from >atom-laser beams will greatly improve the technique, which is already >rivaling conventional optical interferometers for measuring Earth's >rotation and testing relativity. > >NANOTECHNOLOGY >Finally, the atom laser holds exciting possibilities for >nanotechnology, the manipulation of matter at the atomic level. >With an atom laser beam, it would be possible to deposit atoms onto >surfaces with unprecedented precision, potentially allowing >scientists to create more sophisticated nanostructures than ever >before. Ketterle points out, however, that these first atom lasers >will only be able to make nanostructures at a very slow rate. >According to Ketterle, the fluxes of atoms emerging from an atom >laser are currently too small to lead to a practical nanofabrication >scheme in which nanostructures could be mass produced. And he notes >that the atom laser must operate in extreme vacuum conditions, unlike >ordinary lasers whose light can be used in all types of environments. > Nonetheless, the atom laser has the potential to become a tool with >unexpected and widespread consequences. > ># # # >For graphical illustrations associated with this work, figures will >be available starting on Friday, January 24 at the following private >Web site: http://www.aip.org/physnews/special.htm > >List of Experts >Wolfgang Ketterle, MIT--617-253-6815; wolfgang amo.mit.edu >Michael Andrews, MIT--617-253-2518 >Eric Cornell, NIST--303-492-6281 >Carl Wieman, NIST--303-492-6963 >Dan Kleppner, MIT--617-253-6811 >David Pritchard, MIT--617-253-6812 >Randall Hulet, Rice University--713-527-6087 >William Phillips, NIST--301-975-6554 >Keith Burnett, Oxford University--011-44-865-272377 >Robert Ballagh, Otago University, New Zealand--011-64-03-4797793, >ballagh maxwell.otago.ac.nz > >SPECIAL NOTE: Wolfgang Ketterle is currently out of the country, but >will return to his office on Monday, January 27. > >Journal Articles: >M.-O. Mewes, M.R. Andrews, D.M. Kurn, D.S. Durfee, C.G. Townsend, >and W. Ketterle, "An Output Coupler for Bose Condensed Atoms," >Physical Review Letters 78, 582, 27 January 1997. M.R. Andrews, >C.G. Townsend, H.-J. Miesner, D.S. Durfee, D.M. Kurn, and W. >Ketterle, "Observation of Interference between two Bose Condensates," >Science, 31 January 1997. Earlier articles of interest: M. R. >Andrews, M.-O. Mewes, N. J. van Druten, D. S. Durfee, D. M. Kurn, W. >Ketterle, Science, "Direct, Nondestructive Observation of a Bose >Condensate," Science 273, 84, 5 July 1996 M.H. Anderson, J.R. Ensher, >M.R. Matthews, C.E. Wieman, and E.A. Cornell, "Observation of >Bose-Einstein Condensation in a Dilute Atomic Vapor," Science 269, >198 (1995). > >Magazine articles > >Some Previous Accounts of MIT Group's Work >New Scientist, 1 June 1996 >Physics Today, March 1996, August 1996 >Physics World, October 1996 >Science, 3 November 1995; 14 June 1996 >Science News, 25 May 1996 > > >Previous News Articles on Bose-Einstein Condensation >Physics Today, August 1995 >Physics World, August 1995 >Scientific American, August 1995 >Science, 8 July 1994, 14 July 1995 > - ------- End of forwarded message ------- Best regards, Bob Flower ======================================================= Robert G. Flower, Applied Science Associates Quality Control Engineering Instrumentation Systems - Technology Transfer ======================================================= From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 10:49:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA10346; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 10:35:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 10:35:57 -0800 Message-ID: <32EE47E7.7C38 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:39:35 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: ATOM LASER scoop - Thanks! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JxJyy3.0.WX2.BSaxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3648 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My thanks to Remi, John Steck, Robert Flower and other gracious vortexians for the informative answers to my query on ATOM LASERS! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 11:58:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24273; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 11:39:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 11:39:23 -0800 Message-Id: <199701281928.MAA19065 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" , "Non-Moderated WhiteGold" , "Joe Thomas" , "Jon Horton" , "John O'M Bockris" , "David Econopouly" , "Alan Loiben" , "Anthony Joe Champion" , "\"Alchemy discussion group\" <" Subject: New Element Discovered!!!! Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 12:42:22 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qvsYn2.0.9x5.eNbxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3649 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The following information even though it does not relate to low energy nuclear transmutation, I thought that it may be general interest. It was received from cyberspace and into cyberspace it returns. New Element Discovered!!!! ELEMENT: Woman SYMBOL: WO DISCOVERER: Adam ATOMIC MASS: Accepted as 110 pounds but known to vary from 100 to 550 pounds OCCURRENCE: Copious quantities in all urban areas PHYSICAL PROPERTIES: 1) Surface usually covered with painted film 2) Boils at nothing, freezes without reason 3) Melts if given special treatment 4) Bitter if incorrectly used 5) Found in various states ranging from virgin to common ore 6) Yields to pressure applied to correct points CHEMICAL PROPERTIES: 1) Has a great affinity for Gold, Silver, Platinum and precious stones 2) Absorbs great quantities of expensive substances 3) May explode without warning and no known reason 4) Insoluble in liquids, but activity greatly increased by saturation in alcohol. 5) Most powerful money reducing agent known to man COMMON USES: 1) Highly ornamental, especially in sports cars 2) Can be a great aid in relaxation TEST 1) Pure specimen turns rosy pink when discovered in natural state 2) Turns green when placed beside a better specimen HAZARDS: 1) Highly dangerous except in experienced hands 2) Illegal to possess more than one. ___________________________ Joe Champion JChampion transmutation.com http://www.transmutation.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 14:08:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA13299; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:55:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:55:34 -0800 Date: 28 Jan 97 16:55:23 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Bacon on skeptics Message-ID: <970128215523_72240.1256_EHB130-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"3IYHo.0.hF3.JNdxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3651 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I just finished scanning a book by Francis Bacon, Novum Organum (1620), which is chock full of wonderful thoughts on science. Here is one of my favorites: The school of Plato introduced skepticism, first, as it were, in joke and irony, from their dislike to Protagoras, Hippias, and others, who were ashamed of appearing not to doubt upon any subject. But the new academy dogmatized in their skepticism, and held it as their tenet. Although this method be more honest than arbitrary decision . . . yet, when the human mind has once despaired of discovering truth, every thing begins to languish. Hence men turn aside into pleasant controversies and discussions, and into a sort of wandering over subjects, rather than sustain any rigorous investigation. But, as we observed at first, we are not to deny the authority of the human senses and understanding, although weak; but rather to furnish them with assistance. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 14:13:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA12297; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:50:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:50:00 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:46:39 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199701282146.NAA07383 axionet.com> X-Sender: jmanning axionet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: jeane manning Subject: Re: George Wiseman ??? Resent-Message-ID: <"JW7HB.0.303.6Idxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3650 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:07 AM 1/28/97 EST, you wrote: >Does anybody on this list know what is going on with George Wiseman? > George Wiseman has been funded to work on Brown's-Gas-type experiments and reports a breakthrough in that -- a more efficient process for powering an engine. He says he has nearly completed the Brown's Gas manual he's currently writing, so maybe that's why he hasn't replied yet. Email him at wiseeagle cyberlink.bc.ca. Jeane Manning From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 14:30:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA17388; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:17 -0800 Message-Id: <199701282201.PAA04714 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Request from Mark Hugo Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:15:33 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A128t2.0.WF4._cdxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3652 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Hugo, Mark D > To: Joe Champion > Subject: RE: New Site -- http://www.transmutation.com > Date: Tuesday, January 28, 1997 1:28 PM > Could you post an inquiry for me? (I don't have a direct link yet to > Vortex, long story that...I do receive all the postings however.) I've > been searching the internet for > some time and cannot find a supplier of Lithium Metal Hydride storage > batteries. Although I understand they ARE available. I want to aquire > some. Thanks! MDH > ---------- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 14:50:40 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA20026; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:24:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:24:21 -0800 Message-ID: <32EE7C98.3001 advertronix.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:24:24 -0800 From: Carl Leonard Reply-To: carl advertronix.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Request from Mark Hugo Lithium batteries References: <199701282201.PAA04714 nz1.netzone.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FjQ4Y2.0.pu4.Jodxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3653 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Joe Champion wrote: > > ---------- > > From: Hugo, Mark D > > To: Joe Champion > > Subject: RE: New Site -- http://www.transmutation.com > > Date: Tuesday, January 28, 1997 1:28 PM > > > Could you post an inquiry for me? (I don't have a direct link yet to > > Vortex, long story that...I do receive all the postings however.) I've > > been searching the internet for > > some time and cannot find a supplier of Lithium Metal Hydride storage > > batteries. Although I understand they ARE available. I want to aquire > > some. Thanks! MDH > > ---------- If you want primary (non-rechargeables) batteries Digikey carries them. The number is 1-800-344-4539. They have thier catalog on the net at http://www.digikey.com They actually like people who only buy in small quantities, unlike some other distributors. If you want the lithium ion rechargeables, good luck. If you can find them they will be very expensive. As far as I know the supply is way way less than demand. The big name laptop makers get them all. I think that they need special charging circuits as well. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 15:48:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA02685; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:33:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:33:17 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32EE8D7B.59E2B600 math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:36:27 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Bacon on skeptics References: <970128215523_72240.1256_EHB130-2 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XvUe91.0.df.uoexo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3654 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > [quoting bacon] > > The school of Plato introduced skepticism... men turn > aside into pleasant controversies and discussions, and into a sort of > wandering over subjects, rather than sustain any rigorous > investigation. I think what Bacon was objecting to would be what today we refer to as philosophy. Obviously modern science has as one cornerstone a form of skeptical thinking (occams razor, etc), and as another, experimentation. They coexist quite well. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 16:50:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA18660; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:33:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:33:21 -0800 Date: 28 Jan 97 19:33:43 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Bacon quote OCR error Message-ID: <970129003343_72240.1256_EHB131-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"CbWIR.0.LZ4.9hfxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3655 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The Bacon text should say "everything" (one word), not "every thing." Please correct if you plan to use the quote. Had to look at the text (1952 edition) with a magnifying glass to be sure. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 17:36:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA28305; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:09:25 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:09:25 -0800 X-Sender: josephnewman earthlink.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:14:10 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Bacon on Occum Resent-Message-ID: <"PmESm3.0.Bw6.3Dgxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3656 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >[quoting bacon] >> >> The school of Plato introduced skepticism... men turn >> aside into pleasant controversies and discussions, and into a sort of >> wandering over subjects, rather than sustain any rigorous >> investigation. > >I think what Bacon was objecting to would be what today we >refer to as philosophy. Obviously modern science has >as one cornerstone a form of skeptical thinking (occams >razor, etc), and as another, experimentation. >They coexist quite well. > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, Just a point of clarification for me -- perhaps a psychological point: In your above statement you appear to indicate an equivalence between skeptical thinking and Occum's Razor. I have believed that the essence of Occum's Razor is that if one has two competing Hypotheses (that appear to embrace the same domain) one chooses the 'simpler one' --- which does not necessarily mean "simpler to understand," but, rather, consisting of fewer unproven assertions. If I understand your equivalence correctly, then I would assume that your point is that the 'rightness' of the Hypothesis consisting of more proven (via the Scientific Method) assertions would be chosen on the basis of less 'skepticism' as opposed to the other, competing Hypothesis. I suppose I'm not exactly certain where the fine line is drawn [or indeed, if it can be drawn] between "skepticism" and "operationally prudent behavior" with respect to an realistic unwillingness to accept a Hypothesis with a greater number of unproven assertions. From a psychological perspective I would rhetorically ask, "Is this being 'prudent' or 'skeptical' --- and/or is there a difference?" Or, perhaps another way of phrasing it: is there a distinction between "skepticism" and "validity (i.e., logical thought processes)"? Hmmm..... Regards, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 19:37:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA19444; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:05:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:05:50 -0800 Date: 28 Jan 97 22:07:24 EST From: Michael Forsyth <72020.45 compuserve.com> To: Subject: AIDS virus is electrosensitive Message-ID: <970129030724_72020.45_FHH83-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"toWa_1.0.kl4.Cwhxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3657 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If I may jump in, The nature of the electronsensitivity of HIV was first demonstrated some years ago at Albert Einstein Hosp. Bob Beck (the inventor of the electronic flash)followed up on this research and has published a schematic for making your own unit or you can buy one but not from him. He has been involved in a number of clinical trials and has shown that AID's can be eliminated in about 30 to 60 days. This method can also be used to rid the body of other viruses and parasites. It is similar in some ways to Hulda Clark's 'Zapper' which can be built from RadioShack parts from the schematic in her book. It takes about an hour and cost about $10. Of course all this is not approved of by the authorities - if you have AIDS you have to eliminate it yourself but Bob will tell you how free. Tapes of Bob Becks presentations are available from Global Sciences. -- Mike -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 20:46:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA04624; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:34:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:34:10 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:37:19 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701290437.WAA14908 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Rifex kit status Resent-Message-ID: <"iE7G_3.0.281._Cjxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3658 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Our first attempt at a transmutation run with the CETI Rifex kit has been running now for 6 days. It will run for about 15-20 days, then we shut down and start careful analysis of the "reacted" beads. more later... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jan 28 21:47:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA18571; Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:31:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:31:38 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:25:42 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Rifex kit status In-Reply-To: <199701290437.WAA14908 natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"KZ5oQ2.0.2Y4.u2kxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3659 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Scott Little wrote: > Our first attempt at a transmutation run with the CETI Rifex kit has been > running now for 6 days. It will run for about 15-20 days, then we shut down > and start careful analysis of the "reacted" beads. > > more later... > > Are you looking for excess heat in this run? Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 01:31:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA27236; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:08:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:08:32 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 00:08:35 -0900 To: carl advertronix.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Request from Mark Hugo Lithium batteries Resent-Message-ID: <"18oNk2.0.Uf6.FEnxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3660 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From Mark Hugo: [snip] I've >> > been searching the internet for >> > some time and cannot find a supplier of Lithium Metal Hydride storage >> > batteries. Although I understand they ARE available. I want to aquire >> > some. Thanks! MDH >> > ---------- Suggest you check under "Get Wired" section if you are interested in the following ad which appears there: 3V's of Lithium BR-2/3A lithium batteries rated at 1200 ma/hr made for Panasonic by Matsushita Electric. Sold as a set of (2), each is 5/8" dia x 1-1/4" long with solder tabs at each end. Lithium batteries ar long-lasting with extraordinary shelf life and used for a myriad of applications. In particular: computers, pagers, pacemakers and other high tech portable instrumentation requiring dependable, long-lasting power supplies. They are inorganic and non-rechargeable. This is an incredible deal at a fraction of what non-surplus groupies would expect to pay. Power-up today! ITEM NAME: Lithium Battery PRICE: $2.00/set (2) STOCK NUMBER: 25456 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 04:08:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA15665; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 03:47:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 03:47:01 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:50:44 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32eeb529.17093827 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <2.2.16.19970128082405.107f5642 world.std.com> In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19970128082405.107f5642 world.std.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Qu8E5.0.hq3.qYpxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3661 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997 08:25:56 -0500, Mitchell Swartz wrote: [snip] > Q = CV [coulombs,farads,volts respectively] > I = d/dt(Q) = d/dt(CV) = C dV/dt + V dC/dt > Speed voltage is the second term, often neglected, >that results from the chain rule of calculus in the derivation >of current. > Since sonic waves, and other effects could make C = C(t) >then speed voltage should be considered. [snip] "I am under the impression that in the case of Meyer etc. the distance between the plates is much greater than any deviation in the plates that might be caused by vibrations. Hence the change in capacitance would likely only ever be a tiny fraction of the absolute value of the capacitance." Well that's what I was going to say :). Then it occurred to me that in a cell where electrolysis is taking place, one might well get the "electrolytic capacitor" effect. IOW most of the capacitance could exist in a very thin layer adjacent to the plates. How this layer would be affected by vibrations is not clear (well to me at any rate). So it seems that the V dc/dt term could indeed be important. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. BTW if anyone knows of any web references to studies done on this sort of setup (i.e. sound in electrolytics - other than Russ George and John Bedini), then please let me know. Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 05:57:42 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA26302; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:35:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:35:02 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:37:50 -0800 Message-Id: <199701291337.FAA21109 dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Mark Hugo: Lithium metal hydride STORAGE batteries? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"Ccejs3.0.rQ6.48rxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3662 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 29, 1997 You wrote: > >From Mark Hugo: >I've been searching the internet for some time and cannot find a --- Lithium storage batteries like large, big, heavy to handle, rechargeable batteries? Whatever it is, have you tried looking it up in the Yellow Pages, the paper internet? Call up the battery manufacturers like Ray-O=Vac, Duracell, Everready, GE-Sanyo, Panasonic, and others. Talk to battery dealers listed. Go ask the public library, they may have some trade catalogues listing available products. If it's available, you'll find it. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 06:16:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA31237; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:07:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:07:32 -0800 Message-Id: <199701291407.GAA31219 mx1.eskimo.com> Date: 29 Jan 1997 08:45 EST Sender: "Gene Batten" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Gene Batten" Subject: Re: George Wiseman ??? Resent-Message-ID: <"Ezkug2.0._d7.Ycrxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3663 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jeane, Thanks for the info. ..Gene Batten mdleb nortel.ca In message "George Wiseman ???", you write: > At 10:07 AM 1/28/97 EST, you wrote: > >Does anybody on this list know what is going on with George Wiseman? > > > George Wiseman has been funded to work on Brown's-Gas-type experiments and > reports a breakthrough in that -- a more efficient process for powering an > engine. He says he has nearly completed the Brown's Gas manual he's > currently writing, so maybe that's why he hasn't replied yet. Email him at > wiseeagle cyberlink.bc.ca. > > Jeane Manning > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 09:09:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA27548; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:40:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:40:08 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:45:04 -0600 To: newman-l emachine.com (Newman-l) From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, neotech@xbn.shore.net Resent-Message-ID: <"3PrxG2.0.Hk6.brtxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3664 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, MS 39452 (601) 947-7147 -- josephnewman earthlink.net -- (504) 524-3063 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PRESS CONFERENCE AND DEMONSTRATION IN ST. LOUIS DATE/TIME: Friday, February 7, 1997, 11:00AM PLACE: Holiday Inn Southwest (Grand Ballroom) 10709 Watson Road St. Louis, Missouri 63127 Hotel* Tel: (800) 682-6338 / (314) 821-6600 [*Attendees receive special discounted room price of $59, let hotel know you are with the "Joseph Newman Group"] Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will present a demonstration of an electromagnetic device capable of lifting from the surface of the Earth, utilizing our planet's magnetic field. Control of this lift device is also accomplished electromagnetically. Joseph Newman states that a scaled-up version of this device will be capable of safely lifting passengers/cargo into Earth's orbit electromagnetically rather than via the use of rocket technology. To the St. Louis newsmedia who have previously addressed the subject of achieving safe travel into space and especially to the creative individuals of the SPIRIT OF ST. LOUIS X-PRIZE FOUNDATION who strive to stimulate the minds of innovative individuals to develop a practical design for space travel which will also be applicable as normal transportation for the people of our nation and the world to the next frontier for humanity: I SALUTE YOU! I salute the fact that you, as members of the X-PRIZE FOUNDATION, have committed $10 million dollars to the individual who can achieve an altitude of 65 miles above the surface of the Earth via a safe, practical design intended for mass transit into outer space. I respect you for stimulating the fulfillment of practical space travel. I warmly hope that your prize becomes an investment rather than a penalty to you -- an investment which will realize for you a phenomenal return benefit that will exceed your greatest expectations. In essence, I have developed an electromagnetic lift device which rises via an interaction with the Earth's magnetic field. This electromagnetic lift technology has been featured on the front page of the MOBILE PRESS REGISTER Newspaper in Mobile, Alabama. The development of this technology on a worldwide basis would enable our access to space free of the dangers of the present rocket systems. Quoting from LIFE Science Library, MAN & SPACE, pg. 129: ".... Space flight will emerge from its present status as a fantastically expensive stunt, and will start to make economic - and ultimately commercial - sense." "But within a single lifetime,the airplane has become the world's primary mode of long-range passenger transportation. Today, thousands fly where once Lindberg traveled alone, and there is hardly a human being on this planet who has not been affected in some way by the conquest of the air." [page 99] And a quotation from Dr. James Van Allen, discoverer of the Van Allen Belt around the Earth: "WILL THIS STORY BE REPEATED IN SPACE? THE ANALOGY SEEMS OBVIOUS, YET IT IS FALSE IN SOME RESPECTS: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE AIRPLANE MAY BE SLIGHT COMPARED TO THAT OF SPACE TRAVEL" Just as the Wright Brothers were mechanically gifted in their pioneering efforts to invention the aeroplane, so do I believe I am mechanically able to demonstrate safe, practical space travel --- electromagnetically. Even our primitive combustion automobile will become obsolete as a result of this technology. I invite the media, the general public and especially members of the X-PRIZE FOUNDATION to attend the demonstration on Friday, February 7, 1997 in St. Louis at the Holiday Inn Hotel and see for yourselves. Joseph W. Newman This Press Conference/Demonstration will be publicized nationally on the Roger Fredinburg Radio Talk Show, Thursday evening, 8:00PM (P.S.T.) January 30, 1997. ______________________________________________________________ Joseph Newman's pioneering research in electromagnetics has been featured on National CBS Evening News, CNN/ABC/NBC News, All Things Considered (PBS), LIFE Magazine, The Tonight Show, in thousands of newspapers/magazines throughout the world and on hundreds of talk shows across the country. ______________________________________________________________ These quotations are from scientists who have endorsed Joseph Newman's work: "If the manner in which Joseph Newman conducted his experiments and the results were made known to the industrial or engineering community then, in my opinion,several companies and/or individuals possess the expertise and capabilities to construct the hardware required to fully exploit the apparent capability of his new concepts." - Dr. Robert E. Smith, Chief, Orbital and Space Environment Branch George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA "You have opened an area in Astrophysics which may revolutionize the magnetic energy problems which is now the most paramount problem in future energy and space travel. I do believe with proper research funds, the results would not only be a great financial boom to your financiers, but would lead to developments that will be practical and beneficial to all mankind and develop a new step in science." - Dr. E. L. Moragne, MORAGNE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CO. [Dr. Moragne was an electromagnetic pioneer in the development of the first atomic bomb.] ______________________________________________________________ Note: The underlying processes of this electromagnetic lift device is based upon the same principles which apply to all of Joseph Newman's electromagnetic technology as described in his fundamental book, The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman. ______________________________________________________________ For further information, contact: Joseph W. Newman, NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, MS 39452 (601) 947-7147 -- josephnewman earthlink.net -- (504) 524-3063 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 09:29:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA05957 for billb@eskimo.com; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:29:38 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:29:38 -0800 X-Envelope-From: richards me512.ecg.csg.mot.com Wed Jan 29 09:29:35 1997 Received: from motgate.mot.com (motgate.mot.com [129.188.136.100]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA05940 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:29:34 -0800 Received: from mothost.mot.com (mothost.mot.com [129.188.137.101]) by motgate.mot.com (8.7.6/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id LAA16235 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:32:15 -0600 (CST) Received: from nucleus.ecg.csg.mot.com (nucleus.ecg.csg.mot.com [144.188.211.7]) by mothost.mot.com (8.7.6/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id LAA01180 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:32:08 -0600 (CST) Received: from me512.ecg.csg.mot.com by nucleus.ecg.csg.mot.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA211119122; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:32:02 -0600 Received: (from richards localhost) by me512.ecg.csg.mot.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA19645; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:32:01 -0600 (CST) From: richards ecg.csg.mot.com (Richard J. Smolen) Message-Id: <9701291132.ZM19643 me512.ecg.csg.mot.com> Old-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:32:00 -0600 In-Reply-To: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE" (Jan 29, 11:45am) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Cc: johnste me512.ecg.csg.mot.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: What is the impact of Electromagnetic radiation on human brain activity? I know that the use of electromagnetic energy is not new to transportation (i.e. German hovertrain) but I have to wonder if there is any short or long term effects to being exposed to massive doses of this type of energy. High tension wires have been known culprits in causing several types cancers including brain cancer. What is your opinion on this and is there any preventive measures that have been taken or plan to be taken? -- ___________________________________________________ Richard Smolen, CPP Mold Design Engineer MOTOROLA CSS 600 North U.S. Highway 45 Libertyville, IL 60048-5343 Room A-S412 Voice: 1-847-523-8580 Fax: 1-847-523-6269 richards ecg.csg.mot.com ___________________________________________________ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 10:08:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA06303; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:31:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:31:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:34:29 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199701291734.LAA06219 natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Resent-Message-ID: <"VbLld.0.PY1.Bcuxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3665 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:45 1/29/97 -0600, Evan Soule wrote: > PRESS CONFERENCE AND DEMONSTRATION IN ST. LOUIS > DATE/TIME: Friday, February 7, 1997, 11:00AM > PLACE: Holiday Inn Southwest (Grand Ballroom) > 10709 Watson Road > St. Louis, Missouri 63127 > Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will present a >demonstration of an electromagnetic device capable of lifting >from the surface of the Earth, utilizing our planet's magnetic >field. I'd like to see some Vortex members volunteer to attend this demo and file an objective report thereafter....anybody close to St. Louis? Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA 512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 10:19:22 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA11903; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:54:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:54:08 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970129095529.007412c0 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:55:31 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"R7Dht1.0.tv2.xwuxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3666 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:34 AM 1/29/97 -0600, you wrote: >At 11:45 1/29/97 -0600, Evan Soule wrote: > >> PRESS CONFERENCE AND DEMONSTRATION IN ST. LOUIS >> DATE/TIME: Friday, February 7, 1997, 11:00AM >> PLACE: Holiday Inn Southwest (Grand Ballroom) >> 10709 Watson Road >> St. Louis, Missouri 63127 > >> Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will present a >>demonstration of an electromagnetic device capable of lifting >>from the surface of the Earth, utilizing our planet's magnetic >>field. > >I'd like to see some Vortex members volunteer to attend this demo and file >an objective report thereafter....anybody close to St. Louis? > >Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little >Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) > > You should be REAL close to St. Louis because you wouldn't want to put out much money or time getting there. I saw a demo in Colorado as part of a Tesla convention weekend. A mylar foil ballon floats around with a very light wire attached. Most of the lift is probably helium. He charges the mylar with some sort of level and I think it is electrostatic pressure on the air which moves it. The way he demos it you will not get to any real understanding of the mechanisms, only if you are astute enough to figure out from the components on your own. It is a great carney game kinda thing. One could make excellant money with it if one were upfront about it being a carney toy. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 10:40:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA18211; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:19:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:19:08 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970129102151.00749fac aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:21:52 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Bacon on skeptics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"otU773.0.NS4.PIvxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3667 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 03:36 PM 1/28/97 -0800, you wrote: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >[quoting bacon] >> >> The school of Plato introduced skepticism... men turn >> aside into pleasant controversies and discussions, and into a sort of >> wandering over subjects, rather than sustain any rigorous >> investigation. > I rather doubt it. Philosophy means love of knowledge, if I have been informed correctly. Bacon, no mean philosopher, must have known the various Greek schools of thought in considerable detail. Once upon a time in Europe, practically the only knowledge was fragments of remnents in latin and greek from the old old days of the empire, or as imported from the Arabs. I am sure that Bacon consumed it all and was aware of the various positions and theories, most of which were not skeptical but rather dogmatic in starting with a grand assumption or two and chasing them to the nether end, thus, Epicurian, Platonic, Neo-platonic, etc. Bacon incidentally was also heavily involved, like Newton, with the transmitted remains of the mystery schools, the hermetic lore which had been passed from the Egyptians to the Hellenes and the Mesopotanians and thence to thither and thon, ie alchemy. >I think what Bacon was objecting to would be what today we >refer to as philosophy. Obviously modern science has >as one cornerstone a form of skeptical thinking (occams >razor, etc), and as another, experimentation. >They coexist quite well. > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 11:16:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA29855; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:04:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:04:14 -0800 Message-ID: <32EFA007.4D15 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:07:51 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6Fvv01.0.NI7.iyvxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3670 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > (Quoting Newman:) > In essence, I have developed an electromagnetic lift device > which rises via an interaction with the Earth's magnetic field. Where's the BEEF? ( "B" Energy Enabling Flight) The earth's magnetic field is about 6 x 10^-5 tesla. A field of this magnitude can exert a pressure of about 0.00003 lbf per ft^2. If we had a room-temperature superconducting current turn about 200 ft. in diameter - to produce a counter field against earth's field - (assume enough current in the loop to do this) then, we might be able to hover a TOTAL weight of about 1 lb. This would include the weight of the superconducting wire. There must be a better way. BTW, I'm not laughing - if I thought this would work I would be in the garage right now, working on it! A friendly skeptic -- Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 11:44:11 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA03336; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:24:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:24:22 -0800 From: "John Kent" To: Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:54 -0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19253666503341 andover.co.uk> Resent-Message-ID: <"DipPJ2.0.op.XFwxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3671 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Robin van Spaandonk > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: water resonance > Date: Wednesday, January 29, 1997 11:50 AM > > > BTW if anyone knows of any web references to studies done on this sort of > setup (i.e. sound in electrolytics - other than Russ George and John > Bedini), then please let me know. If you carry out a search, using Sonochemistry as the key word, you will find what you seek. jk > > > Robin van Spaandonk > -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on > temperature. > "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." > -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 11:53:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA29482; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:02:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:02:20 -0800 Date: 29 Jan 97 13:48:23 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Bacon on Occum Message-ID: <970129184823_100433.1541_BHG85-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"D9IXt1.0.aC7.xwvxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3669 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Evan, > In your above statement you appear to indicate an equivalence > between skeptical thinking and Occum's Razor. I cannot speak for Barry, but there is no connection between scepticism and Ockham's Razor (sometimes spelled "Occam", but Ockham is the spelling of the name of the small village in England from which William got his name). Ockham's Razor (otherwise known as the Principle of Parsimony) does not appear in his writings, and was used by others, but is generally attributed to him. It is a rule for *thinking*, and states that "Entities may not be multiplied beyond necessity." This saying is usually grossly misinterpreted as saying that we must choose the simpler of two hypotheses, but it doesn't say that. What it says is that we are not permitted to believe in the existence of *anything* unless we are *required* by the evidence to do that. Newtonian gravity does not beat epicycles because it is simpler. But if we leave out the tiny error it leaves in things like the orbit of Mercury, it gives us one 'entity' to test against the evidence. The evidence is so good for a perfect fit that we are forced to accept the 'entity' of gravitation, rather than the epicycles which proliferate endlessly if we do not. So Newton passes the test. Moving on, we have to accept the 'entity' of atoms, because the evidence leaves us no choice. Do we have to accept photons as entities? Well, it makes things much simpler if we do; but *if* we can use the most complex mathematics imaginable and eventually succeed in losing them from the list, to be replaced by something which avoids having to believe that they exist at all, then we are required not to believe in them any more. We could still use them as a convenient model, though. Going on to more fanciful things, like the Big Bang or the expansion of the universe or Black Holes, we are on very shaky ground. These three things are believed in as fact, whereas we have no real proof for any of them. We raise them as hypotheses, and that is well and good, but if we start to accept them as real before the evidence has forced us to accept them as 'entities', then we make an error of thinking. Whether or not they are real is not relevant. What is relevant here is the way we actually *think* - and that is all that the 'razor' teaches. The ideas that the razor 'cuts both ways' or 'is a rule but not always right' are false, and demonstrate a lack of understanding. It's just a rule which tells us how to resolve problems and not go off into flights of fancy (or at least to realise that when we do it). Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 12:28:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA16407; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:15:46 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:15:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:16:51 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: Scott Little cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE In-Reply-To: <199701291734.LAA06219 natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zQU4x2.0.D04.m_wxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3672 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This article mentions a 10 million dollar prize. What are the details of the prize? Conditions? JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 13:42:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA31505; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:24:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:24:18 -0800 X-Sender: josephnewman earthlink.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:28:54 -0600 To: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"v8O2Q2.0.6i7.y_xxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3675 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex; >INTERNET:josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) > >Evan Soule writes: > > Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will present a demonstration of an > electromagnetic device capable of lifting from the surface of the Earth > . . . > >Evan: > >Does this mean that Mr. Newman will actually show a machine levitate off the >ground and hover or travel through the air? If so, how high does he expect it >will go? How much does this machine weigh? How long will it stay in the air? >Please supply some *specific information*. You do yourselves a grave >disservice by posting such vague claims. The term "present a demonstration of >[a] device" does not necessarily mean the device will actually levitate. >Demonstrations of things like unfinished computer vaporware often consist of >turning a switch and showing how the gadget would work if it did work which it >doesn't. > > > I salute the fact that you, as members of the X-PRIZE FOUNDATION, have > committed $10 million dollars to the individual who can achieve an > altitude of 65 miles above the surface of the Earth via a safe, > practical design intended for mass transit into outer space. > >This is preposterous. The FOUNDATION ought to offer that prize for anyone who >can achieve an altitude of two meters, using a safe, practical design capable >of space travel. The arbitrary height of 65 miles is absurd. It adds >tremendous complexity and danger to the demonstration of a prototype space >ship. To prove the point, there is no need to build an air-tight vessel >capable of operating in a vacuum. There is no point in equipping it with the >controls, radios, and navigation systems suitable for long distance travel >away from earth. These systems alone would cost far more than $10 million. To >satisfy the basic goal here, all you need to do is demonstrate a scale-model >of a ship with some form of propulsion that would work in a vacuum. Any height >will do. Any device significantly safer than a rocket should win. (Rockets are >manifestly dangerous. The insurance rates for satellite launches are >astronomical.) > >Whoever set this FOUNDATION goal does not understand the basics of technology, >or common sense. Frankly, if Soule and/or Newman "salute" this kind of idiotic >initiative, they must not understand anything about technology either. > >- Jed Dear Jed, Thank you for your email. You wrote, "You do yourselves a grave disservice by posting such vague claims." Please understand that the mode of expression was a _Press Release_ not a scientific document. The intent of the Press Release is to 1) notify the press and the public that such a demonstration will be held and 2) engender their curiosity to view the demonstration for themselves and arrive at their own conclusions. The details of this technology (and quite a bit more) are formally published in Joseph Newman's fundamental 470-page book (7th Edition), The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman --- and earlier editions of this book are found in libraries across the country or via the inter-library loan system. You also wrote, "The FOUNDATION ought to offer that prize for anyone who can achieve an altitude of two meters." I would agree with your statement. And while we are on this subject, even two "inches" should be scientifically sufficient. However, life being what it is, sometimes one must accept what is offered -- and/or do it entirely yourself. Joseph Newman believes that his craft which _does_ lift electromagnetically can be scaled up to safely carry a human and payload to an altitude of 65 miles for a budget of $1 million. As such, Joseph Newman does accept the terms of the Foundation -- however arbitrary they may be. As Joseph Newman states, "What I have and will be showing in St. Louis, Missouri has never been done before in our history and, as a competent physicist from Sperry Univac (now Unisys) stated when I first disclosed this electromagnetic lifting effect in a demonstration that was featured on the cover of the Mobile Register newspaper and as quoted in the newspaper: '(such) a vehicle which is 1,000 ft in diameter and 500 feet high would carry a payload of 4,400 tons.'" And to answer your question, "Does this mean that Mr. Newman will actually show a machine levitate off the ground and hover or travel through the air?" Yes. Thank you for your comments and best regards, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 14:00:44 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA31283; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:23:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:23:14 -0800 X-Sender: josephnewman earthlink.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:28:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Resent-Message-ID: <"oOYlS.0.ee7.0_xxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3674 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 11:34 AM 1/29/97 -0600, you wrote: >>At 11:45 1/29/97 -0600, Evan Soule wrote: >> >>> PRESS CONFERENCE AND DEMONSTRATION IN ST. LOUIS >>> DATE/TIME: Friday, February 7, 1997, 11:00AM >>> PLACE: Holiday Inn Southwest (Grand Ballroom) >>> 10709 Watson Road >>> St. Louis, Missouri 63127 >> >>> Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will present a >>>demonstration of an electromagnetic device capable of lifting >>>from the surface of the Earth, utilizing our planet's magnetic >>>field. >> >>I'd like to see some Vortex members volunteer to attend this demo and file >>an objective report thereafter....anybody close to St. Louis? >> >>Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc. http://www.eden.com/~little >>Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759, USA >>512-342-2185 (voice), 512-346-3017 (FAX), little eden.com (email) >> >> > >You should be REAL close to St. Louis because you wouldn't want to put out >much money or time getting there. I saw a demo in Colorado as part of a >Tesla convention weekend. A mylar foil ballon floats around with a very >light wire attached. Most of the lift is probably helium. He charges the >mylar with some sort of level and I think it is electrostatic pressure on >the air which moves it. The way he demos it you will not get to any real >understanding of the mechanisms, only if you are astute enough to figure >out from the components on your own. It is a great carney game kinda >thing. One could make excellant money with it if one were upfront about it >being a carney toy. >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm January 29, 1997 To Michael Mandeville: With respect to my electromagnetic technology (Energy Machine): More than a decade ago the U.S. Patent Office specifically stated that if my invention worked -- as was stated to be the case by over 30 competent scientists -- then indeed it was a Pioneering Invention. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled many times in essence the following: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the Applicant.__" My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book (which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue. In addition, I consider your above statement --- with regard to my electromagnetic lift device --- to be that of a liar. What I have and will be showing in St. Louis, Missouri has never been done before in our history and, as a competent physicist from Sperry Univac (now Unisys) stated -- when I first disclosed this electromagnetic lifting effect in a demonstration that was featured on the cover of the Mobile Register newspaper and -- as quoted in the newspaper: "(such) a vehicle which is 1,000 ft in diameter and 500 feet high would carry a payload of 4,400 tons." I ask that objective individuals not listen to this liar and potential thief of my life's work. Come and see the technology for yourself. As regards your comment, "Most of the lift is *probably* helium. He charges the mylar with some sort of level and I *think* it is electrostatic pressure on the air which moves it" ---- (*emphasis added by E. Soule') ---- I respond: Air is both negative and positive ... therefore if you put a charge on the air anyone knows from basic science that a charged object in the air will quickly dissipate a charge from that object, especially in any type of humidity, and especially in the Southern United States. Furthermore, I state again that what I have done has not been demonstrated before in the history of humanity and the demonstration speaks for itself for any objective person. Joseph Newman (601) 947-7147 Route 1, Box 52 Lucedale, MS 39452 _______________________________________________ Transcribed by telephone and posted by Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 14:14:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA30730; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:20:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:20:07 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701291517.ZM28998 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:17:58 -0600 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"dMTU21.0.3W7.5yxxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3673 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Looked up one of the websites detailed at the bottom of the original post on this topic. Quite a few pages to read, but one thing struck me as odd. This guy stands on a soapbox declaring all governments and corporations to be greedy, corupt, and evil (10+ pages of ranting) yet he maintains to have spent the last 10+ years and over 1.5 Mil USD securing patents for his electromagnetic O/U device around the world. If he really is the friend of humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society as we know it, what is he waiting for? If he despises greed and the present day economic structure as he says, why is he wasting time seeking patents? Does he intend to do away this existing evil power base or just usurp it for his own agenda? Something stinks here, but I can't put my finger on it. 1.5 Mil USD is more than enough venture capital to start manufacturing on almost any new product, why did he waste his funding? I see red flags all over the place. Did I miss something? -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 14:20:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA06814; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:01:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:01:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:02:19 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman In-Reply-To: <9701291517.ZM28998 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"uiwar.0.Ng1.YYyxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3677 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo, And John. how about the 10 million? On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, John Steck wrote: > > Looked up one of the websites detailed at the bottom of the original post on > this topic. Quite a few pages to read, but one thing struck me as odd. This > guy stands on a soapbox declaring all governments and corporations to be > greedy, corupt, and evil (10+ pages of ranting) yet he maintains to have spent > the last 10+ years and over 1.5 Mil USD securing patents for his > electromagnetic O/U device around the world. If he really is the friend of > humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society > as we know it, what is he waiting for? If he despises greed and the present > day economic structure as he says, why is he wasting time seeking patents? > Does he intend to do away this existing evil power base or just usurp it for > his own agenda? Something stinks here, but I can't put my finger on it. 1.5 > Mil USD is more than enough venture capital to start manufacturing on almost > any new product, why did he waste his funding? I see red flags all over the > place. Did I miss something? > > -john > > -- > John E. Steck > Motorola CSS > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 14:21:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA06656; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:00:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:00:37 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:01:19 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: [Antigravity] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"LiHFj2.0.sd1._Xyxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3676 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Anyone have any idea about: The 10 million prize and terms ....???? From: Evan Soule PRESS CONFERENCE AND DEMONSTRATION IN ST. LOUIS THIS PART :::::: I salute the fact that you, as members of the X-PRIZE FOUNDATION, have committed $10 million dollars to the individual who can achieve an altitude of 65 miles above the surface of the Earth via a safe, practical design intended for mass transit into outer space. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 14:57:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA17037; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:45:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:45:59 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:50:33 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman Resent-Message-ID: <"EiVJW1.0._94.UCzxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3679 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Looked up one of the websites detailed at the bottom of the original post on >this topic. Quite a few pages to read, but one thing struck me as odd. This >guy stands on a soapbox declaring all governments and corporations to be >greedy, corupt, and evil (10+ pages of ranting) yet he maintains to have spent >the last 10+ years and over 1.5 Mil USD securing patents for his >electromagnetic O/U device around the world. If he really is the friend of >humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society >as we know it, what is he waiting for? If he despises greed and the present >day economic structure as he says, why is he wasting time seeking patents? > Does he intend to do away this existing evil power base or just usurp it for >his own agenda? Something stinks here, but I can't put my finger on it. 1.5 >Mil USD is more than enough venture capital to start manufacturing on almost >any new product, why did he waste his funding? I see red flags all over the >place. Did I miss something? > >-john > >-- >John E. Steck >Motorola CSS Dear John, Yes, something does stink here. What stinks is the insensitivity of some individuals to innovators.....and innovators come in many shapes, sizes, backgrounds, opinions, and dispositions. When one learns something about the well-documented battle that Joseph Newman has had with the Patent Office (I understand his ongoing dispute is even featured in Patent Office examiner training manuals), then one will understand that Joseph Newman has been fighting an expensive battle for his rights to a patent for his technology and for those innovators who may not have the ability to fight as he had done against the injustices which have occurred over the past 18 years. In one sense he has paid --- figuratively and literally --- for his "defacto" patent rights regarding this technology. There is voluminous documentation -- audio, video, and literally tons of printed material -- documenting his claim to his technology. His continuing long and expensive legal battle with the Patent Office has, in effect, created this massive documentation. Our Patent Office system was established by our country's founders as the mechanism whereby one can establish one's claim to new technology and to foster incentive and innovation. Joseph Newman has 'played by the rules' of this system in terms of simply seeking patent protection for his innovation. The fact that his basic quest for a patent has taken him down a long and expensive road is a fact not of __his__ choosing, in terms of the events of this quest. >From my perspective, it would have been certainly preferable to have obtained his patent for perhaps the cost of several hundred or a few thousand dollars (at most) -- but this would be wishful thinking. The total stupidity of certain patent office employees --- notably Donovan F. Duggan (who will, IMO, enjoy a permanent place in history for blatant stupidity) --- have insured that a long and expensive road would be travelled. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 14:59:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA15866; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:39:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:39:34 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701291638.ZM29475 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:38:57 -0600 In-Reply-To: John Schnurer "Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman" (Jan 29, 4:03pm) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Joseph Newman Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"frwfC.0.ht3.Y6zxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3678 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 29, 4:03pm, John Schnurer wrote: > Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman > > > Dear Vo, > > And John. > > how about the 10 million? Not one of the 29 rambling pages I printed off the website said anything about any prize money. There were links to other sites at the end though. Perhaps one of them leads to the sponsor of the contest. As I had to fish the text out of my VIP circular file and knock the orange peels off, I could have missed it however. Given the demonstrated extreme hostility of Mr. Newman and his fanatic "Director of Information" I wish you luck in finding more info. -john PS Mr. "Director of Information": Comments and opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of Mototrola Inc. -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 15:23:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA24519; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:10:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:10:32 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:10:29 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: To Evan Soule In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hIoFw.0.7-5.JZzxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3681 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Evan, What are the terms of the 10 million dollar prize? Who is sponsoring it? Who judges it? To jog your memory, in your 'for immediate release' post you mentioned and commended Foundation X [in capital letters] and the 10 million prize. JHS > P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 > Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 > http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html > http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 15:26:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18236; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:49:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:49:29 -0800 Date: 29 Jan 97 17:45:36 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Press releases, Vortex-L, hot air, ballo Message-ID: <970129224536_72240.1256_EHB59-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"pu34M.0.2S4.rFzxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3680 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I asked Even: How high does he expects this machine will go? How much does this machine weigh? How long will it stay in the air? And I said that by not supplying such specifics you do yourself a grave disservice. Evan responds: Please understand that the mode of expression was a _Press Release_ not a scientific document. The intent of the Press Release is to 1) notify the press and the public that such a demonstration will be held and 2) engender their curiosity to view the demonstration for themselves and arrive at their own conclusions . . . With all due respect, I have written many industry press releases over the last 20 years, and I think it is much better to include product specifications and quantitative information. Otherwise people think you are peddling vaporware. However, be that as it may, this is Vortex-L, a discussion group devoted to scientific issues spiced with occasional humor & horseplay. If you would like us to put your announcement in the former category -- serious science -- then please change your mode of expression and answer my questions: How high? How much does it weigh? Will it be the same type of demonstration that Michael Mandeville witnessed, with a mylar balloon? Describe the experiment in general terms. If you are not willing to share this kind of information then I think we should drop the discussion. We cannot help you here. Joseph Newman believes that his craft which _does_ lift electromagnetically can be scaled up to safely carry a human and payload to an altitude of 65 miles for a budget of $1 million . . . Well, well, well . . . I cannot judge whether Mr. Newman knows anything about science. I have not read his work, I know nothing about his experiments. But this statement proves that he knows nothing about aviation, spacecraft, radar, air & space navigation, life support systems, and industrial engineering of prototype vehicles. In recent weeks there have been three unsuccessful attempts to circumnavigate the globe with high altitude balloons. Balloons are the oldest form of aerial navigation. They began with the Montgolfier brothers in 1783, and the first successful crossing of the English Channel in 1785. The new balloons are high tech machines, but they build upon the fundamentals established 200 years ago, and on the high-altitude, pressurized-gondola balloons in the 1930s. Needless to say, the balloon components like the gondolas, navigation and communication systems cost millions of dollars. To make a long story short, even if he buys the equipment at K-Mart, Mr. Newman could not produce a single major subsystem of his space-ship for a million dollars. Not even if he gets it remaindered from the Former Soviet Union. In a child's fantasy or "The Mouse on the Moon" comedy movie a person might leave the atmosphere and survive a trip in a machine that costs only a million dollars, but it would never happen with today's technology. You might as well talk about manufacturing a prototype automobile for $10. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 15:52:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA32638; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:35:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:35:09 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:39:19 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Joseph Newman Resent-Message-ID: <"deaul1.0.Qz7.awzxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3682 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Jan 29, 4:03pm, John Schnurer wrote: >> Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman >> >> >> Dear Vo, >> >> And John. >> >> how about the 10 million? > >Not one of the 29 rambling pages I printed off the website said anything about >any prize money. There were links to other sites at the end though. Perhaps >one of them leads to the sponsor of the contest. As I had to fish the text out >of my VIP circular file and knock the orange peels off, I could have missed it >however. Given the demonstrated extreme hostility of Mr. Newman and his >fanatic "Director of Information" I wish you luck in finding more info. > >-john > >PS Mr. "Director of Information": >Comments and opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of >Mototrola Inc. > >-- >John E. Steck >Motorola CSS Dear John, It is interesting that you choose to interpret my lack of appreciation for your negative and snide comments as "fanaticism" ..... each to his own, I suppose. Anyone who has been the recipient of the injustice which has been experienced by Joseph Newman who would _not_ demonstrate some level of "hostility" would have had to have been the victim of a natal lobotomy. If you wish to pursue this thread, I would hope it would not descend to the level of a flame war..... but if this is the course which you choose to pursue, then perhaps we could take this to a private discussion. And if you choose to end this particular thread, great. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 16:27:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA09067; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:04:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:04:50 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32EFE653.2781E494 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:07:47 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XiZIm2.0.YD2.UM-xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3683 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Note: The underlying processes of this electromagnetic lift > device is based upon the same principles which apply to all of > Joseph Newman's electromagnetic technology as described in his > fundamental book, The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman. I assume this means it doesn't work. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 16:55:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA10380; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:09:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:09:12 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701291808.ZM29951 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:08:37 -0600 In-Reply-To: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) "Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman" (Jan 29, 4:48pm) References: X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Joseph Newman Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"vZjZs2.0.kX2.YQ-xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3684 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 29, 4:48pm, Evan Soule wrote: > Dear John, > > Yes, something does stink here. What stinks is the insensitivity of some > individuals to innovators.....and innovators come in many shapes, sizes, > backgrounds, opinions, and dispositions. > > When one learns something about the well-documented battle that Joseph > Newman has had with the Patent Office .......... I do not wish to debate the validity, methods, or competence of the USPO. You missed the boat. It is irrelevent to my question or my concerns. I do not question Mr. Newman's efforts, I question his motives. My questions were: If he really is the friend of humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society as we know it, what has been he waiting for? If he despises greed and the present day economic structure as he says, why is he wasting time seeking patents? Won't those patents be irrelevent in the utopia Mr. Newman is aiming for? My concern is that Mr. Newman aspires to the very greed he debases. That to me that is dangerous. I am certain that you are convinced of his altruism, but to me it smacks of hypocrisy. This causes me to question his claims. It makes me wonder if he isn't just holding out for money like everybody else. That is not slander, that is OPINION. Mr. Newman has every right to profit from his invention (the whole point of a patent), but he should come clean and not pretend he doesn't want to in his posted philisophical, pseudo-political manifesto. It casts a shadow of doubt on everything he is associated with. Calling critics liars and threatening lawsuits instead of engaging in logical discourse on a list *for* logical discourse of new ideas further alienates me from even good points you may have. I am a firm believer that character is a key element of credibility, therefore not off limits to question. I question Mr. Newman's credibility. I will happily and publicly apologize if I am wrong in my assesment of the situation, but it is not up to me to give you or Mr. Newman the benifit of doubt, it is up to you or Mr. Newman to convince me otherwise. My unquestioning faith is reserved for God alone. -john Opinions expressed are my own and do not neccessarily represent those of Motorola Inc. -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 17:12:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA13054; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:19:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:19:23 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32EFE9C2.15FB7483 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:22:26 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman References: <9701291517.ZM28998 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ss9v82.0.SB3.1a-xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3685 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: > > if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society > as we know it, what is he waiting for? Well, he had to wait a couple years while he was in jail, because God commanded him to have sex with a minor, if I recall. I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but perhaps Mr. Soule could set the record straight. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:29:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA21408; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:45:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:45:18 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:48:30 -0800 Message-Id: <199701300148.RAA14454 Au.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Hal, where are you! (Puthoff) Resent-Message-ID: <"ROABt3.0.AE5.fq_xo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3686 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greetings. I need to send a letter over to Hal and can't find his email address in my log (too many entries!). Could someone drop me a note? Thanks, Ross Tessien tessien oro.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:31:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA28243; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:40 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:25:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: JOSEPH NEWMAN'S ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE Resent-Message-ID: <"6B-Qu1.0.Cv6.qL0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3689 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: AN AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING AN EARLIER VERSION OF THE TECHNOLOGY: ____________________________ AFFIDAVIT OBSERVATIONS AND PERFORMANCE PROJECTIONS ON JOSEPH NEWMAN'S ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE I have witnessed a demonstration of Joseph Newman's Electromagnetic Air and Space Vehicle prototype. It consists of an aluminized helium balloon wrapped with #38 gauge copper wire. The system is nominally heavier than air. When the wire coil is connected to a 200 volt battery, the balloon gradually lifts into the air. It then aligns with the earth's magnetic field as it rises. If the current is cut off, the balloon immediately begins to fall. If the current direction is reversed, the balloon rotates to align with the earth's field. The balloon can be made to rotate or oscillate by manipulating the direction of current flow. If the current is periodically switched so that the balloon always repels the earth's field, its rate of descent is about 25% faster than the case of steady attraction of the coils to the earth's field. Joseph Newman's design calls for creation of a magnetic field which is an average about equal to the earth's field over the volume of the balloon. This can be achieved with minimum input power using a large number of turns of fine wire. I have considered vehicle modules with the following properties: Volume = 10'x10'x10' = 1,000 cubic feet Helium Lift = 70 lbs. Wire = 12,000 turns of #38 AWG copper Wire Weight = 23 lbs. Battery = 3,000 volts DC Battery Weight = 15 lbs DC Current = 10 mA Material Weight = 10 lbs. Payload Weight = 22 lbs. A vehicle which is 100 feet in diameter and 50 feet high would consist of 400 of the above cubes and would carry a payload of 4.4 tons. A vehicle which is 1,000 feet in diameter and 500 feet high would consist of 400,000 of these cubes and carry a payload of 4,400 tons. The following points should be noted: (1) The total payload is proportional to vehicle volume. (2) The electromagnetic torque and lift are also proportional to volume in this design. (3) Navigation is achieved by manipulating the orientation of the coils. (4) If superconducting wires become available, the batteries would not be required. (5) For improved efficiency with copper wiring, sets of the cubes can be connected in series and energized with pulsed high voltage. Joseph Newman has developed such techniques to extend battery lifetime. (6) In the atmosphere, lift is provided by a combination of ohmic heating of the helium gas, electromagnetic interaction of the helium atoms with the applied fields, and interaction of the applied magnetic field with the earth's magnetic field. (7) It is intended that the craft can operate entirely through interaction with the earth's magnetic field once it leaves the atmosphere. The interaction will be especially strong in the ionosphere and persists in the earth's magnetotail. Joseph Newman's invention was designed and disclosed in a patent application to its construction. It represents a vastly improved means for propulsion and navigation of helium balloons (blimps). Large versions may well carry us gently and safely into space. Dr. Roger Hastings, Ph.D. [Signed and Notarized] ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Just as a long-legged spider can lift itself from the surface of a pond by dispersing its body weight over a wide area upon the molecular surface tension of the water, so too, by analogy, can a vehicle lift itself from the surface of the planet by dispersing a magnetic field over a wide area upon the planet's magnetic field." --- Joseph Newman ------------------------------------------------------------------- "If the manner in which Joseph Newman conducted his experiments and the results were made known to the industrial or engineering community then, in my opinion, several companies and/or individuals possess the expertise and capabilities to construct the hardware required to fully exploit the apparent capability of his new concepts." Dr. Robert E. Smith Chief, Orbital and Space Environmental Branch George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA ------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information about the work of Joseph Newman, contact: Newman Energy Products, Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, Mississippi 39452 (601) 947-7147 or Evan Soule', (504) 524-3063 email: josephnewman earthlink.net __________________________________________ Posted 1/29/97 on the Vortex-L List by: Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:31:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA28154; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:17 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:25:14 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Press releases Resent-Message-ID: <"VtsHo1.0.qt6.VL0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3687 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >To: Vortex > >I asked Even: > >How high does he expects this machine will go? >How much does this machine weigh? >How long will it stay in the air? > >And I said that by not supplying such specifics you do yourself a grave >disservice. Evan responds: > > Please understand that the mode of expression was a _Press Release_ not > a scientific document. The intent of the Press Release is to 1) notify > the press and the public that such a demonstration will be held and 2) > engender their curiosity to view the demonstration for themselves and > arrive at their own conclusions . . . > >With all due respect, I have written many industry press releases over the >last 20 years, and I think it is much better to include product specifications >and quantitative information. Otherwise people think you are peddling >vaporware. However, be that as it may, this is Vortex-L, a discussion group >devoted to scientific issues spiced with occasional humor & horseplay. If you >would like us to put your announcement in the former category -- serious >science -- then please change your mode of expression and answer my questions: >How high? How much does it weigh? Will it be the same type of demonstration >that Michael Mandeville witnessed, with a mylar balloon? Describe the >experiment in general terms. > >If you are not willing to share this kind of information then I think we >should drop the discussion. We cannot help you here. > > > Joseph Newman believes that his craft which _does_ lift > electromagnetically can be scaled up to safely carry a human and payload > to an altitude of 65 miles for a budget of $1 million . . . > >Well, well, well . . . I cannot judge whether Mr. Newman knows anything about >science. I have not read his work, I know nothing about his experiments. But >this statement proves that he knows nothing about aviation, spacecraft, radar, >air & space navigation, life support systems, and industrial engineering of >prototype vehicles. In recent weeks there have been three unsuccessful >attempts to circumnavigate the globe with high altitude balloons. Balloons are >the oldest form of aerial navigation. They began with the Montgolfier brothers >in 1783, and the first successful crossing of the English Channel in 1785. >The new balloons are high tech machines, but they build upon the fundamentals >established 200 years ago, and on the high-altitude, pressurized-gondola >balloons in the 1930s. Needless to say, the balloon components like the >gondolas, navigation and communication systems cost millions of dollars. To >make a long story short, even if he buys the equipment at K-Mart, Mr. Newman >could not produce a single major subsystem of his space-ship for a million >dollars. Not even if he gets it remaindered from the Former Soviet Union. In a >child's fantasy or "The Mouse on the Moon" comedy movie a person might leave >the atmosphere and survive a trip in a machine that costs only a million >dollars, but it would never happen with today's technology. You might as well >talk about manufacturing a prototype automobile for $10. > >- Jed Dear Jed, Thank you for your pronouncement. No doubt, Joseph Newman has eagerly awaited word from you that what he is endeavoring to accomplish simply cannot be done for $1 million. No doubt he will feel a bit dejected by your pronouncement, but I'm sure he will be able to handle it. It's a good thing that Orville and Wilbur didn't have you around in 1903 to tell them how expensive their proposed project would be and it would best for them to forget about it and to stay home in Ohio. But what would they know --- they were just a couple of small-town bicycle mechanics. BTW, for anyone else who may be in the St. Louis area on February 7th -- stop by and see the demonstration for yourself....__then__ make your own conclusions. I will forward separately a document prepared by physicist Roger Hastings. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:40:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA29936; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:29:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:29:09 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:34:00 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Resent-Message-ID: <"aizb9.0.YJ7.mT0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3690 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman writes: >> Note: The underlying processes of this electromagnetic lift >> device is based upon the same principles which apply to all of >> Joseph Newman's electromagnetic technology as described in his >> fundamental book, The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman. > >I assume this means it doesn't work. Dear Barry, You know ... I find it interesting: I post a sincere and positive News Release announcing an upcoming event which people are welcome to attend or not to attend and, in response, I receive snide, sarcastic, and insulting remarks such as yours. There was no hostility or negativism intended nor expressed in my original post towards anyone (or anything, for that matter) on this list ... and yet individuals such as yourself post your petty, negative, one-liner tripe.... Barry, the only thing in this instance which does not work is your _mind_. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html P.S. Judging by __your__ initiated insults and attacks it is apparent that your approach is not particularly positive. (Putting it as mild as I can.) So, if you feel an negative urge to continue to 'slug it out' --- I would invite you to pursue a private email interchange where we can 'slug it out' 'til the cow's come home if this is what is required. While this would essentially be a waste of time, I will endeavor to help you work through your negativism, if necessary. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:40:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA30045; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:29:38 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:29:38 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:34:21 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Joseph Newman Resent-Message-ID: <"bSmXr2.0.LL7.GU0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3691 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >On Jan 29, 4:48pm, Evan Soule wrote: > >> Dear John, >> >> Yes, something does stink here. What stinks is the insensitivity of some >> individuals to innovators.....and innovators come in many shapes, sizes, >> backgrounds, opinions, and dispositions. >> >> When one learns something about the well-documented battle that Joseph >> Newman has had with the Patent Office .......... > > >I do not wish to debate the validity, methods, or competence of the USPO. You >missed the boat. It is irrelevent to my question or my concerns. I do not >question Mr. Newman's efforts, I question his motives. Dear John, No, John. I did not miss the boat. You missed the point. Let me repeat: "....Joseph Newman has been fighting an expensive battle for his rights to a patent for his technology and for those innovators who may not have the ability to fight as he had done against the injustices which have occurred over the past 18 years." _This_ is his movitation. Now, one may claim that his motivation is 'altruism' on behalf of those innovators who may not have the ability to fight the patent office such as he has and to make his fight known ..... however, if one accepts the concept of primary property -- property in ideas -- then I would claim that he does so because it 'profits' him to do so, i.e., I accept the definition of profit as "an increase in happiness through moral (non-coericive means)"....and because his pursuits with respect to his motivation makes him _happy_ (a primary property) --- then I would say that such happiness is his primary profit. [And this is my opinion on this subject.] > >My questions were: >If he really is the friend of humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the >key to revolutionizing society as we know it, what has been he waiting for? If >he despises greed and the present day economic structure as he says, why is he >wasting time seeking patents? Won't those patents be irrelevent in the utopia >Mr. Newman is aiming for? Joseph Newman is the type of individual such that when he encounters injustice, he does not walk away from it: he confronts it with all the means at his disposal. To some people I've met in life this behavior seems perfectly natural and appropriate. To others, it seems foreign and strange. Personally, I rather glad that the former type of people exist --- if not, we would all most likely still be British subjects. > >My concern is that Mr. Newman aspires to the very greed he debases. That to me >that is dangerous. I am certain that you are convinced of his altruism, but to >me it smacks of hypocrisy. This causes me to question his claims. It makes me >wonder if he isn't just holding out for money like everybody else. That is not >slander, that is OPINION. Mr. Newman has every right to profit from his >invention (the whole point of a patent), but he should come clean and not >pretend he doesn't want to in his posted philisophical, pseudo-political >manifesto. It casts a shadow of doubt on everything he is associated with. > Calling critics liars and threatening lawsuits instead of engaging in logical >discourse on a list *for* logical discourse of new ideas further alienates me >from even good points you may have. I am a firm believer that character is a >key element of credibility, therefore not off limits to question. I question >Mr. Newman's credibility. I will happily and publicly apologize if I am wrong >in my assesment of the situation, but it is not up to me to give you or Mr. >Newman the benifit of doubt, it is up to you or Mr. Newman to convince me >otherwise. My unquestioning faith is reserved for God alone. John, the nature of your remarks --- personal as they are in this case with respect to Joseph Newman --- causes me to react in a similar personal approach. Joseph Newman has put his money where his life is --- which is a total and complete commitment to bringing forth his life's work. To many this is strange, since many people I have met do not hold dear such a total a complete commitment to anything. If he was really the greedy dishonest sort, he could have disappeared into thin air with the money he had raised over the course of his continuing battle with the Patent Office. No, he put every available cent towards his legal battle and towards improving his technology .... not that it is really anyone business (but your above comments cause me to write this), but Joseph Newman lives ___very___ modestly. ALL of his available assets are invested into bringing forth his technology. To you, his philosophical manifesto is not to your liking....to many others (who have written, emailed, and teleponed me) it is very much to their liking. Again, to each her/his own...... You wrote: "Calling critics liars and threatening lawsuits instead of engaging in logical discourse on a list *for* logical discourse of new ideas further alienates me from even good points you may have." My response: Logical Discourse __indeed__! I am all for logical discourse. IMO, a true 'critic' will offer __constructive__ criticism .... or will ask sincere questions in an effort to arrive at conclusions. He/she may even have further advancements/improvements to what was originally presented in an effort to further the development of whatever it is under consideration. The individual who made the earlier post in which Joseph Newman responded by calling that individual a liar was NOT acting responsibly --- at least not by my above description of a critic. When one uses words such as, "It is a great carney game..." I can think of many terms to apply to such an individual; 'critic' -- in the sense of one who employs logical discourse -- is not one of them. You wrote, "....what has been he waiting for?" He is not waiting for anything. He is devoting all his time, energy, and resources to bringing this technology forward. If it is not fast enough for anyone's liking, then I would tell them: "either help or get out of the way." Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:41:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA30221; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:30:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:30:19 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:35:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman Resent-Message-ID: <"mM9Lu1.0.1O7.tU0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3692 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >John Steck wrote: >> >> if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society >> as we know it, what is he waiting for? > >Well, he had to wait a couple years while he was in jail, >because God commanded him to have sex with a minor, if I recall. >I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but perhaps Mr. Soule could >set the record straight. > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, "Fuzzy" is pretty it pretty mildly, sir. I've just about had it with your insults and now your lies. Joseph Newman has 1) never been in jail in his life and 2) he has never had sex with a minor. From what planet have you dropped in? Let's hope that your 'research activities' with your "Fusion Energy Research Program" are not as fuzzy as the rest of your thinking. Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 18:42:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA28216; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:33 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:33 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:25:20 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: To Evan Soule Resent-Message-ID: <"0WGNW.0.iu6.jL0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3688 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Dear Evan, > > What are the terms of the 10 million dollar prize? > > Who is sponsoring it? Who judges it? > > To jog your memory, in your 'for immediate release' post you >mentioned and commended Foundation X [in capital letters] and the 10 >million prize. > > JHS > Dear John, Despite your previous and obvious hostility (which engendered a similar reaction on my part), I will answer your question. A simple net-search would have sufficed. The website you seek is: http://www.xprize.org/home.html Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html P.S. In this instance, my memory doesn't requiring 'jogging' by you --- but thanks for the kind thought. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 19:26:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA05878; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:05:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:05:29 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970129190647.006f9e6c aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:06:49 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DK0G02.0.hR1.r_0yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3693 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 03:17 PM 1/29/97 -0600, you wrote: > >Looked up one of the websites detailed at the bottom of the original post on >this topic. Quite a few pages to read, but one thing struck me as odd. This >guy stands on a soapbox declaring all governments and corporations to be >greedy, corupt, and evil (10+ pages of ranting) yet he maintains to have spent >the last 10+ years and over 1.5 Mil USD securing patents for his >electromagnetic O/U device around the world. If he really is the friend of >humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society >as we know it, what is he waiting for? If he despises greed and the present >day economic structure as he says, why is he wasting time seeking patents? > Does he intend to do away this existing evil power base or just usurp it for >his own agenda? Something stinks here, but I can't put my finger on it. 1.5 >Mil USD is more than enough venture capital to start manufacturing on almost >any new product, why did he waste his funding? I see red flags all over the >place. Did I miss something? > >-john > >-- >John E. Steck >Motorola CSS > > Yes you've missed a lot BUT you've seen enough ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 20:08:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA16620; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:43:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:43:52 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F01920.1CFBAE39 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:44:32 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UYbeq1.0.S34.oZ1yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3695 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Evan Soule wrote: > > > P.S. Judging by __your__ initiated insults and attacks it is > apparent that your approach is not particularly positive. You are absolutely right that I am the one initiating the hostility. But really, I should have put smileys on the things I said, because I consider Joe Newman to be more of a joke than anything else. In my mind, Joe Newman personifies the Great American Crank. > I invite you to pursue a private email interchange where we can > 'slug it out'....I will endeavor to help you work through > your negativism. I'll be glad to discuss it in private, but in this case I think other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well. Its certainly on-topic for the group, since JN has long claimed to have working over-unity devices. So, Bill Beatty permitting... To start the discussion, let me tell you what bothers me about JN. Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman 10) Was divinely inspired to marry an underage girl, for which he went to prison. 9) Receives his "scientific" knowledge by divine revelation. 7) Acts like a crank by issuing long, rambling tracts about why he is right, everyone else is wrong, and the many conspiracies against him. 6) Has own personal theories of physics to explain where his extra energy comes from, totally unsupported by known theory or basic experiments. 5) Has had 20 years and many $'s to develop and commercialize his motor, with no apparent success. 4) Gave physically ridiculous public demo in early 80's where his motor---aided by a trunk full of ~1000 AA batteries---allowed a car to creep along at a couple miles per hour (roughly what one would predict for the power output of said batteries), and billed this as powering a vehicle with his motor and AA batteries. 3) Had his over unity motor examined in detail by US National Beareau of Standards in early 80's: not only did they find it did not work (it was < 90% efficient...not even a good motor), but moreover they figured out **why** other tests had shown it to be over unity: due to the long windings, it produced voltage spikes so large they would confound ordinary test equipment. 2) See 4). 1) See 3). Based on this, my personal opinion is that if there ever was a crank, JN is one. Now, maybe I'm just grossly misinformed---I am certainly not a Newman scholar, merely a casual observer of his follies since 1980. Please do correct my errors in items 1--10. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 20:18:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA15166; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:38:21 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:38:21 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970129193735.0074e67c aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:37:37 +0800 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Helium Bag Newman ELECTROSTATICS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VuXUi3.0.ki3.dU1yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3694 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A The toy IS nifty and does work well within a controlled environment. Ain't no way you can maintain control in the real world of highly variable air without adding old-fashioned mechanical/chemical propulsion. What does that do to your weight ratios? Magnetism falls off at the square of the distance and it is pretty damn weak on the surface to start with. How far do you think you are going to get? No way to lift magnetically. It MUST be an electrostatic phenomenon causing some sort of laminar air flow about the ballon, thus creating enough displacement for very sllloooowwwwww motion, which it exhibits. Enough said, Newman and Soule should go fly a ballon...in the carney markets. Lots of money to be made there. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 20:28:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA21750; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:06:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:06:55 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F01EAC.3F54BC7E math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:08:12 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Joe Newman & underage girls References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xblhD2.0.lJ5.Lv1yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3696 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > [I wrote] > > > >Well, he had to wait a couple years while he was in jail, > >because God commanded him to have sex with a minor, if I recall. > >I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but perhaps Mr. Soule could > >set the record straight. > > > > "Fuzzy" is pretty it pretty mildly, sir. > > I've just about had it with your insults and now your lies. > Newman 1) never been in jail in his life and > 2) he has never had sex with a minor. I'm glad to hear it. By the way, I have to admit my lies are plagiarized; they really belong to someome else. The stuff on JN, jail and minors was in a syndicated column called The Straight Dope, by Cecil Adams, sometime between in 1985 and 1990. If it is false, you had better sue Mr. Adams (aka Ed Zotti). Strangely, I read the column during that time and never saw a retraction, even though Adams would regularly print corrections for much more minor misstatements. You really ought to take it up with him. His web site is: http://www.straightdope.com/search.html Also there, he has online the Indices from the three books of column compilations he has published, and in these I find: Index of More of the Straight Dope ... Newman, Joseph (perpetual motion machine inventor), 401-2 ... Index of Return of the Straight Dope ... Newman, Joseph (perpetual motion machine inventor), update on, 409-410 ... >From memory, I'm pretty sure its the latter update column, which updated us on Newman's unfortunate personal problems. I suggest you check it out, since you are JN's PR man. Perhaps he didn't tell you everything when you were hired. Please get back to us with the straight dope on this matter. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 20:42:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA25711; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:25:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:25:06 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F022F4.ABD322C math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:26:28 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bhbGL2.0.VH6.RA2yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3697 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote > > Let's hope that your 'research activities' with your "Fusion Energy > Research Program" are not as fuzzy as the rest of your thinking. > No, my thinking is only as fuzzy as the subject warrants. But, if for the moment we ignore all the massive historical evidence that JN is a crank with no valid o/u motor, answer me this: If JN has a viable over unity motor, why doesn't he simply send a version for testing to EarthTech Int'l. This company is set up _precisely_ to test such devices! They are actually friendly and well-disposed towards such things! If they found it really worked, it would recieve vastly greater attention from mainstream organizations, and Puthoff certainly has the connections needed to hook up a valid device with investors, should such ever be found. That JN does not take advantage of the accreditation services offered by EarthTech is just one more indicator to me that he has nothing. (By the way: let me take the oppurtunity to say that I think EarthTech is really a great endeavor, even though I think their odds of finding such an invention are extremely tiny...if you never look, you'll never know.) -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 20:45:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA27125; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:31:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:31:41 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970129203247.0072d290 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:32:50 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ShBGP3.0.Ud6.WG2yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3698 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, you wrote: >> > >I'll be glad to discuss it in private, but in this case I think >other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well. >Its certainly on-topic for the group, since JN has long claimed >to have working over-unity devices. So, Bill Beatty permitting... > >To start the discussion, let me tell you what bothers me about JN. > >Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman > > >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry > > BARRY, I don't know whether to strangle you with your mouse cord or form up a cheering section. This Newman stuff just clutters my inboxes irritating my goal-focused personality. On the other hand, my sense of entertainment enjoys a feeding now and then as well. Since you are willing to spend the time, to do a definitive no-hold barred, knock down and drag out public shootout, it could end up being pretty educational, I guess we shouldn't begrudge it. Please don't change the thread name because I am setting up a filter to channel the volumes which are about to descend into a new mailbox. NOTE TO BILL BEATY. This is a tuff call for Vortex. It is going to get very catty in this thread. The war has started by calling Newman, uh-hah-uh, the Great American Crank, which on the initial round was stated with supporting data. I think we need to challenge Barry here to serve as an exemplar of a dispassionate examination of objective fact, let the "crank" word pass with one demerit on his side, because even **IF** it is true, it is still a pejorative term. Soule and Newman are not capable of dealing non-emotionally as we well know by now. Their primary refutation is "liar". But I am willing to put up with that stuff to let them reveal who they really are. But other members of Vortex may tell me, Barry, and them to shut up. Other than this, Barry, this is your show and I am going to stay out of it. What say Vortex? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 21:56:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA12672; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:45:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:45:52 -0800 Message-Id: <199701300534.WAA03657 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: Subject: Evan Soule Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:49:03 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-9BG22.0.v53.DM3yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3699 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I remember one night quite well in 1988. I was drinking a red wine. I boarded a flight from Houston to Denver and was feeling quite good. Sitting in the First Class section (from money I made myself, not from believers) I was humored from the flight attendant who said after all of the safety announcements -- For you First Class passengers, we must tell you the truth..... In case of an emergency, please bend down and grab your ankles, place your head between your legs and kiss your ass good bye............ Tell Mr. Newman to have a great flight................ For those that remember that time period, Robert Six was President of Continental Airlines... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 10:43:59 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA19955; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:25:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:25:49 -0800 Date: 29 Jan 97 13:26:37 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Message-ID: <970129182637_72240.1256_EHB163-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"cQGvC.0.Qt4.ZOvxo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3668 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Evan Soule writes: Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will present a demonstration of an electromagnetic device capable of lifting from the surface of the Earth . . . Evan: Does this mean that Mr. Newman will actually show a machine levitate off the ground and hover or travel through the air? If so, how high does he expect it will go? How much does this machine weigh? How long will it stay in the air? Please supply some *specific information*. You do yourselves a grave disservice by posting such vague claims. The term "present a demonstration of [a] device" does not necessarily mean the device will actually levitate. Demonstrations of things like unfinished computer vaporware often consist of turning a switch and showing how the gadget would work if it did work which it doesn't. I salute the fact that you, as members of the X-PRIZE FOUNDATION, have committed $10 million dollars to the individual who can achieve an altitude of 65 miles above the surface of the Earth via a safe, practical design intended for mass transit into outer space. This is preposterous. The FOUNDATION ought to offer that prize for anyone who can achieve an altitude of two meters, using a safe, practical design capable of space travel. The arbitrary height of 65 miles is absurd. It adds tremendous complexity and danger to the demonstration of a prototype space ship. To prove the point, there is no need to build an air-tight vessel capable of operating in a vacuum. There is no point in equipping it with the controls, radios, and navigation systems suitable for long distance travel away from earth. These systems alone would cost far more than $10 million. To satisfy the basic goal here, all you need to do is demonstrate a scale-model of a ship with some form of propulsion that would work in a vacuum. Any height will do. Any device significantly safer than a rocket should win. (Rockets are manifestly dangerous. The insurance rates for satellite launches are astronomical.) Whoever set this FOUNDATION goal does not understand the basics of technology, or common sense. Frankly, if Soule and/or Newman "salute" this kind of idiotic initiative, they must not understand anything about technology either. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 23:29:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA07929; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:07:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:07:07 -0800 From: rvanspaa netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: water resonance Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:10:45 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32fa2a10.9059143 mail.netspace.net.au> References: <19253666503341 andover.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <19253666503341 andover.co.uk> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.354 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M1G6i2.0.px1.QY4yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3701 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:20:54 -0000, John Kent wrote: [snip] >If you carry out a search, using Sonochemistry as the key word, you will >find what you seek. jk [snip] Thank you. Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on temperature. "....,then he should stop, and he will catch up..." -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jan 29 23:41:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA10015; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:18:39 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:18:39 -0800 Message-ID: <32F04922.844 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:39:22 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: <3.0.32.19970129203247.0072d290 aa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UWcbx1.0.LS2.Dj4yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3702 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael Mandeville wrote: > > At 07:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, you wrote: > >> > > > >I'll be glad to discuss it in private, but in this case I think > >other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well. > >Its certainly on-topic for the group, since JN has long claimed > >to have working overunity devices. So, Bill Beatty permitting... > > > >To start the discussion, let me tell you what bothers me about JN. > > > >Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman > > > > > >Barry Merriman > >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program > >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math > >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry > > > > > > BARRY, I don't know whether to strangle you with your mouse cord or form up > a cheering section. This Newman stuff just clutters my inboxes irritating > my goal-focused personality. On the other hand, my sense of entertainment > enjoys a feeding now and then as well. Since you are willing to spend the > time, to do a definitive no-hold barred, knock down and drag out public > shootout, it could end up being pretty educational, I guess we shouldn't > begrudge it. Please don't change the thread name because I am setting up a > filter to channel the volumes which are about to descend into a new mailbox. > > NOTE TO BILL BEATY. This is a tuff call for Vortex. It is going to get > very catty in this thread. The war has started by calling Newman, > uh-hah-uh, the Great American Crank, which on the initial round was stated > with supporting data. I think we need to challenge Barry here to serve as > an exemplar of a dispassionate examination of objective fact, let the > "crank" word pass with one demerit on his side, because even **IF** it is > true, it is still a pejorative term. Soule and Newman are not capable of > dealing non-emotionally as we well know by now. Their primary refutation > is "liar". But I am willing to put up with that stuff to let them reveal > who they really are. But other members of Vortex may tell me, Barry, and > them to shut up. Other than this, Barry, this is your show and I am going > to stay out of it. What say Vortex? > ____________________________________ > MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing > Michael Mandeville, publisher > mwm aa.net > http://www.aa.net/~mwm Hi All, What's going on here? Are we about character assination or about individuals presenting new ideas and then logical discussion following about the ideas presented. ANYONE who uses character assination to disprove any idea, no matter how wild, is in my humble opinion lower than a snails slimy belly. You know better Michael Mandeville and as for a university professor Barry Merriman, I am very surprised. If you have a chip on your shoulder and want a fight, well, this is NOT the place. Lets STOP this right here and now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you agree with me and these two continue, I suggest we flood their in boxes with all the junk mail we can find. I repeat again, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR THIS TYPE OF DISCUSSION!!!!!! -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:02:46 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16557; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:11 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:08 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: A Straight (Fuzzy?) Dope Resent-Message-ID: <"GIR6c.0.V24.bD5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3704 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote: >> >[I wrote] >> > >> >Well, he had to wait a couple years while he was in jail, >> >because God commanded him to have sex with a minor, if I recall. >> >I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but perhaps Mr. Soule could >> >set the record straight. >> > > >> >> "Fuzzy" is pretty it pretty mildly, sir. >> >> I've just about had it with your insults and now your lies. >> Newman 1) never been in jail in his life and >> 2) he has never had sex with a minor. > >I'm glad to hear it. By the way, I have to admit my lies >are plagiarized; they really belong to someome else. >The stuff on JN, jail and minors was in >a syndicated column called The Straight Dope, by Cecil Adams, sometime >between in 1985 and 1990. If it is false, you had better sue Mr. Adams >(aka Ed Zotti). Strangely, I read the column during that >time and never saw a retraction, even though Adams would regularly print >corrections for much more minor misstatements. You really ought >to take it up with him. His web site is: > >http://www.straightdope.com/search.html > >Also there, he has online the Indices from the three books >of column compilations he has published, and in these I find: > >Index of More of the Straight Dope >... >Newman, Joseph (perpetual motion > machine inventor), 401-2 >... > >Index of Return of the Straight Dope >... >Newman, Joseph (perpetual motion > machine inventor), update on, > 409-410 >... >>From memory, I'm pretty sure its the latter update column, which >updated us on Newman's unfortunate personal problems. > >I suggest you check it out, since you are JN's PR man. Perhaps >he didn't tell you everything when you were hired. Please get back >to us with the straight dope on this matter. > > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, If what you state is true (regarding Mr. Adams' comments), then this is a excellent example of the residual sludge generated by media mis/disinformation: a straight dope publicizes lies which are then sarcastically promulgated with seeming pleasure by yourself. I will certainly inform Joseph Newman about the lies apparently published by this "straight dope." What I find most interesting is: I post a sincere news release about an upcoming event in St. Louis, and you choose to generate insults and fixate on Joseph Newman's sex life. I would say that this is a bit off-topic for this List. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:02:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16482; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:52:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:52:44 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:57:42 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: To: Motorola CSS Resent-Message-ID: <"eVEzm2.0.S14.BD5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3703 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 03:17 PM 1/29/97 -0600, you wrote: >> >>Looked up one of the websites detailed at the bottom of the original post on >>this topic. Quite a few pages to read, but one thing struck me as odd. This >>guy stands on a soapbox declaring all governments and corporations to be >>greedy, corupt, and evil (10+ pages of ranting) yet he maintains to have >spent >>the last 10+ years and over 1.5 Mil USD securing patents for his >>electromagnetic O/U device around the world. If he really is the friend of >>humanity he claims, and if he truely holds the key to revolutionizing society >>as we know it, what is he waiting for? If he despises greed and the present >>day economic structure as he says, why is he wasting time seeking patents? >> Does he intend to do away this existing evil power base or just usurp it for >>his own agenda? Something stinks here, but I can't put my finger on it. 1.5 >>Mil USD is more than enough venture capital to start manufacturing on almost >>any new product, why did he waste his funding? I see red flags all over the >>place. Did I miss something? >> >>-john >> >>-- >>John E. Steck >>Motorola CSS >> >> > >Yes you've missed a lot BUT you've seen enough >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm As always, Michael, thanks for the sarcasm. The irony is, you claimed to have seen enough, yet it is obvious that you have missed a lot. :-) Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:03:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16610; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:23 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:05 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Magnetic Lift Resent-Message-ID: <"GJMHN2.0.b24.cD5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3705 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >The toy IS nifty and does work well within a controlled environment. Ain't >no way you can maintain control in the real world of highly variable air >without adding old-fashioned mechanical/chemical propulsion. What does >that do to your weight ratios? Magnetism falls off at the square of the >distance and it is pretty damn weak on the surface to start with. How far >do you think you are going to get? No way to lift magnetically. It MUST be >an electrostatic phenomenon causing some sort of laminar air flow about the >ballon, thus creating enough displacement for very sllloooowwwwww motion, >which it exhibits. > >Enough said, Newman and Soule should go fly a ballon...in the carney >markets. Lots of money to be made there. >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm Dear Mike, Once again, thanks for your sarcasm and insulting comments. I wish to endeavor to make one thing crystal clear to you: my original post was neither negative, sarcastic, insulting, nor attacking anyone in any way. Nor did it threaten you in any way. Yet you have chosen to initiate snide, sarcastic, insulting comments which I neither appreciate nor respect. If you don't like the original news release post there are two things you can do: 1) you can ignore it or 2) you can challenge it in a manner appropriate to this List....without the sarcasm and insults that only reflect poorly upon your own judgment --- especially your statement, "No way to lift magnetically" which demonstrates a fundamental ignorance of this technology. As I've said before, if you want to indulge yourself in this sarcastic and ridiculing approach which you have chosen to initiate, we can take that aspect of the thread private. No doubt it would be a mutual waste of time. A fellow Vortex-L subscriber just sent me the following regarding your post above, so --- out of consideration for your continuing sarcasm --- I suppose I'll pass it along: "There's some sllloooowwwwww motion going on ... but I believe it's in the brain of a certain publisher at MetaSyn Media." Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:03:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16771; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:45 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:28 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Fused thinking Resent-Message-ID: <"kP5Xd.0.r54.5E5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3708 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote >> >> Let's hope that your 'research activities' with your "Fusion Energy >> Research Program" are not as fuzzy as the rest of your thinking. >> > >No, my thinking is only as fuzzy as the subject warrants. > >But, if for the moment we ignore all the massive historical evidence >that JN is a crank with no valid o/u motor, answer me this: > >If JN has a viable over unity motor, why doesn't >he simply send a version for testing to EarthTech Int'l. >This company is set up _precisely_ to test such devices! >They are actually friendly and well-disposed towards such things! >If they found it really worked, it would recieve vastly >greater attention from mainstream organizations, and Puthoff >certainly has the connections needed to hook up a valid device >with investors, should such ever be found. > >That JN does not take advantage of the accreditation services >offered by EarthTech is just one more indicator to me that he has >nothing. > >(By the way: let me take the oppurtunity to say that I think >EarthTech is really a great endeavor, even though I think >their odds of finding such an invention are extremely tiny...if >you never look, you'll never know.) > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, Selective fuzziness? It would appear as though you have lost control over your selectivity. Joseph Newman has over 30 scientists who have signed Affidavits attesting to the operability of his technology including a former U.S. Commissioner of the Patent Office and Electrical Engineer with "impeccable credentials" according to the U.S. Patent Office and the Federal Judge who appointed this technical expert as a Special Master to his Court hearing Joseph Newman suit against the Patent Office. Joseph Newman is now involved in creating a company to produce his technology. Others are free at EarthTech or whereever to build their own _independent_ prototypes. This is one reason why Joseph Newman freely published his 1996 Wiring and Construction Diagram of one of his latest motor designs for his technology. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:03:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16809; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:54 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:30 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Hypocrisy? Resent-Message-ID: <"vuhFP2.0.Q64.DE5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3709 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 07:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, you wrote: >>> >> >>I'll be glad to discuss it in private, but in this case I think >>other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well. >>Its certainly on-topic for the group, since JN has long claimed >>to have working over-unity devices. So, Bill Beatty permitting... >> >>To start the discussion, let me tell you what bothers me about JN. >> >>Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman >> >> >>Barry Merriman >>Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >>Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >>email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry >> >> > >BARRY, I don't know whether to strangle you with your mouse cord or form up >a cheering section. This Newman stuff just clutters my inboxes irritating >my goal-focused personality. On the other hand, my sense of entertainment >enjoys a feeding now and then as well. Since you are willing to spend the >time, to do a definitive no-hold barred, knock down and drag out public >shootout, it could end up being pretty educational, I guess we shouldn't >begrudge it. Please don't change the thread name because I am setting up a >filter to channel the volumes which are about to descend into a new mailbox. > >NOTE TO BILL BEATY. This is a tuff call for Vortex. It is going to get >very catty in this thread. The war has started by calling Newman, >uh-hah-uh, the Great American Crank, which on the initial round was stated >with supporting data. I think we need to challenge Barry here to serve as >an exemplar of a dispassionate examination of objective fact, let the >"crank" word pass with one demerit on his side, because even **IF** it is >true, it is still a pejorative term. Soule and Newman are not capable of >dealing non-emotionally as we well know by now. Their primary refutation >is "liar". But I am willing to put up with that stuff to let them reveal >who they really are. But other members of Vortex may tell me, Barry, and >them to shut up. Other than this, Barry, this is your show and I am going >to stay out of it. What say Vortex? >____________________________________ >MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing >Michael Mandeville, publisher >mwm aa.net >http://www.aa.net/~mwm Dear Mike, Well, it's a cute note on your part. You initiate the negativism with your original post and then you choose to step aside and let Barry take over. I am not calling you this --- and I may be incorrect --- but it __appears__ that you are a hypocrite: You appear to belittle me (and Joe) by stating we "are not capable of dealing non-emotionally as we well know by now" --- yet in your original post you ___initiated___ your _own_ emotional statement: "It is a great carney game kinda thing. One could make excellant money with it if one were upfront about it being a carney toy." It's a pity that you did not speak out with your emotional sarcasms and insults to Joe's face at the Tesla Convention. I would have enjoyed the ensuing discussion. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html P.S. There is also another way of looking at this question of "emotionalism": show me a major innovator in history who was not truly and deeply "emotional" about his work and/or emotional in general, and you will show me an exception to the rule. One reason Newton 'retired to the Mint' was that it was a means of insulating himself from crackpots and cranks attacking him and his work. I rather doubt if the Wright Brothers reacted without emotion to being called not the "Flying Brothers" but the "Lying Brothers." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:03:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16738; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:41 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:17 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: THE NBS TEST: AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY (THE REAL STORY) I. Resent-Message-ID: <"dA3O_1.0.D54.0E5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3707 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The following is now a long-over due response to the NBS Test originally conducted on Joseph Newman's motor/generator. [Actually this response was written at the time of its the original testing --- buy many did (and do) not know of this response.] THE NBS TEST: AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY (THE REAL STORY) Following the dismissal of the findings of the court-appointed Special Master, (a former U.S. Commissioner of the Patent Office [with "impeccable credentials" according to Judge Jackson & nominated as Special Master by the Patent Office] who said that the "evidence was overwhelming" that the Newman motor/generator worked), Federal Judge Jackson (who appointed the Special Master) ignored his own Special Master's findings and imposed upon Joseph Newman a fee of $11,000.00 for the Special Master's Report. (Judge Jackson was the federal judge hearing the case brought by Joseph Newman against the Patent Office.) Judge Jackson then remanded the case BACK to the Patent Office --- Joseph Newman's judicial adversary --- for further action. It was then recommended by the Patent Office that the NBS formally test Joseph Newman's invention. Under the original NBS test conditions, Judge Jackson 1) refused to order the NBS to prepare a testing program in advance of delivery of the energy machine to the NBS, 2) refused to permit Joseph Newman the right to have an expert present for testing, 3) stated that the test results would be issued in secret to Judge Jackson who said in the court record that "it (the results) will be held under seal until we determine that it ought to be exhibited to the public.", and 4) gave the NBS an open-ended period of testing. On behalf of Joseph Newman, attorney John Flannery filed a WRIT OF MANDAEMUS with the U.S. Court of Appeals, seeking to reverse Judge Jackson's unfair testing conditions in favor of those open testing procedures originally proposed by Joseph Newman. On January 13, 1986, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a court order upholding Joseph Newman's WRIT OF MANDAEMUS against Judge Jackson. The higher court sternly rebuked Jackson for ordering "highly irregular" testing procedures that denied Joseph Newman the "fundamental fairness" guaranteed him by the Federal Rules. Jackson had originally ordered Joseph Newman to surrender his energy machine of the National Bureau of Standards so that Office might dismantle or even destroy it. Instead, the U.S. Court of Appeals rejected ALL of Jackson's conditions for testing and supported Joseph Newman's position. [As it turned out, this did no good, because Jackson/NBS/Patent Office did exactly what they wanted to do anyway.] The higher Court criticized Judge Jackson for authorizing the destruction of Joseph Newman's invention and giving "no reason for barring petitioner from observing all the tests on his device, or from knowing in advance what tests are to be conducted (by the NBS)," The higher Court concluded: "Such procedures are highly irregular, and taint the evidentiary value of the test results." SPECIFICALLY, THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ORDERED THAT: 1) the NBS tests be prepared in advance of the energy machine's delivery to the NBS, 2) Joseph Newman be present for testing as well as have an expert on his behalf, 3) the energy machine could not be dismantled or destroyed without Joseph Newman's consent, 4) the NBS would have 30 days AND NO MORE to test the energy machine, and 5) the results would be issued openly and publicly to all parties. However, after Joseph Newman delivered his energy machine prototype to the NBS on January 24, 1986, the following happened: During the authorized and original 30-day test period (from January 24, 1986 to February 24, 1986) the NBS did not conduct a SINGLE test! The Patent Office and the NBS asked the Court of Appeals to change its mind and let the NBS dismantle and destroy the energy machine. On February 12, 1986, for the second time, the Court of Appeals said "NO: The NBS's representative, Dr. Hebner, has not attested to his inability to test the device, or that its structure is concealed, or that a test program cannot be reasonably conducted to ascertain whether the device performs as disclosed in the patent application and "on reconconsideration, we affirm the prior order." The NBS still refused the test the energy machine and to run a single test unless they were permitted to destroy the invention. They told the Court of Appeals BEFORE they ran the test that Joseph Newman's invention was a hoax! (Hardly the comment of an "unbiased" testing agency.) The NBS then offered dozens of excuses --- each of which Joseph Newman anwswered --- in an effort to run the (30 day) clock while they waited for permission to destroy the energy machine, e.g., the NBS insisted on communicating by mail, rather than by telephone. In another instance, the NBS required Joseph Newman to travel 1,000 miles from Mississippi to Maryland to move a single wire a single inch. Apparently the wire had come loose while the machine was in the possession of the NBS. Joseph Newman flew to Maryland and reconnected the loose wire, but the NBS still refused to test the energy machine or even tell Joseph Newman when or how they would test it. During the 1,000 mile trip to connect the wire by moving it one inch, an event occurred WHICH WOULD HAVE GREAT SIGNIFICANCE LATER ON. The approximately 135-lb energy machine delivered to the NBS would --- if not restricted --- "pump" back-emf into the battery pack and thus proceed to overcharge and damage the batteries by shorting them out internally. Normally, Joseph Newman placed 4-foot fluorescent bulbs in the circuit to act as a "release valve" to reduce this back-emf into the batteries. Since it was inconvenient to carry 4-foot bulbs to the NBS offices in Maryland the day Joseph Newwman traveled there from Mississippi to reconnect in several minutes the loose wire, Joseph Newman simply grounded the energy machine to shunt away the back-emf and prevent it from damaging the batteries. What is most ironic is that NBS officials saw Joseph Newman GROUND the energy machine and they ASSUMED that he ALWAYS grounded it --- even for testing! The NBS officials were not interested in mastering Joseph Newman's technical process and understanding the principles involved. Instead --- like "monkey see, monkey do" --- they later grounded the energy machine during their secret testing of the confiscated energy machine (see below). This action would have important ramifications with respect to the validity of the actual NBS test. [It should be added that Joseph Newman has NO intention of "educating the NBS personnel." They were supposed to be the experts; Joseph Newman's attitude was, "Let's see what the 'experts' do."] Moreover, before the NBS ran any tests, Joseph Newman's attorney sent the NBS a NON-GROUNDED schematic of the circuit used to test the energy machine. And the reader should be reminded that over five years earlier Joseph Newman transported an 800-pound unit from Mississippi to Maryland and asked the NBS to test the device. [This was shortly after he had filed his original Patent Application.] The NBS refused to even look at the unit! In addition, since Joseph Newman has over 30 Affidavits from physicists, electrical engineers and electrical technicians attesting to validity of the machine while the Patent Office had NOT ONE affidavit to the contrary, Joseph Newman's position was that the Patent Office's refusal to grant him a patent was groundless. ADDITIONAL HISTORICAL NOTE: early in the application process Joseph Newman was told by a patent office examiner "Mr. Newman, we believe that your invention works, but your technical description is inadequate." Joseph Newman appealed this decision and was informed by the next higher examiner: "Mr. Newman, we believe that your technical description is adequate, but your invention does not work." It was at this point that Joseph Newman initiated his lawsuit in the Federal Court against the Patent Office. BACK TO THE STORY OF THE NBS TEST: Well, the "experts" at the National Bureau of Standards did nothing during the court-ordered-and-authorized-30-day-test-period that expired on February 23, 1986. On Monday, 10:30AM on February 24, 1986, Joseph Newman's attorney, John Flannery, appeared at the Maryland headquarters of the National Bureau of Standards where the energy machine was being held. Armed guards met John Flannery and refused to permit him to secure and return Joseph Newman's property. Mr. Flannery was informed that he had until 12 noon of that day to appear at an emergency meeting in Federal Judge Jackson's courtroom. Should Flannery fail to appear, Jackson would immediately issue a warrant for his arrest. Attorney John Flannery did appear in the courtroom of Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson by 12 noon. He was promptly informed by Judge Jackson that the energy machine of Joseph Newman was NO LONGER THE PROPERTY OF HIS COURT and that it was now under the COMPLETE CONTROL of the National Bureau of Standards and that the invention would NOT be returned to Joseph Newman --- even after the agreed-upon 30-day NBS test period had expired. Joseph Newman's attorney John Flannery then asked Judge Jackson to remove himself as the Judge in the case because of demonstrated personal bias and prejudice. Jackson denied that he was prejudiced and refused to tell Joseph Newman what authority permitted the Judge to violate the Court of Appeals Order (see above). As Joseph Newman said, "Since when in this country can a court take away a person's property, seize it without even a hearing and in violation of a standing order from an appellate court? Something is very wrong here." On March 3, 1986, as a result of the Court's questionable procedures, Joseph Newman made an Affidavit in support of a motion to disqualify Judge Jackson for his demonstrated bias and prejudice. On March 7, 1986, the District Court held a status conference to consider giving the NBS more time to test the energy machine in violation of the original 30-day time limit authorized by the U.S. Court of Appeals. Immediately before the status conference began, Jackson's law clerk handed Joseph Newman's attorney John Flannery an order denying Joseph Newman's motion to disqualify Judge Jackson as insufficient, but without any discussion as to why the pleadings were factually insufficient. Judge Jackson then held attorney John Flannery in contempt for merely mentioning the pending motion to disqualify him. Jackson then gave the PTO/NBS until June 26, 1986 to test the energy machine --- 150 DAYS AFTER THE ENERGY MACHINE WAS ORIGINALLY DELIVERED. Joseph Newman could not financially afford to be present with counsel and expert for the 12-hour workdays the NBS claimed they worked each day on testing the energy machine. It would have cost Joseph Newman over $60,000 to attend the tests and is one of the reasons that the U.S. Court of Appeals authorized the original 30-day test period limit. Former PTO Commissioner Mossinghoff misappropriated $100,000 to run the unprecedented tests which were in violation of the original order of the U.S. Court of Appeals. And according to the Patent Office, the tests cost approximately $75,000.00. Although Joseph Newman has the "right" to attend the later, unauthorized tests on his now-confiscated energy machine, it was a "right" that he could not financially afford to exercise. Joseph Newman is not a large corporation. He is an inventor who lives by what he invents. Worse, the Patent Office said that they expect Joseph Newman to reimburse the Patent Office for ALL NBS tests! IT IS, IN FACT, JOSEPH NEWMAN'S POSITION THAT ALL PTO/NBS/JUDGE JACKSON ACTIONS TAKEN AFTER THE FEBRUARY 24, 1986 CONFISCATION WITHOUT-DUE-PROCESS OF HIS PROPERTY ARE ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL. As a result of this position and of the expense in attending 90 additional days of testing, Joseph Newman did NOT IN ANY WAY wish to appear to endorse the NBS proceedings by being present for their testing. Also, it should be noted that BEFORE the NBS ran any tests, Joseph Newman's attorney, John Flannery, forwarded to the NBS a schematic of the circuit used to test the energy machine. It plainly showed NOT to connect the energy machine to ground. Continued in Part II. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, contact: Evan Soule Director of Information Newman Energy Products (504) 524-3063 Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, Mississippi (601) 947-7147 email: josephnewman earthlink.net P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, Louisiana 70157-7684 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:04:11 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16873; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:54:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:54:02 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:23 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: THE NBS TEST: AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY (THE REAL STORY) II. Resent-Message-ID: <"KIK3W.0.Z64.DE5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3710 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: THE NBS TEST: AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY (THE REAL STORY) II. (continued from Part I.) Prior to the expected release of the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) test (conducted by three individuals) results on June 26, 1986, Joseph Newman issued a national press release --- sent to over 1,500 members of the press --- which predicted that the NBS test results would be negative and that a "mockery of justice is expected to continue in the chambers of Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson." On June 26, 1986, the NBS unsurprisingly said that Joseph Newman's device did not work. Moreover, Jackson set a trial date for December 8, 1986. (Up to this point, Jackson had held a series of expensive hearings to determine if a trial was warranted. Jackson refused to relieve himself from the case due to bias, and Jackson refused to give Joseph Newman a trial by jury. In fact, a Patent Office attorney once told Joseph Newman's attorney, "We would hate to see this case tried by a jury.") It is ironic that as a consequence of the Patent's Office disregard of the Court of Appeals requirement that the NBS notify Joseph Newman of what tests they intended to run, Joseph Newman did not know how the NBS "tested" his machine until AFTER the NBS issued its report. Consequently, Joseph Newman discovered that the NBS DID NOT ACTUALLY TEST HIS INVENTION AT ALL. In one of his press releases, Joseph Newman writes: "In his April 9, 1984 Statutory Declaration before a Federal Court, page 10, NBS expert Jacob Rabinow claimed the following: 'It is my opinion since Mr. Newman does not use a tightly-coupled iron structure around his armature, that the efficiency of his motor should be very low when used purely as a motor.' Following the release of the June 26, 1986 NBS Report (which has been challenged by Dr. Roger Hastings and other scientific experts), NBS spokesman Matt Heyman boastfully stated to the newsmedia that: 'the energy machine invention was so inefficient that if one wanted to operate an ELECTRIC FAN, then don't use the Newman Invention hooked to a battery, but rather use a simple conducting wire from a battery to a conventional motor.' The above two statements by NBS representatives Rabinow and Heyman are ESPECIALLY IRONIC because on July 30, 1986 --- in conjunction with his appearance before the Senate Subcommittee Hearing --- Joseph Newman demonstrated his latest, portable energy machine prototype which operated as a MOTOR (without Rabinow's 'tightly-coupled iron structure around the armature') to power a home-appliance ELECTRIC FAN at an efficiency rate that proved the Patent Office and the NBS dead wrong. Again." Dr. Roger Hastings, Senior Physicist with a major research corporation concluded that the Patent Office's trial expert, the National Bureau of Standards --- the preeminent national testing laboratory --- failed to measure the energy in Joseph Newman's energy machine although it had the energy machine for 150 days. Dr. Hastings said that the NBS simply didn't know what they were doing. "The Court of Appeals gave the Patent Office 30 days to test the energy machine and required the Patent Office to tell us in advance what tests they were going to run during the 30-day test period authorized by the U.S. Court of Appeals," said John Flannery, Newman's counsel. "But their expert, the NBS, kept the device 150 days and never told us what tests they were going to run during this 30-day period," he concluded. In his evaluation, Dr. Hastings wrote that the NBS "results reflect a total lack of communication between the NBS and Newman or any other expert on Newman's technology." "If they told us what they were doing, we might have been able to avoid this waste of time and resources of Joseph Newman and the taxpayers as well," said Flannery. Dr. Hastings said in his evaluation that the NBS allowed energy to escape from Newman Energy Machine and then, instead of measuring the output energy from the machine, they measured the power consumed by resistors "placed in parallel with the Newman motor, and called this power the output." Dr. Hastings concluded, "The primary r.f. (radio frequency) power was shunted to ground." As for measuring output, Hastings said the NBS's test was "equivalent to stating that the output of an electric motor plugged into a wall socket is given by the power used by a light bulb in the next room which is on a parallel circuit." "The NBS test results came as no surprise to me," said Joseph Newman, "I never expected that we would get a fair shake from the Patent Office's expert. What I am surprised about is how badly they did the job." If the Patent Office and the NBS had complied with the Court of Appeals Order, Joseph Newman would have had a second opportunity to reinforce what was already obvious from the schematic diagram forwarded to the NBS --- that they should NOT connect Joseph Newman's energy machine to ground. Joseph Newman could have told the NBS that they were in error. But since the NBS and the Patent Office failed to give Joseph Newman any notice --- contrary to the U.S. Court of Appeals Order --- of the tests they intended to run during the 30-day test period authorized by the Court of Appeals, the Patent Office and the NBS wasted Joseph Newman's resources and, by their estimates, $75,000.00 of federal taxpayer's monies misappropriated by former Patent Office Commissioner Mossinghoff. The Republican Study Committee of Congress wrote in its May 9, 1986 REPORT: "Joseph Newman has received arbitrary and unfair treatment at the hands of the Patent Office and Judge Jackson. Congress should act because the Executive and Judicial branches have failed this American citizen. In light of Congress' oversight responsibilities and the fact that it is empowered by the Constitution to issue patents, the fact that the preponderance of evidence is in Joseph Newman's favor, and the fact that this invention is potentially beneficial to hundreds of millions of people, it is totally in order for Congress to grant Newman a patent and to allow the American marketplace to decide the value of this invention." ************************************** SUMMATION OF ANALYSIS OF TEST RESULTS: ************************************** GROUND: The NBS shunted energy from the Newman invention to ground without measuring and lost this energy. RESISTORS: The NBS measured energy spent in resistors but not in or by Newman's invention. Dr. Hastings: "In the NBS testing, the Newman motor was connected directly to ground, thus eliminating the excess r.f. power from the system." Dr. Hastings: "The NBS test is equivalent to stating that the output of an electric motor plugged into a wall socket is given by the power used by a lightbulb in the next room which is on a parallel circuit." Principal points concerning deficiencies of the NBS test conducted by three individuals: 1) The input voltage into the energy machine was restricted. This is exactly opposite to the Technical Process taught by Joseph Newman who teaches that the input voltage should be maximized and the input current should be minimized. The three individuals at the NBS did the opposite. 2) As Dr. Roger Hastings wrote in his statement: "In the NBS testing, the Newman motor was connected directly to ground." --- as a result, the excess output power was shunted away. 3) The NBS test did not measure the output of Newman's motor --- instead, he says, the tests measured the output of parallel resistors. As a result, Dr. Hastings says, "Their measurements are therefore irrelevant to the actual functioning of the Newman device." 4) No attempt was made by the NBS to measure the heat generated in the motor windings. 5) No attempt was made by the NBS to measure the mechanical output of the Newman motor --- only the electrical output. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, contact: Evan Soule Director of Information Newman Energy Products (504) 524-3063 Route 1, Box 52, Lucedale, Mississippi (601) 947-7147 email: josephnewman earthlink.net P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, Louisiana 70157-7684 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:04:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA16589; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:53:19 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:58:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Comment Resent-Message-ID: <"YtidA.0.634.jD5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3706 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote: >> >> P.S. Judging by __your__ initiated insults and attacks it is >> apparent that your approach is not particularly positive. > >You are absolutely right that I am the one initiating the >hostility. But really, I should have put smileys on the things >I said, because I consider Joe Newman to be more of a joke >than anything else. In my mind, Joe Newman personifies the Great >American Crank. _______________________________________ Dear Barry, You started it. You appear intent on continuing it. Let's do it. While there is one school of thought that one should simply ignore the insults of a fuzzy-brained 'scientist' --- who, BTW, is an insult to the word "scientist" --- there is another school of thought which maintains that lies and attacks which go unchallenged only generate additional residual sludge (see my other post). _______________________________________ >> I invite you to pursue a private email interchange where we can >> 'slug it out'....I will endeavor to help you work through >> your negativism. > >I'll be glad to discuss it in private, but in this case I think >other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well. >Its certainly on-topic for the group, since JN has long claimed >to have working over-unity devices. So, Bill Beatty permitting... _______________________________________ Remember, __you__ are the one using the words "I think other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well." ---- just so this point does not get lost in the shuffle. _______________________________________ > >To start the discussion, let me tell you what bothers me about JN. > >Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman > > >10) Was divinely inspired to marry an underage girl, for which > he went to prison. _______________________________________ Barry: this is a lie, pure and simple. _______________________________________ > >9) Receives his "scientific" knowledge by divine revelation. _______________________________________ Barry: this demonstrates that you have no knowledge of the numerous scientific tests which he has conducted over three decades, many of which are described in his book. _______________________________________ > >7) Acts like a crank by issuing long, rambling tracts > about why he is right, everyone else is wrong, and the > many conspiracies against him. _______________________________________ Barry: the injustices against him are well-documented. Many of these injustices are the results of rather stupid individuals such as Donovan Duggan who "run their mouths off" without knowing the facts. _______________________________________ > >6) Has own personal theories of physics to explain where his > extra energy comes from, totally unsupported by known theory or > basic experiments. _______________________________________ Barry: This statement demonstrates a _total_ ignorance on your part of his technology. It also indicates your personal ignorance regarding the fact that the PHYSICAL lines of force represent kinetic energy --- and that the energy in electromagnetic phenomena consists of MATTER IN MOTION. _______________________________________ > >5) Has had 20 years and many $'s to develop and commercialize his motor, > with no apparent success. _______________________________________ Barry: Over the past 20 years he has made considerable progress and success in the development of his motor/generator technology. Had he not received costly and abusive treatment by truly stupid employees at the Patent Office --- especially at the hands of my good 'friend', Donovan F. Duggan, he would have received his Pioneering Patent years ago which would have greatly assisted the commercialization of this technology. Of course, 17 years is a long time to humans living short life-spans. However, in the sense of the Species Time Scale, 17, 27 or 37 years is but the blink of a eye. One thing I've learned in interfacing with pathological sceptics and intellectual dishonest individuals is: patience. _______________________________________ > >4) Gave physically ridiculous public demo in early 80's where > his motor---aided by a trunk full of ~1000 AA batteries---allowed > a car to creep along at a couple miles per hour (roughly what > one would predict for the power output of said batteries), > and billed this as powering a vehicle with his motor and > AA batteries. _______________________________________ Barry: Interesting. Ray-O-Vac Battery Corporation would happen to disagree with your "knowledgable" synopsis of that demonstration. The motor powering the 1800-lb automobile at that demonstration operated for 34 hours on the current equivalent to that from a 1.5-volt transistor battery. Joseph Newman challenges anyone to run an 1800-lb automobile powered by a __conventional electric motor__ with the current equivalent to that from a 1.5-volt transistor battery. The performance of those batteries connected in __series__ amazed representatives of Ray-O-Vac who had supplied the batteries for the test. Upon dismantling the batteries at their laboratory, Ray-O-Vac representatives reported that the internal parts of the batteries had been "burned through as if with a laser from the back-charging effects of his motor" which operated on HIGH voltage and LOW current. _______________________________________ > >3) Had his over unity motor examined in detail by US National Beareau > of Standards in early 80's: not only did they find it did > not work (it was < 90% efficient...not even a good motor), but > moreover they figured out **why** other tests had shown it to > be over unity: due to the long windings, it produced voltage > spikes so large they would confound ordinary test equipment. _______________________________________ Barry: This NBS test has been shown to be invalid. The so-called "experts" grounded the device for ALL tests, even after a) they were given a non-grounded schematic and b) they ___themselves___ prepared a non-grounded schematic IN ADVANCE of all testing. Yet for ALL testing they STILL grounded the device. One would expect that true scientists would have, at the very least, conducted __some__ non-grounded tests of the invention.... just to "see what happens" --- you know: that funny thing called "curiosity." But of course they already had their minds made up BEFORE they conducted any testing. Representatives of the NBS publicly attacked Joseph Newman long before they conducted a SINGLE test. This is hardly the performance of a supposedly "unbiased government testing agency." I will separately post a detailed synopsis specifically written in response to the NBS test. The totally inadequate test procedures of the three incompetent individuals at the NBS only attests to their failure to understand even the fundamentals of Joseph Newman's technology. _______________________________________ > >2) See 4). > >1) See 3). > > >Based on this, my personal opinion is that if there ever was a crank, >JN is one. Now, maybe I'm just grossly misinformed---I am certainly not >a Newman scholar, merely a casual observer of his follies since 1980. >Please do correct my errors in items 1--10. >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, Either you are a fuzzy-minded fool or you are simply grossly misinformed....or both. I will choose to believe that you are grossly misinformed. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html Additional document: THE NBS TEST: AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY (THE REAL STORY) Parts I. and II. P.S.: ****************************************** SUMMATION OF ANALYSIS OF NBS TEST RESULTS: ****************************************** GROUND: The NBS shunted energy from the Newman invention to ground without measuring and lost this energy. RESISTORS: The NBS measured energy spent in resistors but not in or by Newman's invention. Dr. Hastings: "In the NBS testing, the Newman motor was connected directly to ground, thus eliminating the excess r.f. power from the system." Dr. Hastings: "The NBS test is equivalent to stating that the output of an electric motor plugged into a wall socket is given by the power used by a lightbulb in the next room which is on a parallel circuit." Principal points concerning deficiencies of the NBS test conducted by three individuals: 1) The input voltage into the energy machine was restricted. This is exactly opposite to the Technical Process taught by Joseph Newman who teaches that the input voltage should be maximized and the input current should be minimized. The three individuals at the NBS did the opposite. 2) As Dr. Roger Hastings wrote in his statement: "In the NBS testing, the Newman motor was connected directly to ground." --- as a result, the excess output power was shunted away. 3) The NBS test did not measure the output of Newman's motor --- instead, he says, the tests measured the output of parallel resistors. As a result, Dr. Hastings says, "Their measurements are therefore irrelevant to the actual functioning of the Newman device." 4) No attempt was made by the NBS to measure the heat generated in the motor windings. 5) No attempt was made by the NBS to measure the mechanical output of the Newman motor --- only the electrical output. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:13:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA18646; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:03:02 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:03:02 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:08:06 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Info on xprize Resent-Message-ID: <"xvv902.0.4Z4.qM5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3711 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 9:25 PM 1/29/97, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >Dear John, > >Despite your previous and obvious hostility (which engendered a similar >reaction on my part), I will answer your question. A simple net-search >would have sufficed. > >The website you seek is: http://www.xprize.org/home.html [snip] Evan, I think you are confusing which John is which. JHS, the above web site has very little information. What you really want is the email address of the foundation: Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:18:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA19640; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:07:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:07:20 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:12:27 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Call for a moderator! Resent-Message-ID: <"9pFXx3.0.lo4.tQ5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3712 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 4:28 PM 1/29/97, Evan Soule (Joseph Newman?) wrote: > >"From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the patent claims, such >claims will be upheld in the __language of the Applicant.__" > >My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book >(which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic >technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this >moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the >above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue. > IMHO this kind of threat of law suit should not be tolerated in any moderated news list. Moderator? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:44:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA25265; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:35:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:35:43 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 03:40:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Flying High Resent-Message-ID: <"YwDL2.0.gA6.Tr5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3713 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: "Joe Champion" writes, >I remember one night quite well in 1988. I was drinking a red wine. I >boarded a flight from Houston to Denver and was feeling quite good. > >Sitting in the First Ass section (from money I made myself, not from >believers) I was humored from the flight attendant who said after all of >the safety announcements -- For you First Ass passengers, we must tell >you the truth..... > >In case of an emergency, please bend down and grab your ankles, place your >head between your legs and kiss your ass good bye............ > >Tell Mr. Newman to have a great flight................ > >For those that remember that time period, Robert Six was President of >Continental Airlines... Dear Joe: I will respond privately to your thoughtful comments. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:46:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA25458; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:36:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:36:58 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 03:41:44 -0600 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Stations Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"jNPxZ1.0.YD6.as5yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3714 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: N>Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will be featured on the Roger N>Fredinburg Show at 8:00PM (Pacific Time) this Thursday, January 30, 1997. N>The Roger Fredinburg Show will be carried Coast-to-Coast on 170 radio N>stations on the TALK RADIO NETWORK (AM). This is the same network which N>carries the Art Bell Show. Please consult your local radio stations in N>case (re)broadcast times may vary from city to city. Here's a list of stations I located on Rogers web site: City/State Call Freq Watts ALABAMA Foley WHEP 1310 1,000 Montgomery WACV 1170 1,000 Dothan WWNT 1450 1,000 Florence WBCF 1240 1,000 ALASKA Anchorage KENI 550 5,000 Fairbanks KFAR 660 10,000 Kodiak KJJZ 101.1 3,100 Kodiak KVOK 560 250 ARIZONA Globe KJAA 1240 1,000 Phoenix KFYI 910 5,000 Prescott KNOT 1450 Safford KATO 1000 1,000 ARKANSAS Ft. Smith KWHN 1320 5,000 Pine Bluff KOTN 1490 1,000 CALIFORNIA Bakersfield KNZR 1560 10,000 Chico KPAY 1060 10,000 Chico KNSN 1290 5,000 Merced KYOS 1480 5,000 Paso Robles KPRL 1230 1,000 Redding KQMS 1400 1,000 San Bernardino KCKC 1360 5,000 San Diego KOGO 600 5,000 Santa Barbara KQSB 990 500 Santa Maria KSMA 1240 1,000 Sonora KVML 1450 1,00 COLORADO Denver KHOW 630 5,000 Grand Junction KNZZ 1100 50,000 DELAWARE Rehoboth WGMD 92.7 3,000 FLORIDA Ft.Myers WINK 1240 1,000 Jacksonville WOKV 690 10,000 Leesburg WQBQ 1410 5,000 Sarasota WKXY 930 2,500 Sebring WWTK 730 500 St. Augustine WFOY 1240 1,000 Tampa WBDN 760 1,000 Port St. Lucie WPSL 1590 5,000 GEORGIA Dalton WDAL 1430 2,500 Jasper WYYZ 1490 1,000 IDAHO Idaho Falls KID 590 1,000 St. Maries KOFE 1240 500 ILLINOIS Herrin WJPF 1340 1,000 Mt. Vernon WMTX 940 5,000 Ottawa WCMY 1430 500 Peru WAIV 103.3 2,500 Quincy WTAD 930 1,000 Springfield WMAY 970 500 Peoria WTAZ 102.3 6,000 Cairo WKRO 1490 1,000 INDIANA Lafayette WASK 1450 1,000 Lafayette WASK 98.7 50,000 Tell City WTCJ 1230 1,000 IOWA Dubuque KDTH 1370 5,000 KANSAS Chanute KKOY 1460 1,000 Liberal KSCB 1270 500 KENTUCKY Central City WMTA 1380 500 Lexington WLXG 1300 1,000 Madisonville WTTL 1310 500 Ownesboro WOMI 1490 830 LOUISIANA Baton Rouge WJBO 1150 5,000 New Orleans WODT 1280 5,000 MASSACHUSETTS Attleboro WARA 1320 1,000 MICHIGAN Cadillac WKJF 1370 1,000 Flint WFNT 1470 1,000 Muskegon WKBZ 850 1,000 Sault St. Marie WKNW 1400 250 Traverse City WTCM 580 5,000 Petosky WJML 1110 10,000 MINNESOTA Brainerd WWWI 1270 5,000 Duluth WEBC 560 5,000 St. Cloud KNSI 1450 1,000 Bemidji KKVJ 1360 5,000 MISSISSIPPI Whynot KNKE Cable MISSOURI Cape Girardeau KZIM 960 500 Festus KJCF 1400 1,000 Jefferson City KWOS 1240 1,000 Joplin WMBH 1450 1,000 St. Louis KSD 550 5,000 Washington KLPW 1220 1,000 Farmington KREI 800 1,000 MONTANA Bozeman KMMS 1450 1,000 Great Falls KMSL 1450 1,000 Missoula KGVO 1290 5,000 NEBRASKA Fremont KHUB 1340 1,000 NEW HAMPSHIRE Manchester WGIR 610 1,000 NEW MEXICO Las Cruces KOBE 1450 1,000 Roswell KBIM 910 500 Santa Fe KVSF 1260 1,000 NEW YORK Amsterdam WCSS 1490 1,000 Elko KRJC 1340 1,000 Hudson WHUC 1230 1,000 Jamestown WJTN 1240 1,000 Utica WIBX 950 5,000 Glens Falls WWSC 1450 2,500 Olean WMNS 1360 1,000 NORTH CAROLINA Albemarle WSPC 1010 1,000 Fuquay-Varina WCRY 1460 120 Greensboro WKEW 1400 1,000 Jacksonville WLAS 910 5,000 Southern Pines WEEB 990 500 Wilmington WMFD 630 1,000 OHIO Canton WCER 900 500 Mansfield WMAN 1400 1,000 Springfield WBLY 1600 1,000 Youngstown WKBN 570 5,000 OKLAHOMA Bartlesville KWON 1400 1,400 Lawton KDDQ 96.7 1,000 McAlester KTMC 1400 1,000 OREGON Baker City KBKR 1490 1,000 Coos Bay KHSN 1230 1,000 Klamath Falls KAGO 1150 1,000 La Grande KLBM 1450 1,000 Medford KOPE 103.5 100,000 Roseburg KTBR 950 1,000 Tillamook KBMD 1590 1,000 PENNSYLVANIA Allentown WAEB 790 1,000 Beaver Falls WBVP 1230 1,000 Erie WFLP 1330 5,000 Milton WMLP 1380 1,000 Phillipsburg WPHB 105.9 5,000 Reading WEEU 850 1,000 SOUTH CAROLINA 2Burnwell WBAW 99.1 25,000 Charleston WTMA 1250 1,000 Columbia WVOC 560 5,000 Florence WJMX 970 5,000 Greenville WFBC 1330 5,000 Greenwood WLMA 1350 1,000 Myrtle Beach WRNN 94.5 6,000 S2partenburg WORD 910 1,000 Anderson WAIM 1230 1,000 SOUTH DAKOTA Sioux Falls KWSN 1230 1,000 TENNESSEE Jackson WTJS 1390 1,000 Memphis WMC 790 5,000 Waynesboro WTNR 930 500 Murfreesboro WGNS 1450 1,000 TEXAS El Paso KTSM 1380 500 Huntsville KYLR 1400 1,000 Lubbock KKAM 1340 1,000 Lufkin KRBA 1340 1,000 UTAH Blanding KUTA 790 1,000 Salt Lake City KCNR 1120 5,000 VERMONT Burlington WVMT 620 5,000 VIRGIN ISLANDS St. Thomas WSTA 1340 1,000 VIRGINIA Bristol WXBQ 980 1,000 Front Royal WFTR 1450 1,000 Richmond WRVA 1140 1,000 WASHINGTON Ellensburg KXLE 1240 1,000 Everett KRKO 1380 5,000 Moses Lake KRSN 1470 5,000 Yakima KUTI 980 500 WEST VIRGINIA Charleston WQBE 950 5,000 WISCONSIN Fond Du Lac KFIZ 1450 1,000 Kenosha WLIP 1050 250 Lacrosse WIZM 1410 5,000 Madison WTDY 1480 5,000 Stevens Point WSPO 1010 1,000 West Bend WBKV 1470 2,500 WYOMING Cheyene KRAE 1480 500 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 00:58:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA27382; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:49:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:49:45 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 03:50:43 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Message-ID: <970130085043_100060.173_JHB77-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"ucjiE1.0.lh6.d26yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3715 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> What say Vortex? << Mike, What fascinates me is the parallel with Meyer - the whole JN thing is so similar one wonders if they are related or members of the same club Its a pity that these people have to drag God into their PR - I suppose they think that that will add force to their project Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 01:03:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA28041; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:53:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:53:04 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:57:55 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Call for a moderator! Resent-Message-ID: <"aCHLQ.0.zr6.g56yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3716 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Earlier I wrote: "IMHO this kind of threat of law suit should not be tolerated in any moderated news list. Moderator?" Let me say that this was simply not stated strongly enough. I was out of town for some days and am sorely disappointed to reurn to find facets of both sci.physics.fusion and the Newman list migrating into the vortex. I would like to point out that this kind of "content free" fully hashed out drivel already has other designated places to go, has already been various other places, and adds nothing being repeated here. Besides, Joe's claim is that "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system is my invention. " (In effect he claims all o-u inventions conceived and yet to be conceived in the electromagnetic realm. I don't see why he does not copyright all words about o-u electromagnetic phenomena written and yet to be written, as such an approach would be equally valid and fully in conformance with US law and procedures. Vortex would then therefore become the new Newman list. 8^) More to the point, electromagnetic topics were designated to the freenrg list by fiat, so could we please have enforcement of that fiat? This unproductive name calling and threatening tripe is destructive. Let's not get sucked into it, however tempting it may be. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 01:12:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA30851; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:02:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:02:57 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 04:07:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Info on xprize Resent-Message-ID: <"ky-0C3.0.yX7.-E6yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3717 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 9:25 PM 1/29/97, Evan Soule wrote: >[snip] >>Dear John, >> >>Despite your previous and obvious hostility (which engendered a similar >>reaction on my part), I will answer your question. A simple net-search >>would have sufficed. >> >>The website you seek is: http://www.xprize.org/home.html >[snip] > >Evan, I think you are confusing which John is which. > >JHS, the above web site has very little information. What you really want >is the email address of the foundation: > > > > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Thanks for clarifying the name confusion and supplying the email address. My apologies to JHS. Sincerely, Evan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 01:28:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA00855; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:16:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:16:41 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 04:21:40 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Project Resent-Message-ID: <"CXT313.0.ED.uR6yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3718 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>> What say Vortex? << > >Mike, > >What fascinates me is the parallel with Meyer - the whole JN thing is so >similar >one wonders if they are related or members of the same club > >Its a pity that these people have to drag God into their PR - I suppose they >think that that will add force to their project > >Norman Dear Norman, I will respond privately to your insulting comment. In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 01:48:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA03830; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:34:18 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:34:18 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 04:39:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Call for a moderator! Resent-Message-ID: <"tvtMs2.0.mx.Oi6yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3719 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Earlier I wrote: > > >"IMHO this kind of threat of law suit should not be tolerated in any >moderated news list. Moderator?" > >Let me say that this was simply not stated strongly enough. I was out of >town for some days and am sorely disappointed to reurn to find facets of >both sci.physics.fusion and the Newman list migrating into the vortex. > >I would like to point out that this kind of "content free" fully hashed out >drivel already has other designated places to go, has already been various >other places, and adds nothing being repeated here. Besides, Joe's claim >is that "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than >energy externally inputted into the system is my invention. " (In effect >he claims all o-u inventions conceived and yet to be conceived in the >electromagnetic realm. I don't see why he does not copyright all words >about o-u electromagnetic phenomena written and yet to be written, as such >an approach would be equally valid and fully in conformance with US law and >procedures. Vortex would then therefore become the new Newman list. 8^) >More to the point, electromagnetic topics were designated to the freenrg >list by fiat, so could we please have enforcement of that fiat? > >This unproductive name calling and threatening tripe is destructive. Let's >not get sucked into it, however tempting it may be. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Dear Mr. Heffner, I will respond privately to your comments. In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 02:22:33 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA09165; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:12:36 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 02:12:36 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Joseph Newman To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 04:15:51 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Evan Soule" at Jan 29, 97 09:34:21 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"03oi.0.7F2.JG7yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3720 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > Let me repeat: "....Joseph Newman has been fighting an expensive battle for > his rights to a patent for his technology and for those innovators who may > not have the ability to fight as he had done against the injustices which > have occurred over the past 18 years." _This_ is his movitation. While it may be noble to fight injustice on behalf of the "little guy", it is really doubtful that patent issuance disputes break down into "haves" versus "have nots." The USPTO issues or refrains from issuing patents based upon their understanding of what works and what doesn't. Since they are only human, this is an imperfect review. The alternative is to have the USPTO issue a patent on every claim regardless of their adjudged merit -- but then the USPTO becomes nothing more than a central notary. Ironically, people such as Joseph Newman want patents granted precisely because they are somewhat of an imprimatur of scientific respectability (an important step toward commercial viability.) And therein lies the conundrum -- notary versus imprimatur. Mere notary doesn't convey any scientific respectability, it just officially notes precedence. The *primary* reason why patents are issued doesn't even come into play. i.e. the exclusive grant to produce for sale. Since nobody else is selling actual working free-energy machines, no sales revenue is being lost by Newman to competitors. And Newman surely doesn't need a patent in order to start producing a marketing his own free-energy machines. The minute actual working free-energy machines are available for sale, all existing patent claimes can be re-submitted and Newman's priority claims will be re-examined and patents issued to those who document true precedence. Frankly, I like Don Lancasters general advice on patents -- forget 'em, they are a waste of time. If you've got a new technology or improvement, produce it, market it, as fast as possible. Your sales window is likely just a few years before something better comes along. While others are still trying to secure patent protection, you are already collecting revenue. What good is it to have 10 more years of exclusive rights to a product that is now unmarketably obsolete? What good is it to have exclusive rights to a thing that no competitor would want to produce? His advice is sound for the additional reason that too many small time inventors waste countless hours patenting unmarketable inventions. If you just say "to hell with patents" you will avoid that futile trap. Instead, you will concentrate your efforts into market testing your inventions, and quickly discarding those ideas that are worthless. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 05:22:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA31333; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:12:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:12:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:13:28 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: NOT hostile ... YES curious Re: To Evan Soule In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"yzT5Y2.0.Vf7.Yu9yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3721 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Evan and the rest of Vortex, I am not now nor have I ever been hostile, to you or anyone else. I am always curious, questioning .... but NOT hostile. I do not get angry for long, if ever, and then only at trivial things. Anger, hostility and so on are wasteful actions and emotions. I have read Newman's book and find it VERY interesting. Hostile? No. That would presume I would allow the object of the hostility to live rent free in my mind and soul. Not a winning proposition for any party. My name is John Herman Schnurer. You may have me confused with someone else. I do not even mind if you do not respond to or apologize to this open letter.... I am just setting the record straight, I hope. I am not angry. I am thinking that maybe you and Newman have had a long and up hill trail, I can, from first hand experience, empathize with this. I again write to you, in open and humble curiousity about the 10 million dollar prize. If I was able to secure such a prize I would use the lion's share to endow the libraries of our local educational insitutions or maybe start a facility to preserve books. On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Evan Soule wrote: > > Dear Evan, > > > > What are the terms of the 10 million dollar prize? > > > > Who is sponsoring it? Who judges it? > > > > To jog your memory, in your 'for immediate release' post you > >mentioned and commended Foundation X [in capital letters] and the 10 > >million prize. > > > > JHS > > > > Dear John, > > Despite your previous and obvious hostility (which engendered a similar > reaction on my part), I will answer your question. A simple net-search > would have sufficed. > > The website you seek is: http://www.xprize.org/home.html > > Sincerely, > > Evan Soule' > Director of Information > NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS > josephnewman earthlink.net > (504) 524-3063 > P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 > Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 > http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html > http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html > > P.S. In this instance, my memory doesn't requiring 'jogging' by you --- but > thanks for the kind thought. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 05:36:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA00524; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:27:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:27:29 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:28:56 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helium Bag Newman ELECTROSTATICS In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970129193735.0074e67c aa.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"4wlBK.0.28._6Ayo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3722 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I thought magnetism fell off with cube of distance... but I admit my math is poor. On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Michael Mandeville wrote: > > The toy IS nifty and does work well within a controlled environment. Ain't > no way you can maintain control in the real world of highly variable air > without adding old-fashioned mechanical/chemical propulsion. What does > that do to your weight ratios? Magnetism falls off at the square of the > distance and it is pretty damn weak on the surface to start with. How far > do you think you are going to get? No way to lift magnetically. It MUST be > an electrostatic phenomenon causing some sort of laminar air flow about the > ballon, thus creating enough displacement for very sllloooowwwwww motion, > which it exhibits. > > Enough said, Newman and Soule should go fly a ballon...in the carney > markets. Lots of money to be made there. > ____________________________________ > MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing > Michael Mandeville, publisher > mwm aa.net > http://www.aa.net/~mwm > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 05:59:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA14178; Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:54:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:54:32 -0800 Message-ID: <32F03879.B24 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:58:17 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: JOSEPH NEWMAN'S ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wZSbd3.0.RT3.LU3yo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3700 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > (a snip from Dr. Roger Hastings' affidavit) > The following points should be noted: > > (1) The total payload is proportional to vehicle volume. This is probably true for the normal helium-balloon portion of the lift. > (2) The electromagnetic torque and lift are also proportional to volume in > this design. This is not so. The electromagnetic torque would be probortional to the AREA of the equivalent circular-turn of current having the same magnetic dipole moment as the wired balloon. An electromagnet of practical size would have almost NO linear thrust or lift due to the earth's magnetic field because the earth's field is so large that the GRADIENT of the field is very small. In a uniform magnetic field, a magnetic dipole can experience only a TORQUE, not a linear force. > (3) Navigation is achieved by manipulating the orientation of the coils. This might be realized to some extent. > (4) If superconducting wires become available, the batteries would not be > required. Probably true for future (?) room-temperature superconductors. > (5) For improved efficiency with copper wiring, sets of the cubes can be > connected in series and energized with pulsed high voltage. Joseph Newman > has developed such techniques to extend battery lifetime. This sounds like nonsense physics to me. > (6) In the atmosphere, lift is provided by a combination of ohmic heating > of the helium gas, electromagnetic interaction of the helium atoms with the > applied fields, and interaction of the applied magnetic field with the > earth's magnetic field. If the volume were free to expand with heat, then heating would help. The rest of (6) is vapor-physics. > (7) It is intended that the craft can operate entirely through interaction > with the earth's magnetic field once it leaves the atmosphere. It will never leave the atmosphere unless it's aboard some other launch vehicle that works. I am not laughing at the idea of inflatable space craft - the Atlas ICBM is an inflatable structure and works very well using rocket thrust. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 06:11:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA06208; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:01:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:01:20 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:02:44 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: I abstract Re: Comment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Pjvl63.0.wW1.kcAyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3723 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo, Throwing away all the broo fraa [or a lot of it anyway.....] I abstract a very nice and interesting bit from Evan's comments. On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Evan Soule wrote: > >Evan Soule wrote: > > From item 4 ::: > fact that the PHYSICAL lines of force represent kinetic energy --- and that > the energy in electromagnetic phenomena consists of MATTER IN MOTION. I will agree, on a micro level the little 'current loops' as they are sometimes called are matter in motion. I am not always in love with the current loop model ... but then again I am rarely in love with ANY model for all situations .... BUT: I will say the 'magic of magnetism' is the most interesting of things to search. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 06:37:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA08403; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:14:23 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:14:23 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:15:50 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Info on xprize In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cjjA12.0.932.zoAyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3724 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Evan, No harm done. Q: for the sake of a lay person ... Could the turning magnetic member be though of as a 'squeegee' which pushes 'jazz' through the windings? Please jog my memory as to direction of 'squeegee' VS directions of turns.... JHS On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Evan Soule wrote: > >At 9:25 PM 1/29/97, Evan Soule wrote: > >[snip] > >>Dear John, > >> > >>Despite your previous and obvious hostility (which engendered a similar > >>reaction on my part), I will answer your question. A simple net-search > >>would have sufficed. > >> > >>The website you seek is: http://www.xprize.org/home.html > >[snip] > > > >Evan, I think you are confusing which John is which. > > > >JHS, the above web site has very little information. What you really want > >is the email address of the foundation: > > > > > > > > > >Regards, > > > >Horace Heffner > > Thanks for clarifying the name confusion and supplying the email address. > My apologies to JHS. > > Sincerely, > > Evan > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 07:06:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA17250; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:50:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:50:53 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701300849.ZM3679 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:49:39 -0600 In-Reply-To: Michael Mandeville "Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE" (Jan 29, 10:34pm) References: <3.0.32.19970129203247.0072d290 aa.net> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"sW8531.0.RD4.8LByo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3725 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 29, 10:34pm, Michael Mandeville wrote: >> What say Vortex? "You can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all the people all of the time." -Abe Lincoln I'm still willing to consider even if only remotely feasible. Since the precedence of Mr. Newman's fight for a patent is apparently well documented, I suggest he allow us to check the math by posting coroborating evidence and test data. Legally he has grounds to contest if someone tries to steal anything so I don't see why he couldn't. If this thread continues to only involve philisophical disagreements (yes, I recognise my own guilt) then I vote to terminate. There are other lists for those type of discussions. -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 07:09:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA19460; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:59:27 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:59:27 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:02:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970130095908_1693307462 emout13.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: pejaks report MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="PART.BOUNDARY.0.531.emout13.mail.aol.com.854636348" Resent-Message-ID: <"BLzcS.0.-l4.CTByo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3727 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --PART.BOUNDARY.0.531.emout13.mail.aol.com.854636348 Content-ID: <0_531_854636348 emout13.mail.aol.com.42976> Content-type: text/plain attached file type WRI. Work abandoned a force that drops off at the fourth power is no force at all at length. --PART.BOUNDARY.0.531.emout13.mail.aol.com.854636348 Content-ID: <0_531_854636348 emout13.mail.aol.com.42977> Content-type: application/octet-stream; name="FIG8-4.WRI" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Mb4AAACrAAAAAAAAAAA6EwAAKAAsACwALAAsACwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgICAgICBSZXN1bWUgb2YgdGhlIFRIRU9SWSBPRiBUSEUg TUFHTk9DUkFGVCBieSBEci4gSmFuIFBhamFrDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICBUcmVh dGlzZSwgIDE5ODQsICBJU0JOIDAtOTU5NzY5OC1sLTENCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IEludmVyY2FyZ2lsbCwgUC5PLiBCb3ggMTcwNSwgTmV3IFplYWxhbmQNCg0KICAgICAgICAg ICAgIkEgdHJlYXRpc2Ugb24gdGhlIE1hZ25vY3JhZnQgLSBhIHNwYWNlIHZlaGljbGUgd2hp Y2ggcmVwcmVzZW50cyBhIGNvbXBsZXRlbHkNCiAgICAgIG5ldyBhcHByb2FjaCB0byBpbnRl cnN0ZWxsYXIgdHJhdmVsLCBoYXMgcmVjZW50bHkgYmVlbiBwdWJsaXNoZWQgaW4gTmV3IFpl YWxhbmQuICBUaGUNCiAgICAgIG1haW4gYWNoaWV2ZW1lbnRzIG9mIHRoaXMgYXBwcm9hY2gg YXJlOg0KDQogICAgICAgIChsKSAgIE5vdCBhIHNpbmdsZSBtb3ZpbmcgcGFydCBpcyBuZWNl c3NhcnksIGVpdGhlciBmb3IgZmxpZ2h0IG9yIG1hbmV1dmVyaW5nIG9mDQogICAgICAgICAg ICAgIHRoaXMgc3BhY2VjcmFmdC4gIEhvdyBpbXBvcnRhbnQgYSBicmVhay10aHJvdWdoIHRo aXMgaXMgY2FuIGJlIHJlYWxpemVkIHdoZW4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgd2UgdGhpbmsgb2Yg dGhlIHByb2R1Y3Rpb24gb2YgYWxsIHRoZXNlIHRob3VzYW5kcyBvZiBjb29wZXJhdGluZyBw YXJ0cw0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICBjb250YWluZWQgaW4gc3BhY2UgdmVoaWNsZXMgdG8gZGF0 ZSwgYW5kIHdoZW4gd2UgY29uc2lkZXIgdGhlIGNvbnNlcXVlbmNlcw0KICAgICAgICAgICAg ICBvZiB0aGUgZmFpbHVyZSB0byBtb3ZlIGFueSBvZiB0aGVzZSBwYXJ0cyBzb21ld2hlcmUg aW4gc3BhY2UuDQoNCiAgICAgICAgKDIpICAgVGhlIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb25zIGZvciB0aGlz IHNwYWNlY3JhZnQgYXJlIGF0IHN1Y2ggYW4gYWR2YW5jZWQgbGV2ZWwgdGhhdCBpdA0KICAg ICAgICAgICAgICBjYW4gbm90IGJlIGNvbXBhcmVkIHdpdGggYW55IGRldmljZSB0aGF0IG1h biBoYXMgYnVpbHQgdG8gZGF0ZS4gIFRoZSBNYWdub2NyYWZ0DQogICAgICAgICAgICAgIHdp bGwgcG9zc2VzczogYSBzcGVlZCBvZiBhcHByb3hpbWF0ZWx5IDcwLDAwMCBrbSBwZXIgaG91 ciBpbiB0aGUgYXRtb3NwaGVyZSwNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgYW5kIGNsb3NlIHRvIHRoZSBz cGVlZCBvZiBsaWdodCBpbiBmcmVlIHNwYWNlOyAgaW52aXNpYmlsaXR5IHRvIHJhZGFyIGFu ZCB0aGUNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgbmFrZWQgZXZlOyAgdGhlIGFiaWxpdHkgdG8gd2l0aHN0 YW5kIGFueSBoaWdoIHByZXNzdXJlIGFuZCB0ZW1wZXJhdHVyZTsgdGhlDQogICAgICAgICAg ICAgIHRvIGZseSBpbiBhbnkgZW52aXJvbm1lbnQsIGkuZS4gbm90IG9ubHkgaW4gYWlyLCB3 YXRlciBvciBmcmVlIHNwYWNlLA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICBidXQgYWxzbyB0aHJvdWdoIHNv bGlkIG1hdHRlciAocm9ja3MsIGJ1aWxkaW5ncywgYnVua2VycywgZXRjLikgYW5kIHRocm91 Z2gNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgbWVsdGVkIG1lZGlhOyAgdGhlIGFiaWxpdHkgdG8gb3Bwb3Nl IGFueSB3ZWFwb24gdGhhdCBvdXIgY3VycmVudCBtaWxpdGFyeQ0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICB0 ZWNobmlxdWVzIG1heSB1c2UgYWdhaW5zdCBpdDsgdGhlIGNhcGFiaWxpdHkgdG8gY2hhbmdl IGludG8gYW4gZXhwbG9zaXZlDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgIG1hdGVyaWFsIGFuZCBibGFzdCBl dmVyeSBwaWVjZSBvZiBtZXRhbCBmb3VuZCBpbiB0aGUgcmFuZ2Ugb2YgaXRzIHNwaW5uaW5n LA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICBwdWxzYXRpbmcgbWFnbmV0aWMgZmllbGQuDQoNCiAgICAgICAg KDMpLiAgQWxsIHRoZSBwcmluY2lwbGVzIGFwcGxpZWQgdG8gdGhlIE1hZ25vY3JhZnQgYXJl IGJhc2VkIG9uIG91ciBjdXJyZW50IGxldmVsIG9mDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgIGtub3dsZWRn ZSwgYW5kIG5vIHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIHRoZW9yeSBvZiB0aGlzIHNwYWNlY3JhZnQgLSBpbmNs dWRpbmcgdGhlIGRldmljZQ0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICBjYWxsZWQgYW4gJ29zY2lsbGF0b3J5 IGNoYW1iZXInIHdoaWNoIHByb2R1Y2VzIGEgcHVsc2F0aW5nIG1hZ25ldGljIGZpZWxkIHVz ZWQNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgYXMgdGhlIG1lYW5zIG9mIHByb3B1bHNpb24gLSByZXF1aXJl cyB0aGUgZGlzY292ZXJ5IG9mIGFueSBuZXcgdGVuZXQgb2YNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgcGh5 c2ljcyBvciBuZXcgcGhlbm9tZW5vbi4NCg0KICAgICAgVGhlIGFib3ZlIHBvaW50cyBtYWtl IHRoZSBNYWdub2NyYWZ0IGEgdmVoaWNsZSB3aGljaCBpcyBwb3NzaWJsZSB0byBiZSBjb21w bGV0ZWQgYnkgYQ0KICAgICAgc21hbGwgY291bnRyeSBvciBldmVuIGEgbGFyZ2UgaW5kdXN0 cmlhbCBjb3Jwb3JhdGlvbi4gIFdoZW4gYnVpbHQsIGl0IHdpbGwgY29tcGxldGVseQ0KICAg ICAgY2hhbmdlIGV2ZXJ5IGFzcGVjdCBvZiBvdXIgbGl2ZXMgLSBiZWdpbm5pbmcgaW4gdGhl IHBvbGl0aWNhbCBhcmVuYSAocHJvbW90aW9uIG9mIGENCiAgICAgIHdvcmxkIGxlYWRlciks IHRocm91Z2ggc29jaWFsIGFuZCBlY29ub21pYyB0cmFuc2Zvcm1hdGlvbiAob3BlbmluZyB1 bmxpbWl0ZWQgY29zbWljDQogICAgICByZXNvdXJjZXMgZm9yIGNvbG9uaXphdGlvbiBhbmQg ZXhwbG9pdGF0aW9uKSwgYW5kIGNvbmNsdWRpbmcgd2l0aCBvdXIgc3R5bGUgb2YgbGl2aW5n DQogICAgICAocmVwbGFjaW5nIG91ciBzdGF0aW9uYXJ5IGhvbWVzIHdpdGggbW92ZWFibGUg c3BhY2VjcmFmdCkuDQoNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgVGhlIHByb3B1bHNpb24gb2YgdGhlIE1h Z25vY3JhZnQgb3BlcmF0ZXMgb24gdGhlIHByaW5jaXBsZSBvZiBhbiBpbnRlcmFjdGlvbg0K ICAgICAgYmV0d2VlbiB0aGUgdm9ydGV4IG1hZ25ldGljIGZpZWxkIHByb2R1Y2VkIGJ5IHRo ZSBjcmFmdCBpdHNlbGYgYW5kIGEgdGVycmVzdHJpYWwsDQogICAgICBzb2xhciBvciBnYWxh Y3RpYyBtYWduZXRpYyBmaWVsZCBhbHJlYWR5IGV4aXN0aW5nIGluIGV2ZXJ5IHBvaW50IG9m IHRoZSB1bml2ZXJzZS4NCiAgICAgIFRoZSBwdWxzYXRpbmcgbWFnbmV0aWMgZmllbGQgcHJv dmlkaW5nIHRoaXMgc3BhY2VjcmFmdCB3aXRoIHRoZSBwcm9wdWxzaXZlIGZvcmNlcyBpcw0K ICAgICAgcHJvZHVjZWQgYnkgdGhlICdvc2NpbGxhdG9yeSBjaGFtYmVyJywgYSBkZXZpY2Ug d2hpY2ggYWxzbyBhcHBsaWVzIGNvbXBsZXRlbHkgbmV3DQogICAgICBwcmluY2lwbGVzLiAg VGhlIGZpZWxkIGlzIHByb2R1Y2VkIGluIGl0IGJ5IGFuIGVsZWN0cmljIHNwYXJrIGNpcmN1 bGF0aW5nIGFyb3VuZCBhDQogICAgICBwZXJpbWV0ZXIgb2YgYSBjdWJlIGZvcm1lZCBmcm9t IHR3byBvc2NpbGxhdG9yeSBjaXJjdWl0cyB3aXRoIGEgc3BhcmsgZ2FwLiAgICBTdWNoDQog ICAgICBwcmluY2lwbGVzIHJlbW92ZSBhbGwgdGhlIGxpbWl0YXRpb25zIHdoaWNoIG5vdyBo b2xkIGJhY2sgYW4gaW5jcmVhc2Ugb2Ygb3V0cHV0IGluDQogICAgICBvdXIgcHJlc2VudCBl bGVjdHJvbWFnbmV0cywgYW5kIHdpbGwgcmFpc2UgdGhlIHN0cmVuZ3RoIG9mIGEgcHJvZHVj ZWQgZmllbGQgdG8gYQ0KICAgICAgbGV2ZWwgc3VmZmljaWVudCBmb3IgcHJvcGVsbGluZyBh IHNwYWNlY3JhZnQuDQoNCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgVGhlIHRyZWF0aXNlIGNvbnRhaW5zOiBh IGNvbXBsZXRlIGRlc2NyaXB0aW9uIG9mIHRoZSBkZXNpZ24gb2YgdGhlIE1hZ25vY3JhZnQ7 DQogICAgICB0aGUgcHJpbmNpcGxlcyBvZiBpdHMgb3BlcmF0aW9uOyB0aGUgYmFja2dyb3Vu ZCwgbWVjaGFuaXNtIGFuZCBjaGFyYWN0ZXJpc3RpY3Mgb2YgdGhlDQogICAgICBwaGVub21l bmEgaW5kdWNlZCBieSB0aGlzIHNwYWNlY3JhZnQ7ICAgYW5kIHRoZSBwcmluY2lwbGVzIG9m IG9wZXJhdGlvbiBhbmQgYXR0cmlidXRlcw0KICAgICAgb2YgaXRzIHByb3B1bHNpb24gZGV2 aWNlIChpLmUuIG9zY2lsbGF0b3J5IGNoYW1iZXIpLg0KDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgIFRoZSB0 cmVhdGlzZSBjb25zaXN0cyBvZiBvdmVyIDExMCBwYWdlcyBvZiBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbnMgcGx1 cyA0NCBwYWdlcyBvZg0KICAgICAgaWxsdXN0cmF0aW9ucy4gIEl0IGlzIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGVk IGluIHRoZSBmb3JtIG9mIGEgYm91bmQgcGhvdG8tY29weSwgYW5kIGNhbiBiZSBvYnRhaW5l ZA0KICAgICAgYnkgYW55b25lIGZvcndhcmRpbmcgdGhlIGNvc3Qgb2YgcHJlcGFyYXRpb24s IHBhY2thZ2luZyBhbmQgcG9zdGFnZSAtYXQgcHJlc2VudCAkMTUNCiAgICAgIHBlciBjb3B5 IGZvciBzdXJmYWNlIG1haWxpbmcuICBUbyBvcmRlciB0aGlzIHRyZWF0aXNlLCBwbGVhc2Ug c2VuZCB0aGlzIGFtb3VudCB0bzoNCiAgICAgIERyIEphbiBQYWphaywgUC5PLiBCb3ggMTcw NSwgSW52ZXJjYXJnaWxsLCBOZXcgWmVhbGFuZC4gIFBsZWFzZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgaWYgeW91 cg0KICAgICAgb3JkZXIgYXJyaXZlcyB3aGVuIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBubyBzcGFyZSBjb3BpZXMg YXZhaWxhYmxlLCBpdCBtYXkgdGFrZSBhIGZldyBkYXlzIGZvcg0KICAgICAgeW91ciBvcmRl ciB0byBiZSBmaWxsZWQuIg0KDQoNCk5PVEU6ICAgVGhpcyAgYXV0aG9yIGhhcyB0cmllZCBz ZXZlcmFsIHRpbWVzIHRvIGNvbnRhY3QgRHIuIFBlamFrIGFmdGVyIDE5ODkuICAgSGUgbWF5 IA0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgYmUgZGVjZWFzZWQuICAgIElmIHNvLCAgaGlzIGlkZWFzIG1h eSBiZSBmb3JldmVyICBsb3N0LiAgICAgSGUgbm8gbG9uZ2VyIHJlc2lkZXMgDQogICAgICAg ICAgICAgICBhdCB0aGUgYWJvdmUgYWRkcmVzcy4gIERvZXMgYW55b25lIGtub3cgd2hlcmUg aGUgaXM/DQp2ZSBwb2ludHMgbWFrZSB0aGUgTWFnbm9jcmFmdCBhIHZlaGljbGUgd2hpY2gg aXMgcG9zc2libGUgdG8gYmUgY29tcGxlgAAAADoSAAB3ANkSAABzAN0SAABvADoTAABrAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwAAFgMBABQDAAAWAwEAFASAAAAAvwAAAP// +gAAAP//OQEAAP//OwEAAP//lgEAAP//8wEAAP//IgIAAP//JAIAAP//fgIAAP//2gIAAP// MAMAAP//igMAAP//1wMAAP//2QMAAP//NQQAAP//lAQAAP//8AQAAP//TQUAAP//qAUAAP// /QUAAP//AQAUFP0FAABYBgAA//+xBgAA//8KBwAA//9lBwAA//+OBwAA//+QBwAA///uBwAA //9MCAAA//+qCAAA//8BCQAA//8rCQAA//8tCQAA//+KCQAA///nCQAA//9CCgAA//+dCgAA ///6CgAA//88CwAA//8+CwAA//+aCwAA//8BABQUmgsAAPMLAAD//0wMAAD//6gMAAD//wEN AAD//1sNAAD//7UNAAD//w8OAAD//2cOAAD//5wOAAD//54OAAD///wOAAD//1kPAAD//7cP AAD///MPAAD///UPAAD//00QAAD//60QAAD//wgRAAD//2IRAAD//7sRAAD//wEAFBS7EQAA FRIAAP//NhIAAP//OBIAAP//OhIAAP//kxIAAP//9RIAAP//OhMAAP//PBMAAP//nA4AAP// ng4AAP///A4AAP//WQ8AAP//tw8AAP//8w8AAP//9Q8AAP//TRAAAP//rRAAAP//CBEAAP// YhEAAP//uxEAAP//AQAUCAEABwAgQXJpYWwAAABnbmV0aWMgZmllbGQgYWxyZWFkeSBleGlz dGluZyBpbiBldmVyeSBwb2ludCBvZiB0aGUgdW5pdmVyc2UuDQogICAgICBUaGUgcHVsc2F0 aW5nIG1hZ25ldGljIGZpZWxkIHByb3ZpZGluZyB0aGlzIHNw --PART.BOUNDARY.0.531.emout13.mail.aol.com.854636348-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 07:13:53 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA17329; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:51:04 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:51:04 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:53:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970130095338_1145318078 emout20.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com, noever@webtv.net Subject: flying saucer Resent-Message-ID: <"E77iH3.0.KE4.JLByo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3726 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I enjoyed reading about Newman's levitational device. It reminds me of the device that Jan Pejak and I looked at some years ago. We were trying to design a device that produced low thrust in outer space by repelling off of the earth's magnetic field. We found that the problem was not the strength of the earth's magnetic field but rather the length of the magnet onboard the ship. The long range translational force on any dipole drops off as 1/rrrr the 4th power of the distance. The short range dipole interaction drops off at 1/rr the square of the distance. How in the world could we make a dipole 60 miles long to exploit the 1/rr reaction? We could not and gave up. I have an open mind looked at and studied the problem and found that it was unworkable. If you look at my paper, "The Source of Inertial and Gravitational Mass" on electromagnum you will find a derivation that seems to suggest that gravitational dipoles are possible. The gravitational dipole of a superconductor consists of two parts, one gravitational 1/r field and one antigravitational 1/r field. Rotating this gravitational diple induces a Gravito-magnetic field. The reaction is sort of like spinning neutral matter..no magnetic field will be produced. Separate the electrical charges from the matter and then rotate the charges..a magnetic field will be produced. This is the way to go with gravity. PS Berry Merry man said that I "was a harmless crank" to. Geroge Miley has recommended me for a top job in his lab. Who is the crank? Not I ! Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 07:52:17 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA30250; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:40:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:40:56 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 10:40:32 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Good advice on patents Message-ID: <970130154032_72240.1256_EHB51-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"7Qj0O.0.8O7.24Cyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3728 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I agree with John Logajan: Since nobody else is selling actual working free-energy machines, no sales revenue is being lost by Newman to competitors. And Newman surely doesn't need a patent in order to start producing a marketing his own free-energy machines. I like Don Lancasters general advice on patents -- forget 'em, they are a waste of time. If you've got a new technology or improvement, produce it, market it, as fast as possible. Quite right, except that I would not forget about them completely. I would file for two reasons: 1. As someone here pointed out, after the logjam breaks the P.O. might start handing out o-u patents, so you want to reserve your place in line. 2. Even if you do not plan to seriously pursue a patent, you wouldn't want your competitor to get one and then charge *you* royalties! Your old patent filing will prevent anyone else from getting one. Your sales window is likely just a few years before something better comes along. While others are still trying to secure patent protection, you are already collecting revenue. Exactly right. Brand new technology changes from month to month. Think of the first televisions and the first microcomputers. Would anyone here like to have a patent for the Radio Shack TRS-80 computer? I doubt Radio Shack ever bothered to file for one. What good is it to have 10 more years of exclusive rights to a product that is now unmarketably obsolete? What good is it to have exclusive rights to a thing that no competitor would want to produce? A case in point is the infamous IBM Micro Channel bus. IBM thought they had learned some lessons from the experience of putting the original PC design in the public domain. (Effectively, that is what they did.) They decided to set a new standard, patent everything from the get-go, crack the whip, and force the rest of the industry to fall in line. They invented the Micro Channel bus for the PS/2, and they said anyone who wanted the new bus would have to pay them royalties for that and the old one too! What followed is described in this hilarious passage from P. Carroll's book "Big Blues," p. 140: Bill Lowe spent all of 1987 and 1988 waiting for Dell or Tandy or Toshiba or *somebody* to launch a successful clone. Initially, he sounded tough. He said anybody trying to copy the Micro Channel architecture in his new PS/2 line had better either have some pretty slick engineers or an awful lot of good lawyers. As the months went by and competitors shunned the Micro Channel, Lowe said that, well, maybe he'd be willing to license the Micro Channel under the right terms. Then he became willing to license under just about any terms. By the end, Lowe was practically begging other companies to adopt the Micro Channel. How could IBM claim to own the new standard if nobody else used it? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 07:52:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA30302; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:41:06 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:41:06 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 10:40:16 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Sex life out of bounds Message-ID: <970130154016_72240.1256_EHB51-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"YjxfO.0.IO7.24Cyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3729 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex These personal attacks against Newman and the allegations about his sex life are inappropriate. Barry Merriman should apologize for posting them. You would not mention such scandalous allegations at the podium of an academic conference, even if you were convinced they are true. So I don't think you should talk about them here. I say a persons's sex life is out of bounds. Unless, of course, you would like to regale us with boasts about your own . . . uh, accomplishments in this . . . field. In that case I'm all ears! (What was that about a field?) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 08:19:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA00345; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:50:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:50:53 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:53:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Resent-Message-ID: <"kYkCS3.0.15.IDCyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3730 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I think it is worthwhile looking at Joe's anti-gravity device although I suspect that the result will be the same as his energy machine. It would be good to have a competent scientist there who will write up a report afterwards. As for the plan to expose Joe as the great American crank, that sounds like a good idea but just be careful about what you say. Joe likes to sue people and he has threatened to sue me a number of times. You will be OK if you just concentrate on known facts like: * Joe has had a large amount of time to develop his energy machine and has not yet sold Joule number 1 of energy or any device that produces any energy. * He has adequate capital and patent protection (he could manufacture his device in Mexico where he has a patent and the production costs are lower than in the US) yet has not produced or sold product number 1. * The device is of a low tech nature and there is no obvious excuse for not starting up production other that it does not work as claimed. You should avoid claims that may be true but might be difficult to prove in a court of law (remember that juries are made up of people with IQ's that could be quite low and who could be very easily swayed to Joe's side). So do not make any claims like: * Joe is the great American crank. * He is a crackpot extraordinaire, one of the greatest ever. * Joe's claim that God has revealed to him the secret of free energy is a symptom of mental illness. * His gyroscopic particle theory is perhaps the most bogus theory of all time. Such claims may very well be false and even it they were true it could still cause legal problems and could be impossible to prove in a court of law, so just don't make them. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 08:43:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA08730; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:20:43 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:20:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Patents From: Hoyt Stearns Reply-To: hoyt isus.wierius.com Sender: hoyt isus.wierius.com Originator: hoyt isus.wierius.com Transport-Options: /delivery Content-Type: text Date: Thu, 30 Jan 97 08:43:00 GMT Message-ID: <9701300857.aa28118 wierius.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"8fs8H3.0.C82.MfCyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3731 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, John Logajan wrote: The alternative is to have the USPTO issue a patent on every claim regardless of their adjudged merit -- but then the USPTO becomes nothing more than a central notary ... The minute actual working free-energy machines are available for sale, all existing patent claimes can be re-submitted and Newman's priority claims will be re-examined and patents issued to those who document true precedence... I remember thinking years ago, that they should just grant Newman's patents to save all the effort in paper shuffling, and let the market decide. I've seen many patents that are non-workable, so either way it wouldn't be any kind of precedent. ... Frankly, I like Don Lancasters general advice on patents -- forget 'em, they are a waste of time. If you've got a new technology or improvement, produce it, market it, as fast as possible. Your sales window is likely just a few years before something better comes along. While ... I agree with this entirely, EXCEPT, I did get two patents on electric fan-in-blade helicopters because venture capitalists insist on what they call "unfair advantage", and a patent is almost a necessity for that community to look at your idea. Best Regards, -- Hoyt A. Stearns jr., President, International Society of Unified Science| 4131 E. Cannon Dr. Phoenix AZ 85028 Advancing Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal | hoyt isus.wierius.com fax 996 9088 System- a unified physical theory | voice *82 602 996-1717 http://infox.eunet.cz/interpres/sr/ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Be reckless in the expression of the ideal, and it will never betray you. Treat it with kid gloves and you are in the middle of a battle.' - Seth ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the facts do not conform to your theory, they must be disposed of. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Churchill's Commentary on Man: Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." -- Howard Aiken From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 08:54:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA13277; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:43:55 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:43:55 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:47:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Remi Cornwall To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Good advice on patents and the Newman o-u affair In-Reply-To: <970130154032_72240.1256_EHB51-2 CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"R2srk.0.JF3.9_Cyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3732 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subscribers, I take no stand on this o-u device (I don't have the time) and I certainly wouldn't get personal even if I had to suffer fools. I do believe in property rights both concrete and intellectual (you can't have the former without the latter). Just as I wouldn't want some sh*t squatting on my land, I don't want people squatting on hard work. Innovators have it tough, they're all mad until their accepted and unless they are fraudulent, it comes out of their own budget. The least people can do is give them respect and pay them when they get it right. Aultrism, sod it! Innovators, expect: ridicule, character assasination, bankcruptcy, marital failure, plagarism. Now go switch on a light and thank the best in Humanity. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 09:00:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA13677; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:45:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:45:52 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F05D52.237C228A math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:35:30 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Analysis of Newman's ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sL2ed1.0.bL3.-0Dyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3733 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > > AN AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING AN > EARLIER VERSION OF THE TECHNOLOGY: Now, I find it interesting that Newman is putting his effort into a conventional invention, when he's sitting on an over unity motor. Be that as it may, its always conceivable that an inventor could come up with a useful invention, even though his prior inventions and his world view are seriously flawed. So, lets briefly consider this one: > > AFFIDAVIT > > OBSERVATIONS AND PERFORMANCE PROJECTIONS ON > JOSEPH NEWMAN'S ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE > > > Newman's design calls for creation of a magnetic field which is an > average about equal to the earth's field over the volume > of the balloon. This can be achieved with minimum input power > using a large number of turns of fine wire. > I have considered vehicle modules with the following > properties: > > Volume = 10'x10'x10' = 1,000 cubic feet Helium Lift = 70 lbs. > Wire = 12,000 turns of #38 AWG copper Wire Weight = 23 lbs. > Battery = 3,000 V DC Battery Weight = 15 lbs DC Current = 10 mA > Material Weight = 10 lbs. Payload Weight = 22 lbs. > Uh, this sounds like a description of a Helium balloon to me: note that all the lifting force come from the buoyancy of the Helium, as it should. There is no claim in the above numbers that any of it is due to the magnetic field effetcs. To get some numebers, we can compute the magnetic field at the center of the windings; treating it as roughly a solenoid, we have from the above data (take 10 feet = 3 meter) (B in tesla) and the usual solenoid formula B = mu_0 N I = (4 pi 10^-7)(12,000 turns/3 meter)(10^-2 Amp) ~ 5 x 10^-5 Tesla which is the sames as the strength of the Earth B field near the surface, as claimed above. The max torque between this and the earth field would be torque = (B_earth) X (magnetic moment of balloon) = (B_earth) X ( I A ) < (B_earth) I A = (5 10^-5 Tesla)(12,000 x 0.01 Amp)(3 meter)^2 ~ 5 x 10^-3 newton-meters which is about the same torque about its center as would result on an ordinary He balloon of the same size by taping a 3 x 10^-3 newton weight (= 0.3 gram mass !) on its equator, i.e., in other words, tape a dried pea on the side. Of course, Newmans balloon is more slugish, since its laden with wire: For the wired balloon described above, which weighs about 10 kg (ignore the battery...let them have the superconducting wire they want, no losses), and a moment of inertia of about I_0 = M r^2 ~ 10 kg m^2, we get the max rotation rate producible by the max torque is rotation rate (revolution/sec) = torque/(2 pi I_0) ~ 10^-4 rev/sec In other words, it will take about an hour for newman's balloon to rotate through a *quarter* turn...hold on tight! But wait---that is only in still air. A slight breeze would easily overwhelm this mechanism. The drag force per unit area on the ballon is roughly P_drag ~ (air_density)x(air_velocity)^2 ~ v^2 newtons/m^2 where v is in miles per hour. If this acts preferentialy on one side of the balloon (due to variations in flow speed over the surface), it will produce a torque of roughly torque_airflow ~ P_drag x (ballon area) x (ballon radius) ~ 10 v^2 newton-meters Thus, if the air velocity relative to the balloon exceeds roughly v = 0.02 miles per hour, the drag can overwhelm the magnetic torque. In simpler terms, if there is a breeze blowing at greater than *0.1 miles per hour* (and when was the last time there wasn't *outdoors*), don't expect Newmans magnetic steering to work. Finally, lets consider lift: Recall a uniform magnetic field does not exert any net force at all on a magnetic dipole; it only exerts a torque. The deviations from uniformity, i.e. gradients in the earths field, over the surface of the balloon will scale something like (diam of balloon)/(diameter of earth) ~ 10^-7 so we are talking about an incredibly small field gradient, and thus a similarly small "lift" force. More quantitatively, the magnetic pressure of the earth's field near the surface of earth is P_mag = B^2/(2 mu_0) ~ 10^-3 Pascal = 10^-8 atmospheres So, even *if* this pressure were all available to act on the balloon (its not), it would only generate a lift force of P_mag x balloon area = 10^-2 newtons, which is the weight of a 1 gram mass, i.e. somewhat less than a penny. But, it is worse than this, since the the force is due to the pressure _gradient_ across the balloon, not just the pressure. The real magnetic lift force on the balloon would go something like magnetic lift force = (diff. in mag pressure on sides) x (area) ~ (gradient of pressure)x(diam)x(area) ~ (pressure/diam of earth)x(diam)x(area) ~ P_mag x (area of ballon) x (diam/earth diam) ~ 10^-2 newton x 10^-7 ~ 10^-10 newtons which is like...well, its too small for us to comprehend. Suffice it to say that even in outer space, with perfect vacuum, this will produce a 10^-11 meter/sec^2 acceleration on Newmans balloon, and so for the balloon to start from a dead stop and traverse its own length would take about 10^6 seconds, i.e. one month. It would be cruising along at about 10 microns a second at that point, too. If it conversely had to break from moving at a speed on 1 meter/s, it would take it 10^11 seconds, or 10,000 years---it may be tough to get its started, but once its going it ain't gonna stop! > > (1) The total payload is proportional to vehicle volume. as with any balloon > (2) The electromagnetic torque and lift are also proportional to volume in this design. Unlike what was said in someone else's prior post, this _is_ strictly true, but the constants of proportionality are incredibly small: consider the general scalings: we saw above the lift goes like: Lift Force ~ P_mag x (balloon vol)/diam of earth = 10^-11 x (ballon volume) (with vol. in meters^3, force in newtons) and torque is torque = B_earth x I_tot x area, but it is stipulated that total current in the windings, I_tot, is chosen by the condition that as a solenoid its B strength equals the earths field, i.e. as above, B = mu_0 N I = mu_0 (I_tot/diam of balloon) == B_earth, so I_tot == B_earth x diam /mu_0, so we get Torque = (B_earth^2 /mu_0 ) x volume = 2 P_mag x (balloon volume) ~ 10^-3 x (balloon volume) Note we have the general relationship for such a device of any size: Lift Force ~ Torque/diameter of earth which shows why it cannot have appreciable lift. > (3) Navigation is achieved by manipulating the > orientation of the coils. Yes, but not in our lifetime, especially if there is a slight breeze ( > 0.1 mile/hour ) > (4) If superconducting wires become available, > the batteries would not be required. I already granted you those. > (5) For improved efficiency with copper wiring, sets of the cubes > can be connected in series and energized with pulsed high voltage. I assume you mean to reduce resistance losses....whatever. Efficiency is the least of your worries. > (6) In the atmosphere, lift is provided by a combination of > ohmic heating of the helium gas, not if you use a superconductor to eliminate the battery > electromagnetic interaction of the helium atoms with the > applied fields, not clear what this means; the applied (newman's coils) field acting on the He atoms inside the ballon cannot produce net lift on the system, since they are parts of that closed system. If you mean the He becomes magnetized and the whole thing acts like a ferromagnetic, enhance the net B field, well---this is also extremely tiny, since you can't get appreciable magnetization from a volume of He gas at atmoshperic pressure (I'm not even sure if He is parameagnetic...?) > and interaction of the applied magnetic field with the > earth's magnetic field. This contributes nothing detectable within the earths atmosphere... We have already shown for the 10 meter balloon considered this can only produce enough force to lift about 1 part in one *trillion* of its mass. > (7) It is intended that the craft can operate entirely through interaction > with the earth's magnetic field once it leaves the atmosphere. It certainly can in principle...as noted, it just takes an eternity for it to maneuver. > > It represents a vastly improved means for > propulsion and navigation of helium balloons (blimps). > Large versions may > well carry us gently and safely into space. > > Dr. Roger Hastings, Ph.D. [Signed and Notarized] > I would love to see Dr. Hasting's analysis. As we have seen here, for the 10 meter demo balloon proposed, with a standard bouyant lifting ability of 70 lbs, we get the following trade off, due to Joe Newman: At the cost of: using 50% of the lift capacity to strap on wires and a battery We gain: the ability to execute a quarter turn maneuver in an hour, *if* the surrounding windspeed is << 1 mile per hour, and an extra milli-nano-pound of "thrust" force that will persist even in the total vacuum of space, which gives us the maneuverability to repostion the craft by 10 meters in 1 months time, or go from accel. from 0 to 50 mph in 250,000 years. (except we can't get there to actually use this, because no balloon can get that high in the first place, and all the practical lift is via normal balloon bouyancy). > > in my opinion, several companies...possess the expertise and > capabilities to construct the hardware required to fully exploit the > apparent capability of his new concepts." > Dr. Robert E. Smith > Chief, Orbital and Space Environmental Branch > George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA > Hmmm....is this a political appointee? :-) > > Evan Soule' > Director of Information > NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS > josephnewman earthlink.net So, Evan, my analysis only seems to confirm my prejudice that good old Joe Newman is a...well, I'm not supposed to use the C-word here---even when it comes to *ordinary* inventions. That also satisfies my definition of a *ut [ N-word deleted ]. I await your refutation of the above analysis. As for JN toy demo: it definitely _does not_ lift itself via the magnetic field of the earth. It certainly can rotate, just as does a compass needle. But as noted, the lift force will produce motions roughly 10^8 times slower than the rotational ones. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 09:22:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA18225; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:02:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:02:05 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:07:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: PTO Resent-Message-ID: <"Yrr0m3.0.hS4.BGDyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3735 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote: >> Let me repeat: "....Joseph Newman has been fighting an expensive battle for >> his rights to a patent for his technology and for those innovators who may >> not have the ability to fight as he had done against the injustices which >> have occurred over the past 18 years." _This_ is his movitation. > >While it may be noble to fight injustice on behalf of the "little guy", >it is really doubtful that patent issuance disputes break down into >"haves" versus "have nots." > >The USPTO issues or refrains from issuing patents based upon their >understanding of what works and what doesn't. Since they are only human, >this is an imperfect review. > >The alternative is to have the USPTO issue a patent on every claim >regardless of their adjudged merit -- but then the USPTO becomes nothing >more than a central notary. > >Ironically, people such as Joseph Newman want patents granted precisely >because they are somewhat of an imprimatur of scientific respectability >(an important step toward commercial viability.) And therein lies the >conundrum -- notary versus imprimatur. Mere notary doesn't convey >any scientific respectability, it just officially notes precedence. > >The *primary* reason why patents are issued doesn't even come into play. >i.e. the exclusive grant to produce for sale. Since nobody else is >selling actual working free-energy machines, no sales revenue is being >lost by Newman to competitors. And Newman surely doesn't need a patent >in order to start producing a marketing his own free-energy machines. > >The minute actual working free-energy machines are available for sale, >all existing patent claimes can be re-submitted and Newman's priority >claims will be re-examined and patents issued to those who document >true precedence. > >Frankly, I like Don Lancasters general advice on patents -- forget 'em, >they are a waste of time. If you've got a new technology or improvement, >produce it, market it, as fast as possible. Your sales window is >likely just a few years before something better comes along. While >others are still trying to secure patent protection, you are already >collecting revenue. What good is it to have 10 more years of exclusive >rights to a product that is now unmarketably obsolete? What good is >it to have exclusive rights to a thing that no competitor would want >to produce? > >His advice is sound for the additional reason that too many small time >inventors waste countless hours patenting unmarketable inventions. >If you just say "to hell with patents" you will avoid that futile trap. >Instead, you will concentrate your efforts into market testing your >inventions, and quickly discarding those ideas that are worthless. > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - > - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - Dear John, Over the years, Joe may have been talking with the wrong people. On many occasions, the first question asked by interested corporations was, "Do you have a patent?" If this was not the case, then such companies' replies was some version of, "Well, call us when you have secured your patent rights." While Joe's principal goal is now to manufacture this technology himself, it might be helpful to know applicable manufacturers who would produce a mass-marketable commercial product _without_ patent protection. If you would please forward via private email a list of such companies, I would be very appreciative. Best regards, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html P.S. You wrote re the Patent Office, "Since they are only human, this is an imperfect review." In the case of certain patent employees this is a very charitable statement --- especially in light of the historically *documented* incompetence of the patent examiner assigned to process Joseph Newman's patent. You also wrote, "it is really doubtful that patent issuance disputes break down into "haves" versus "have nots." It is interesting that top patent officials sometimes leave the PTO to work for major corporations that become the recipients of _extremely_ financially lucrative patents (patents which were processed/approved during the top official's tenureship) --- this can be especially true in the pharmauceutical industry. No doubt this is a simple case of good public relations. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 09:26:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA18018; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:00:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:00:50 -0800 Message-Id: <9701301704.AA20043 oracle> From: "ryb1989" To: Subject: Re: attacks on J. Newman Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:04:11 -0500 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"D-y4Q1.0.OP4.-EDyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3734 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I did check the references mentioned earlier about Mr Newman's going to jail on accxount of sex with a minor.Now thsi colum is a satire and you need to BUY the BOOK called MORE STARIGHT DOPE to look the short article about Mr Newman on p 401-402.Do not BOTHER to buy IT and save $9.95 + postage.His letters,of this columnist are in the format of "my father states that Atlantis is at the bottom of lake Neptune in South Dakota ? Should I go and help him or send him to the but hose ? Then the enlightened columnist repleies"the ole geyser had one too many beers,etc..." Hence persons relying on such material are dishonest and JEALOUS and ENVIOUS. They are the ones that have NO credibility.And I seriously doubt what kind of study did they do,maybe in stupidology. I am not a scientist but will judge Mr Newman's demonstrations on their physical facts. They work or do not work,simple. Hey,the Maharishi and his followers claim to achivee levitation,whatever-well so far what I have seen of their proof is people jumping form a trampoline and levitate until they crash their arses unto the floor. Why can't the skeptics on this list that have the knowledge,technology and funds simply do 3 things: 1-buy Mr Newman's book(or via their university or funded research) 2-Buy his video 3-Build it themselves or have technical people do it And 4th-fourthly-demonstrate it. But some will say "well I tried but failed"-BUT did you follow the instructions,seek help from Mr Newman and his associates,etc..on how to go about it ? To me the proof is with people running Newman's motors.Now I do encourage Mr Soulie et al to print,publish photos,videos of people that have don eso with their permission and better to put it on their Web site.Nothing like plain physical evidence to further demonstrate one's point. Finally you will ALWAYS have doubting Thomases no matter what.After all we still have a FLAT Earth Society,people believing in Scientology,etc..to name a few.. Yours,Ryb. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 10:24:51 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06340; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:10:59 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:10:59 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:16:03 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Call for a moderator! Resent-Message-ID: <"TlzHk.0.vX1.iGEyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3736 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Dear Mr. Heffner, > >I will respond privately to your comments. > >In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you >to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you >unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. > >Sincerely, > >Evan Soule' Without prior written agreement I do not recognize the "privacy" of any corespondence to me. Demands of privacy regarding unsolicited email represents an imposition of duty without any compensation, and thus should be tolerated by no one. Further, since I can not remember where my keys are or where I put my shoes from hour to hour, do not expect me to remember long any externally imposed "privacy" requirements. I have had similar discussions with others on the list about this very topic, so don't feel singled out. As I have stated to others on this list, people with whom private correspondence is higly desirable, I have considered putting a summary of the above in my email signature block. It does not happen often that people email me with unsolicited information with "confidentiality requests" out of the blue, so I have avoided this unpleasant discussion with some people who have done so, and avoided putting the somewhat obnoxious statement in my signature box. However, repeated occurances of email requesting "privacy" or "secracy" I respond to in a similar manner. Also, I try to clear the air about this issue whenever having protracted private discussions. As for communications from you, I do not want any at all, much less private ones. Please do not email me or otherwise privately contact me. If I should email you privately you can be assured it is due to my error in operating my computer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 10:49:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA11814; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:19:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:19:56 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 13:16:44 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Project Message-ID: <970130181643_100060.173_JHB85-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"n8k3e3.0.Mu2.6PEyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3737 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Evan, You may publish anything you like. I am still of the opinion that to bring God into a publicity program as some sort of support for the content of that program is not only arrogant, but might be construed as sacrilegious. It is certainly a turn-off for many scientists who might otherwise look more benevolently at the content. Any correspondence you wish to have with me will only be read via this list. I do not intend to get involved in some religious debate with you or anyone else, so please don't bother to send me private mail. Regards, Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 10:51:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA23289; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:38:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:38:08 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:43:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Resent-Message-ID: <"TZevE3.0.ih5.DgEyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3738 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > I think it is worthwhile looking at Joe's anti-gravity device although I >suspect that the result will be the same as his energy machine. It would >be good to have a competent scientist there who will write up a report snip-- >Such claims may very well be false and even it they were true it could >still cause legal problems and could be impossible to prove in a court of >law, so just don't make them. > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Dear Mr. Wharton, I will respond privately to your comments. In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 10:53:26 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA25009; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:40:17 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:40:17 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:45:11 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: A Mathematician Speaks Resent-Message-ID: <"PkIol2.0.A66.EiEyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3739 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote: >> >> AN AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING AN >> EARLIER VERSION OF THE TECHNOLOGY: > >Now, I find it interesting that Newman is putting his effort >into a conventional invention, when he's sitting on an over unity snip--- > >As for JN toy demo: it definitely _does not_ lift >itself via the magnetic field of the earth. It certainly >can rotate, just as does a compass needle. But as noted, >the lift force will produce motions roughly 10^8 times >slower than the rotational ones. > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, Well, I'm glad to see you are endeavoring to finally respond in a manner which is more appropriate to that which you indicate as your profession. [Of course, I duly noted the unavoidable slurs and ridicule (deleted above) which you were kind enough to insert at the conclusion of your post.] To respond --- I 'got a little story for you': ONCE UPON A TIME at the early part of this century a man wrote two treatises entitled: "Is the Airship Coming? The Prospects of Aerial Navigation." These "scholarly" treatises were intended as PROOFS as to why man would NEVER fly in a heavier-than-air machine: To quote (only a small portion since the author rambles on, and on, and on......): "Now, our principle of the square and cube applies to the aeroplane, and to every form of flying-machine pure and simple; but it is reversed in the application. With every increase in size of the machine the weight increases as the cube of the linear dimension, always supposing that the model remains the same. Possibly it might not always be necessary to increase the thickness in the same proportion as the length and breadth, but in every case the weight would necessarity increase in a higher ratio than the square of the length or breadth. But, the sustaining power being proportional to the surface, or to the spread of wing, whenever we increase the size of the flyer or of the aeroplane, the sustaining power diminishes relative to the size. We see this exemplified in the limitations put upon the size and agility of flying animals; the smaller they are, the more easily they fly. There is a certain weight, which probably is less than the weight of a man, which no bird can ever exceed. And the writer continues........ "The principle we have applied does not of course set any precise limit to the weight which a flying-machine may possibly be made to carry. It only says that the advantage in increasing the size and weight continually diminishes. A very small machine, say one less in size than a humming-bird, would carry only the weight of a humming-bird. At the other extreme there is a size, -- we cannot say exactly what, but not many yards in length, -- beyond which _no_ machine can be made to carry more than its own weight. There is a certain intermediate size where the maximum weight, perhaps that of one or more men, can be carried; and this size can __never__ be exceeded with advantage." And who was this "crankpot" this "nut" (to use recently-employed jargon)? Was he some fly-by-night (no pun intended) non-credentialed nobody? Hardly. He was in fact one of the so-called "most distinguished men of science of the day." And what was this crankpot's name? His name was: PROFESSOR SIMON NEWCOMB, Ph.D., LL.D. Dr. Newcomb was professor of mathematics and astronomy at John Hopkins University, Editor of the American Journal of Mathematics, and one-time director of the American Nautical Almanac Office in Washington, D.C. In the treatise from which I quoted above, Dr. Newcomb proudly proves mathematically why man will never fly in a heavier-than-air-machine. This "distinguished" treatise was published in 1903. Fortunately for the rest of us, the Wright Brothers did not have time to read such scholarly works of mathematics and science. They were too busy building the aeroplane. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html P.S. My above comments should not be interpreted as a general condemnation of mathematicians. Only those --- who by their pronouncements --- earn a special place in history. There are, in fact, several mathematicians and mathematical physicists who are endeavoring to translate Joseph Newman's mechanical model(s) into mathematical expression. For their efforts I have sincere respect. If they are successful I will have profound respect and appreciation and I believe they will accomplish an achievement of positive historical significance. I believe that the mathematician(s) who does(do) accomplish such a translation will have a deep understanding of the fact that the PHYSICAL lines of force represent kinetic energy --- and that the __energy in electromagnetic phenomena consists of *MATTER IN MOTION*__. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 11:17:10 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA01214; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:59:08 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:59:08 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:03:52 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"OxADm2.0.cI.ozEyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3740 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> >>Dear Mr. Heffner, >> >>I will respond privately to your comments. >> >>In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you >>to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you >>unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. >> >>Sincerely, >> >>Evan Soule' > >Without prior written agreement I do not recognize the "privacy" of any >corespondence to me. Demands of privacy regarding unsolicited email >represents an imposition of duty without any compensation, and thus should snip--- >obnoxious statement in my signature box. However, repeated occurances of >email requesting "privacy" or "secracy" I respond to in a similar manner. >Also, I try to clear the air about this issue whenever having protracted >private discussions. > >As for communications from you, I do not want any at all, much less private >ones. Please do not email me or otherwise privately contact me. If I >should email you privately you can be assured it is due to my error in >operating my computer. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner Dear Mr. Heffner, While I, likewise, have no particular desire to receive private email from you, should you elect to ridicule, attack, or engage in sarcasm with respect to myself and/or Joseph Newman then rest assured I will respond as above and I will ask (hope) that any further discussion of that nature would be relegated to a private discussion. I state this not for my benefit and not for your benefit, but to minimize traffic of this nature for the rest of the List. And a further point of clarification: You write above: "Demands of privacy..." I was not aware that I was making any "demands" upon you. My explicit wording (which you were kind enough to repeat above) was, "I will _ask_ you..." Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 11:24:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA01763; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:01:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:01:29 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:04:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970130130506_1446792113 emout06.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: address Resent-Message-ID: <"TLu3E2.0.FR.30Fyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3741 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Does anyone have the address of the Journal of Physics A? I tried the 335E 45th St. NY and my mail came back undeliverable. Ross I have a copy of the paper you want but I have missplaced your address again. Forgive me, I'm sort of in a quandary traveling all over the place interviewing. Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 11:26:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA04322; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:11:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:11:49 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:16:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: God Resent-Message-ID: <"qSPsQ.0.J31.p9Fyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3742 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dear Evan, > >You may publish anything you like. > >I am still of the opinion that to bring God into a publicity program as some >sort of support for the content of that program is not only arrogant, but might >be construed as sacrilegious. It is certainly a turn-off for many scientists >who might otherwise look more benevolently at the content. > >Any correspondence you wish to have with me will only be read via this list. I >do not intend to get involved in some religious debate with you or anyone else, >so please don't bother to send me private mail. > >Regards, Norman Dear Norman, I made a diligent effort to move this to a private discussion, but you appear to have a need to continue postings to the entire list. So be it. Just for the sake of explicitness, I re-read my original posting regarding the upcoming event in St. Louis on February 7th and I failed to find "God" mentioned anywhere in that posting. And since you brought up the subject, I personally view myself as a "Deist" -- my religion (as Thomas Paine simply expressed it) can be summed up in one sentence, "I believe in one God and no more, and I hope for happiness beyond this life." For me, that's about it. I have __absolutely__ no interest in engaging in a religious debate with you. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 11:54:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA15773 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:53:44 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:53:44 -0800 X-Envelope-From: bshannon tiac.net Thu Jan 30 11:53:24 1997 Received: from maildeliver0.tiac.net (maildeliver0.tiac.net [199.0.65.19]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA15695; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:53:19 -0800 Received: from mailnfs0.tiac.net (mailnfs0.tiac.net [199.0.65.17]) by maildeliver0.tiac.net (8.8.0/8.8) with ESMTP id OAA09295; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:56:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from bshannon.tiac.net (bshannon.tiac.net [206.119.135.211]) by mailnfs0.tiac.net (8.8.0/8.8) with SMTP id OAA01700; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:56:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <32F0B6A5.56E2 tiac.net> Old-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:56:37 +0000 From: Bob Shannon Reply-To: bshannon tiac.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: <3.0.32.19970129203247.0072d290 aa.net> <32F04922.844@mail.enternet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Greg Watson wrote: > Hi All, > > What's going on here? Are we about character assination or about > individuals presenting new ideas and then logical discussion > following about the ideas presented. > > ANYONE who uses character assination to disprove any idea, no matter > how wild, is in my humble opinion lower than a snails slimy belly. I think first honors here must go to the Newman camp. Joe Newman's reaction to an honest and open inquiry on his two coil experiment was greeted with just such a reaction. > You know better Michael Mandeville and as for a university > professor Barry Merriman, I am very surprised. If you have a chip > on your shoulder and want a fight, well, this is NOT the place. > > Lets STOP this right here and now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > If you agree with me and these two continue, I suggest we flood their > in boxes with all the junk mail we can find. > > I repeat again, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR THIS TYPE OF DISCUSSION!!!!!! Respectfully, I must disagree with Mr. Watson. The free enrgy field has been host to more outright fraud than a great many others and this situation impacts all in the field. It is not easy to obtain funding for valid research in this area due to the near total lack of respect the field as a whole engenders. This lack of respect is due to fraud, a lack of peer review, and shoddy science. Unless we police ourselves, we will not earn professional respect. If Mr. Newman's claims can be backed up, what has he to fear from this type of discussion? It's free publicity, and he stands to gain another true beleiver who has the background to express the operation of Mr. Newman's machine to other orthodox scientists. If this is not the place, what then is? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:00:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA10592; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:34:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:34:13 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970130113629.006e5760 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:36:30 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Helium Bag Newman ELECTROSTATICS Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"CF2g4.0.4b2.lUFyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3744 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:28 AM 1/30/97 -0500, you wrote: > > > I thought magnetism fell off with cube of distance... but I >admit my math is poor. > > oooopppsss. oh well squares and cubes are kinda similar looking, depending on the angle of the dangle. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:02:41 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA08403; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:27:15 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:27:15 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701301326.ZM6130 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:26:05 -0600 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"UlsSo3.0.232.EOFyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3743 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Jan 30, 11:02am, Evan Soule wrote: > Dear John, > > Now that perhaps the equivalent of a 'cyber slug-fest' may be winding down, > I would be happy to forward to you a number of documents which may shed > some light on technical aspects of Joe's invention. He has no objection to > people constructing their own prototypes for their own edification, > experimentation and use. This is one reason why he published his 1996 > Wiring and Construction Diagram detailing his design for one version of his > Motor/Generator technology. Thankyou. I appreciate the offer. If they are posted somewhere, all the better. If I have any further confusion on any non-scientific issues regarding JN I will contact you direct. For the record, no "cyber slug-fest" was ever intended. I am sorry to have inadvertantly catylized this situation on vortex. -john ->JES -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:11:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA10850; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:34:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:34:53 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970130194142.002d0d90 atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:41:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Call for a moderator! Resent-Message-ID: <"5RR_g1.0.xe2.NVFyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3745 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner (hheffner corecom.net) wrote: >"IMHO this kind of threat of law suit should not be tolerated in any >moderated news list. Moderator?" > >Let me say that this was simply not stated strongly enough. I was out of >town for some days and am sorely disappointed to reurn to find facets of >both sci.physics.fusion and the Newman list migrating into the vortex. > >I would like to point out that this kind of "content free" fully hashed >out drivel already has other designated places to go, has already been >various other places, and adds nothing being repeated here. [snip] Agreed. Bill Beatty (moderator), please stop Evan Soule and Joe Newman from posting to this list. Their kind of trash belongs in free-energy (unless the free-energy group can't stomach it either). Kurt Johmann -- PS: Thanks to Barry Merriman and others for giving some history to the Newman story. Joseph Newman and Stanley Meyer? Two peas in a pod, IMO. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:15:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA11273; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:36:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:36:35 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 14:37:44 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Sex life out of bounds Message-ID: <970130193744_72240.1256_EHB113-2 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"7mx5C1.0.1m2.-WFyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3746 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex A distinguished colleague of mine, who cannot post to Vortex at the moment, explained how we members of the cold fusion community feel about sex. He writes: I'd guess that the problem is this---we folks involved in "Cold Fusion" tend to consider talk about our personal "HOT FUSION" work to be something we'd prefer to keep under cover(s). Well said! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:25:50 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA15920; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:54:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:54:24 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:59:05 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"cQsRx1.0.Zu3.anFyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3747 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 2:03 PM 1/30/97, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >Dear Mr. Heffner, > >While I, likewise, have no particular desire to receive private email from >you, should you elect to ridicule, attack, or engage in sarcasm with >respect to myself and/or Joseph Newman then rest assured I will respond as >above and I will ask (hope) that any further discussion of that nature >would be relegated to a private discussion. I state this not for my >benefit and not for your benefit, but to minimize traffic of this nature >for the rest of the List. > >And a further point of clarification: You write above: "Demands of >privacy..." I was not aware that I was making any "demands" upon you. My >explicit wording (which you were kind enough to repeat above) was, "I will >_ask_ you..." > >Sincerely, > >Evan Soule' You have asked and I have replied. I would note that you sent private email before receiving my reply. I take the above to mean that if I publically disagree in any way, humerously or otherwise, with posts by you or Joe Newman that you are threatening to privately harass me even though I have specifically asked that you not? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:27:39 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA24253; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:15:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:15:05 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F101E4.7DE14518 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:17:40 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: attacks on J. Newman References: <9701301704.AA20043 oracle> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"el-JT.0.Mv5.u4Gyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3749 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ryb1989 wrote: > > I did check the references mentioned earlier about Mr Newman's going to > jail on accxount of sex with a minor.Now thsi colum is a satire and you > need to BUY the BOOK called MORE STARIGHT DOPE to look the short article > about Mr Newman on p 401-402.Do not BOTHER to buy IT and save $9.95 + > postage. No, its not a satire. The information contained in the column is typically valid and researched, but the articles are written in a _sarcastic_ style, not a satirical style. Uh, but you never said whether it mention the Newman---jail---minor connections. If it is not in the book, I am sure it was in one of his published columns. > > Hence persons relying on such material are dishonest and JEALOUS and > ENVIOUS. I assure you I am not in the least envious of JN. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:35:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA27259; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:22:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:22:22 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F10373.4487EB71 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:24:19 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sex life out of bounds References: <970130154016_72240.1256_EHB51-1 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mMJ4r.0.Kf6.kBGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3751 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > These personal attacks against Newman and the allegations > about his sex life are inappropriate. Barry Merriman should > apologize for posting them. I apologize for posting them without this disclaimer---its not his sex life per se that caught my attention. It was that he had been inspired by god---see the Straight Dope article on this; I know thats not a standard scholarly reference, but where else do you expect to read about JN---to these acts. I just thought the thing with the minor was a sort of reductio ad absurdum of newmans claims about having divine inspiration. I could really care less what his sexual proclivities may be. Of course, if such allegation are all false anyway, it'd be nice to clear it up publicly, since the original allegations were printed in a column with a readership of ~ 1 million people, I don't feel particulalry bad about repeating them til they are convincingly refuted. But, as i said, Newman really should sue Cecil Adams/Ed Zotti if this is all fictitious. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:37:03 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA20668; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:06:58 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:06:58 -0800 Message-ID: <32F1001A.570E interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:10:02 -0500 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger interlaced.net Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Analysis of Newman's ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE References: <32F05D52.237C228A@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yyjAu2.0.U25.KzFyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3748 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > (A thorough analysis of Newman's EM balloon concept) Thanks for the effort, Barry - I think you put this one to rest! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:39:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA28689; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:26:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:26:47 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F104A3.6201DD56 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:29:23 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: flying saucer References: <970130095338_1145318078 emout20.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eCI_t2.0.q_6.zFGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3752 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: > > > PS Berry Merry man said that I "was a harmless crank" to. > Geroge Miley has recommended me for a top job in his lab. For the record, one can still be a good engineer while holding many fallacious beliefs, so there is no essential contradiction in the above. And, as long as you let your beliefs be guided by experiment, you can avoid crankdom fairly easily. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 12:51:16 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA25923; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:19:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:19:10 -0800 X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970130122052.0074b384 aa.net> X-Sender: mwm aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:20:54 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Analysis of Newman's ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"zpodN1.0.PK6.f8Gyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3750 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:35 AM 1/30/97 -0800, you wrote: >Evan Soule wrote: >> >> AN AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING AN >> EARLIER VERSION OF THE TECHNOLOGY: > >Now, I find it interesting that Newman is putting his effort >into a conventional invention, when he's sitting on an over unity >motor. Be that as it may, its always conceivable that an >inventor could come up with a useful invention, even though >his prior inventions and his world view are seriously flawed. >So, lets briefly consider this one: > >> HUGE SNIP > >We gain: the ability to execute a quarter turn maneuver >in an hour, *if* the surrounding windspeed is << 1 mile per hour, >and an extra milli-nano-pound of "thrust" force that will persist >even in the total vacuum of space, which gives >us the maneuverability to repostion the craft by 10 meters >in 1 months time, or go from accel. from 0 to 50 mph in 250,000 years. >(except we can't get there to actually use this, because no >balloon can get that high in the first place, and all the >practical lift is via normal balloon bouyancy). > > > Thanks Barry. I always thought that dealing even with .....should be handled seriously by professional scientists, simply for the educational value to people. You have proven me correct. I learned a lot from your post. >> >> in my opinion, several companies...possess the expertise and >> capabilities to construct the hardware required to fully exploit the >> apparent capability of his new concepts." >> Dr. Robert E. Smith >> Chief, Orbital and Space Environmental Branch >> George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA >> > >Hmmm....is this a political appointee? :-) > >> >> Evan Soule' >> Director of Information >> NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS >> josephnewman earthlink.net > > >So, Evan, my analysis only seems to confirm my prejudice that good old >Joe Newman is a...well, I'm not supposed to use the C-word >here---even when it comes to *ordinary* inventions. That also >satisfies my definition of a *ut [ N-word deleted ]. I await >your refutation of the above analysis. > > >As for JN toy demo: it definitely _does not_ lift >itself via the magnetic field of the earth. It certainly >can rotate, just as does a compass needle. But as noted, >the lift force will produce motions roughly 10^8 times >slower than the rotational ones. > > > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry > > ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:01:55 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA01971; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:49:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:49:50 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:53:07 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Let's cut this out, folks. In-Reply-To: <32F01920.1CFBAE39 math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xuW9Q3.0.jU.jbGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3753 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Barry Merriman wrote: > Evan Soule wrote: > > > > P.S. Judging by __your__ initiated insults and attacks it is > > apparent that your approach is not particularly positive. > > You are absolutely right that I am the one initiating the > hostility. Barry, you've forgotten something: RULES 2. This is not the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup; ridicule, debunkery, and namecalling between believers and skeptics are forbidden. The tone should be one of legitimate disagreement and respectful debate. If you want to initiate hostility towards Mr. Soule and Newman, then they get the implicit OK to do the same thing in return, and the result is another useless flamewar. The solution is simple: IF IT'S NOT "RESPECTFUL DEBATE," THEN SEND IT PRIVATELY. > But really, I should have put smileys on the things > I said, because I consider Joe Newman to be more of a joke > than anything else. In my mind, Joe Newman personifies the Great > American Crank. You are indulging in namecalling. This is specifically mentioned in the rules. Take the discussion to private mail immediately. > > I invite you to pursue a private email interchange where we can > > 'slug it out'....I will endeavor to help you work through > > your negativism. > > I'll be glad to discuss it in private, but in this case I think > other readers of vortex would like to hear the details as well. > Its certainly on-topic for the group, since JN has long claimed > to have working over-unity devices. So, Bill Beatty permitting... As long as insults, namecalling, and hostility are a component, both sides will respond at the same level, and there will be no discussion, there will just be flaming. > Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman > > > 10) Was divinely inspired to marry an underage girl, for which > he went to prison. What does this have to do with Newman's invention? This sounds like anti-Relativity people pointing out Einstein's supposed cheating on his wife. I don't mean that Newman is the next Einstein, I mean that this stuff is pure mudslinging. It's an attempt to trigger feelings of hated against Newman, and as a debating ploy is nothing to be proud of. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:07:21 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA03094; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:52:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:52:42 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:56:25 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Audionet Resent-Message-ID: <"FWOK32.0.xl.JeGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3754 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I've not been able to verify the following, but I wanted to pass it along just in case --- >Evan Soule wrote: > N>Energy Machine Inventor Joseph Newman will be featured on the Roger > N>Fredinburg Show at 8:00PM (Pacific Time) this Thursday, January 30, 1997. > > N>The Roger Fredinburg Show will be carried Coast-to-Coast on 170 radio > N>stations on the TALK RADIO NETWORK (AM). This is the same network which > N>carries the Art Bell Show. Please consult your local radio stations in > N>case (re)broadcast times may vary from city to city. > > Here's a list of stations I located on Rogers web site: > > City/State Call Freq Watts > > ALABAMA > Foley WHEP 1310 1,000 > Montgomery WACV 1170 1,000 >snip---- > >I believe the show is also available via the following link, same >time... >AUDIONET is needed!! >FYI the 550 station in St. Louis no longer carries the show!! > >http://www.audionet.com/radio/special.ram > >Thomas Johnston From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:12:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA04028; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:57:19 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:57:19 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:00:06 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Helium Bag Newman ELECTROSTATICS In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970129193735.0074e67c aa.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CECJd2.0.r-.iiGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3755 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Michael Mandeville wrote: > > The toy IS nifty and does work well within a controlled environment. Ain't > no way you can maintain control in the real world of highly variable air > without adding old-fashioned mechanical/chemical propulsion. What does > that do to your weight ratios? Magnetism falls off at the square of the > distance and it is pretty damn weak on the surface to start with. How far > do you think you are going to get? No way to lift magnetically. It MUST be > an electrostatic phenomenon causing some sort of laminar air flow about the > ballon, thus creating enough displacement for very sllloooowwwwww motion, > which it exhibits. I doubt it's an electrostatic effect. To prove that the lifting force is a new discovery, he should also control for air heating. If the coil becomes even slightly warm, it will warm the helium, expand the balloon, and create excess lift. What is the temperature rise of the coil when it is operated? Even a few degrees may be significant. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:35:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA08699; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:08:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:08:05 -0800 From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199701302103.NAA02344 shell.skylink.net> Subject: Wasting Time To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:03:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <32F01920.1CFBAE39 math.ucla.edu> from "Barry Merriman" at Jan 29, 97 07:44:32 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"i-FNB.0.h72.jsGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3758 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman writes: > Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman Here's my own top 5 list. 5. No product, or demo kit available after all these years, except for sale of books and video tapes. 4. Scientifically illiterate, and incapable of engaging in meaningfull dialog. 3. Ill-defined and non-sensical explanations of the operating principles of his "inventions", with many ideas openly borrowed from others. 2. Belligerent claims of ownership of all possible free-energy and anti-gravity technologies. And the number one thing wrong with Joseph Newman: 1. Still causing me to waste my time. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:40:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA08192; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:05:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:05:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:06:45 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer cc: vortex , John Schnurer Subject: Re: [Antigravity] Re: Gravity Shadow ? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970130093855.006bfd88 inforamp.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"eFZYg1.0.w_1.QqGyo" mx1> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3757 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., You may know am one of the founders of the Gravity Society at www.gravity.org. We try to be a 'neutral ground to discuss gravity. Primarily the work of E E Podklentnov. Some comments, below You can consider this an official announcement from the Gravity Society, USA On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, ***** wrote: > Dear A/G: > > > > >If the beam really does *not* spread, then the resulting 5% reduction in > >air pressure would represent about .75 lbs/in^2, or about 1.6" mercury. > >This should be sufficient to generate a very noticeable vortex above the > >building where the experiment is taking place. I would think such a thing > >would be quickly noticed on a crowded campus, but ... maybe not. > >Horace Heffner To clarify some of the measuremnts, for "A survey of Results" and Addendum I will just say 'PK' or pk for Eugene E Podklentnov. PK's measurments were taken as follows: A closed bottom hollow glass cylinder that scales from the drawings to be about 1 foot by maybe 1.5" dia protects a quartz or glass rod. The rod appears to be maybe 0 .3 inch dia. ... which presents a fairly small foot print for, in my opinion, pretty good spatial resolution. The rod is fastened to a string or line which in turn is connected to a beam.... the far end of the beam goes to a measurement scale, electronic. Resolution is about 1 part per 1,000. This is all in the papers. It seems the column, which displaces smoke, or dust motes is of the same dimensions as the diameter of the disk of HTc YCBO. We have found YCBO does work, but BSCCO does not. The column does ot diverge or spread out and gets no weaker over a distance of, from the cryostat to 3 meters away. Then comes the ceiling so this is as far as what was measured. No change in weight below the set up. PK observed a reasonably stable 19 to 2.1 effect. I was able to observe a transient [5 second] 5% effect. Opinion: Eugene is still the 'king' Hope this helps. JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:56:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA13728; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:28:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:28:32 -0800 Message-Id: <199701302131.OAA22620 nz1.netzone.com> From: "Joe Champion" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Fw: Mark Hugo's 2nd Request for assistance Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:55:23 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uxZpg2.0.QM3.-9Hyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3759 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark's new system does not allow him to observe vortex-l. He asked me to post the following and people with answers please respond directly to Mark.... Thanks, I wonder if we should forward all of the Newman mail to Hugo, since he's missing out on all of it? One requires a large hard disk if they want to store all of the vortex files at this time... ---------- > From: Hugo, Mark D > To: Joe Champion > Subject: RE: Request for assistance > Date: Thursday, January 30, 1997 10:40 AM > > Joe: > > Here's an interesting factoid for you.... > > > You posted my request to find Lithium "storage" or "rechargable" > batteries. I can't recall, but did we put into that request that they be > "Lithium Hydride" based? > > In any case---ALL the responses I've gotten deal with obtaining straight > Lithium batteries! (Which work with a Lithium coated Ni anode, and an > MgO, or V2O5 cathode, and an Li-iodine electrolyte.) Man, talk about > "off the mark". Anyway, I KNOW they are out there, and I'll find > some---by gum! > > MDH From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 13:58:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA07943; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:04:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:04:22 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 16:06:08 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: God out of bounds too! Message-ID: <970130210608_72240.1256_EHB125-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"lH7H53.0.1y1.LpGyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3756 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Barry writes: I apologize for posting [personal attacks and allegations about sex life] without this disclaimer---its not his sex life per se that caught my attention. That's a disclaimer?!? It was that he had been inspired by god---see the Straight Dope article on this . . . God is out of bounds too! Sex, God, sex with God, sex with hamsters & duct tape, whatever! Look, just ask yourself this. If you were at a New Energy Conference at Texas A&M and they passed you the microphone, would you stand up and talk about the speaker's sex life, or his religion, or who he voted for? At the Brits would say, that's just not on, old boy. Even if the speaker says that God gives him his ideas, as Meyer often does, I think you should ignore that part. Anyway, I am glad you apologized and that was a great analysis of the fly-by-magnet idea. Plans for magnetically propelled aircraft and spacecraft been bandied about for centuries. I recall Arthur Clarke once described them as like trying to climb a cobweb or ride a moonbeam. I can't find the exact quote. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 14:27:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA15692; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:35:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:35:26 -0800 Message-Id: <199701302135.NAA15634 mx1.eskimo.com> Date: 30 Jan 1997 16:13 EST Sender: "Gene Batten" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Gene Batten" Subject: Free Energy over Internet ?? Resent-Message-ID: <"dZ5Rc.0._q3.RGHyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3760 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If I could just figure out a way to harness all the emotional energy expended recently concerning Joseph Newman, I could make some fantastic claims of O/U. Think about the possibilities!! Isn't there something better we can talk about here? Gene Batten mdleb nortel.ca From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 14:29:32 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA27973; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:13:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:13:10 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:17:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"8rb5z1.0.yq6.npHyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3763 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 2:03 PM 1/30/97, Evan Soule wrote: >[snip] >>Dear Mr. Heffner, >> >>While I, likewise, have no particular desire to receive private email from >>you, should you elect to ridicule, attack, or engage in sarcasm with >>respect to myself and/or Joseph Newman then rest assured I will respond as >>above and I will ask (hope) that any further discussion of that nature >>would be relegated to a private discussion. I state this not for my >>benefit and not for your benefit, but to minimize traffic of this nature >>for the rest of the List. >> >>And a further point of clarification: You write above: "Demands of >>privacy..." I was not aware that I was making any "demands" upon you. My >>explicit wording (which you were kind enough to repeat above) was, "I will >>_ask_ you..." >> >>Sincerely, >> >>Evan Soule' > > >You have asked and I have replied. I would note that you sent private >email before receiving my reply. Dear Mr. Heffner, The only reply from you that I anticipated at the time of that original post was that you would (or would not) honor my request to not reprint my private post to you without my permission. A private email reply was sent to you by virtue of the nature of your remarks on the list --- a reply which I choose not to post on the List in an effort to minimize the traffic. > >I take the above to mean that if I publically disagree in any way, >humerously or otherwise, with posts by you or Joe Newman that you are >threatening to privately harass me even though I have specifically asked >that you not? > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner I would hope that polite public disagreement would be acceptable to any reasonable individual. If the word "otherwise" includes insulting comments, sarcasm, ridicule, and/or profanity directed at myself and/or Joseph Newman, then I will endeavor not to clutter up the List with my detailed reply to such behavior. A response to such behavior, IMO, should be handled privately. Should one wish to view this as "private" harassment, I consider this operationally more appropriate (especially in deference to other members of the List) than initiated "public" harassment. I would hope that the best approach for everyone would be to maintain reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 14:31:45 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA28016; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:13:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:13:22 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:17:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Sex Resent-Message-ID: <"lXzAe3.0.Mr6.spHyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3764 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> To: Vortex >> >> These personal attacks against Newman and the allegations >> about his sex life are inappropriate. Barry Merriman should >> apologize for posting them. > >I apologize for posting them without this disclaimer---its not >his sex life per se that caught my attention. It was that he >had been inspired by god---see the Straight Dope article >on this; I know thats not a standard scholarly reference, but where >else do you expect to read about JN---to these acts. I just >thought the thing with the minor was a sort of reductio ad absurdum >of newmans claims about having divine inspiration. I could really >care less what his sexual proclivities may be. > >Of course, if such allegation are all false anyway, it'd be nice >to clear it up publicly, since the original allegations were >printed in a column with a readership of ~ 1 million people, >I don't feel particulalry bad about repeating them til they >are convincingly refuted. But, as i said, Newman really should >sue Cecil Adams/Ed Zotti if this is all fictitious. > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, As I stated before, such allegations are indeed false -- and as far as this List goes my purpose in so responding is precisely to "clear it up publicly." This was the first I have heard about "the straight dope's" malicious accusations. I will be referring this matter to Joseph Newman's attention. I myself do not normally read such malicious and factually inaccurate gossip. My other comments will be address privately to you. In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 14:38:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA30074; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:20:41 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:20:41 -0800 Message-ID: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Analysis of Newman's ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:23:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"F8eZT1.0.OL7.jwHyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3765 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Thanks for the cogent analysis. Its about time someone put in a few numbers. But leave Newman's sex life out please. Hank Scudder ---------- From: Barry Merriman To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Analysis of Newman's ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE Date: Thursday, January 30, 1997 12:35AM Evan Soule wrote: So, lets briefly consider this one: As for JN toy demo: it definitely _does not_ lift itself via the magnetic field of the earth. It certainly can rotate, just as does a compass needle. But as noted, the lift force will produce motions roughly 10^8 times slower than the rotational ones. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 14:51:37 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA01521; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:35:20 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:35:20 -0800 Date: 30 Jan 97 17:21:22 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541 compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Project Message-ID: <970130222121_100433.1541_BHG26-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"IDWln3.0.QM.N8Iyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3766 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman writes: > I am still of the opinion that to bring God into a publicity > program as some sort of support for the content of that program is > not only arrogant, but might be construed as sacrilegious. It is > certainly a turn-off for many scientists who might otherwise look > more benevolently at the content. Personally, I would rather that the 'electromagnetic lifting device' from Mr Newman had not attracted so great a number of postings, and postings of such a character. I would certainly agree with Norman that religion and science make a poor mix - I've always seen them as quite independent in kind. In an effort to lighten the tone, I would only add that I have recently discovered that the House of Commons any reference to an opinion of the Monarch, in an attempt to make one's idea more popular, is "disorderly." Seems to me that this is true of the Almighty, only more so. Chris From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 14:53:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA22385; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:56:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:56:13 -0800 Message-ID: <32F0D34B.1EF0 tiac.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:58:51 +0000 From: Bob Shannon Reply-To: bshannon tiac.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fw: Mark Hugo's 2nd Request for assistance References: <199701302131.OAA22620 nz1.netzone.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"61ntw3.0.TT5.sZHyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3761 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Joe Champion wrote: > > Mark's new system does not allow him to observe vortex-l. He asked me to > post the following and people with answers please respond directly to > Mark.... Thanks, > > I wonder if we should forward all of the Newman mail to Hugo, since he's > missing out on all of it? > > One requires a large hard disk if they want to store all of the vortex > files at this time... > > ---------- > > From: Hugo, Mark D > > To: Joe Champion > > Subject: RE: Request for assistance > > Date: Thursday, January 30, 1997 10:40 AM > > > > Joe: > > > > Here's an interesting factoid for you.... > > > > > > You posted my request to find Lithium "storage" or "rechargable" > > batteries. I can't recall, but did we put into that request that they be > > "Lithium Hydride" based? > > > > In any case---ALL the responses I've gotten deal with obtaining straight > > Lithium batteries! (Which work with a Lithium coated Ni anode, and an > > MgO, or V2O5 cathode, and an Li-iodine electrolyte.) Man, talk about > > "off the mark". Anyway, I KNOW they are out there, and I'll find > > some---by gum! > > > > MDH If Lithium Hydride cells are what is needed, I may be able to assist. I test rechargable batteries used in laptop computers, and may have a few samples laying about. Send me an email with your request, and I'll dig around and see what I can find. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 15:05:54 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA27803; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:12:42 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:12:42 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:17:16 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Trash Resent-Message-ID: <"oCFec1.0.wn6.KpHyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3762 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Horace Heffner (hheffner corecom.net) wrote: > >>"IMHO this kind of threat of law suit should not be tolerated in any >>moderated news list. Moderator?" >> >>Let me say that this was simply not stated strongly enough. I was out of >>town for some days and am sorely disappointed to reurn to find facets of >>both sci.physics.fusion and the Newman list migrating into the vortex. >> >>I would like to point out that this kind of "content free" fully hashed >>out drivel already has other designated places to go, has already been >>various other places, and adds nothing being repeated here. [snip] > >Agreed. > >Bill Beatty (moderator), please stop Evan Soule and Joe Newman from >posting to this list. > >Their kind of trash belongs in free-energy (unless the free-energy group >can't stomach it either). > > >Kurt Johmann >-- > >PS: Thanks to Barry Merriman and others for giving some history to the > Newman story. > > Joseph Newman and Stanley Meyer? Two peas in a pod, IMO. Dear Kurt, Thanks for your kurt comments regarding censorship. I'd have some most appropriate words in reply, but I will content myself with the following: I will respond privately to your comments. In order to minimize the traffic on this list at this point, I will ask you to have the decency not to post the content of my private replies to you unless you have my permission. I would honor such a request from you. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 15:28:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA10941; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:06:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:06:12 -0800 From: "Jay Olson" Organization: University of Idaho To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:07:07 PST8PDT Subject: Re: Call for a moderator! Priority: urgent X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a) Message-ID: <5F42A3B7B hickory.csrv.uidaho.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"8lXHY3.0.sg2.YbIyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3767 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > I would like to point out that this kind of "content free" fully hashed out > drivel already has other designated places to go, has already been various > other places, and adds nothing being repeated here. Besides, Joe's claim > is that "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than > energy externally inputted into the system is my invention. " (In effect > he claims all o-u inventions conceived and yet to be conceived in the > electromagnetic realm. I don't see why he does not copyright all words > about o-u electromagnetic phenomena written and yet to be written, as such > an approach would be equally valid and fully in conformance with US law and > procedures. Vortex would then therefore become the new Newman list. 8^) > More to the point, electromagnetic topics were designated to the freenrg > list by fiat, so could we please have enforcement of that fiat? Very well said. How can we have an objective discussion of science when people are making threats on one another for what they believe (or believe not) to be true. I've never seen such unconstructive emotionalism on Vortex before this "blimp with a coil" discussion came up. Can we reasonably think of anything more stupid to argue about? The whole debate should wait until the experiment is carried out at the very least. If Newman can put this thing into orbit, then he's proved something. If not, it's simply a helium baloon guided magnetically. In any case, we won't have to wait long for the actual results to be recorded. Although I myself find the probability of operational success to be small, what I believe must take back seat to actual experimentation. All you cold fusion people should be especially aware of this. How do you like it when intelligent people laugh at your goals? I think it is obvious that Newman really believes he can eventually design a space craft based on this work, and laughing in his face at his efforts is disgusting. If you just can't resist, tell your jokes in private, but don't discourage the poor guy. Let's all try to behave like gentlemen here. Jay Olson P.S. -- if the debate is long gone by the time this gets through, forgive me. My network seems to be a bit slow lately. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 16:11:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA20106; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:44:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:44:49 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F1320E.695678E2 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:43:11 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: A Mathematician Speaks References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XKemr2.0.Pu4.T9Jyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3768 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > > These "scholarly" treatises were intended as PROOFS as to why > man would NEVER fly in a heavier-than-air machine: There is one important distinction: the Newcomb article you generously provided attempted to rule out the general possibility of manned heavier than air flight. But the author simply cast his generalities a little too far---he does indeed prove you cannot simply scale up birds or birdlike craft to large proprotions (the gossamar albatross craft is about the limit). That however does not rule out the Wright's craft, which slip through these assumptions (by having a powerfull engine, not anticipated by newcomb). In contrast, I analyzed a *specific design* for a specific family of crafts due to Joe Newman, using standard electromagnetic theory and fluid dynamics. I was not making generalites, I was analyzing his specific device. It simply will not work as a practicle device---by many orders of magnitude---by known principles of fluids dynamics and electromagnetics. In that regard, my argument is much more like Newcomb saying that if you made a 10 foot long scaled up exact replica of a hummingbird, it definitely will not fly, which is very true. However, my argument is much more rigorous, since I computed the actual lift forces and torques available to operate newmans machine. Where is the undue generalization here? Joe Newman is totally free to claim that his devie flies magnetically by some *anomalous property of electromagnetism*, unknown to science. Maybe its his "long wire" effect, again :-). However, if it is claimed the device works by conventional EM principles, that claim is demonstrably very wrong, no experiment even needed. It should be made clear in your press release that your device "works" in massive defiance of the known laws of electromagnetism, and is therefore also a proof that maxwellian electrodynamics is seriously flawed. My primary purpose in this is to counter a Joe Newman/Evan Soule "press release" (ultimately intended to round up investors, I imagine), with a little pro-bono scientific and historical analysis to the effect that (a) Newman has a long, discredited history, including failure of his devices under careful scientific experimental investiagtion. (b) Application of known principles to Newmans inventions clearly suggest they will not work, so investors beware. As for the story about Joe Newman and underage girls: that is very tangential to the issues at hand, but its a nice shorthand way of conveying to people that this fellow has some screws loose: of course, if it is not true I would never repeat it, so I would like to see clear evidence that it is not, in contradiction to what was published in a nationaly syndicated column, The Straight Dope. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 16:36:09 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA23034; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:52:10 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:52:10 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F134DF.13728473 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:55:11 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: God out of bounds too! References: <970130210608_72240.1256_EHB125-1 CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RwIih.0.Hd5.bGJyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3769 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > Barry writes: > > > God is out of bounds too! Jed: I agree with you in principle that sex, god, and the zodiac sign are are irrelevant for judging scientific theories (well, maybe not the zodiac... :-). However, once ones theories have been judged on their merits---based on the triad of theory, experiment, and the free market---and found lacking, it is no longer an issue of science alone. The issue then becomes sociological and psychological---i.e. what motivates this individual? With Newman, we are well beyond the issues of scientific judgement alone, and well into the question of what the hell is this guy thinking? Are you saying you have no curiosity about why some people exhibit exceedingly bizarre behavior? -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 16:43:36 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA26724; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:06:07 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:06:07 -0800 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32F1382C.500F9F30 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:09:16 -0800 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: <3.0.32.19970129203247.0072d290 aa.net> <32F04922.844@mail.enternet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GBkte1.0.SX6.jTJyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3770 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greg Watson wrote: > > > ANYONE who uses character assination to disprove any idea, no matter > how wild, is in my humble opinion lower than a snails slimy belly. > It is trivially clear that character assasination cannot disprove a postulate about the physical world. However, Newman is operating outside the realm of scientific inquiry. He is looking for investors. This involves a complex mix of science, psychology and sociology, with heavy emphasis on the latter two, and it must be addressed on all these fronts. On the science side, I posted a detailed classical refutation of his invention. If he wants to claim to have invented anti-gravity, let him come out and say it, instead of obscuring it with borrowed scientific jargon. But I will not withhold comments on the character side as well, if I have reason to believe they are true. And if they are not true, let them be refuted...I'm not the source for these claims, all my knowledge of JN comes from reading published mass media. In short, what Joe Newman does is not scientific, and so an entirely scientific response does not properly address the situation. In business dealings, it is common to consider the character of those you will be dealing with, and I think Newmans character deserves some discussion for any potential investors reading this. If Newman is allowed to post his press releases here, fishing for investors, then this other discussion must also be tolerated. One simple solution would be to have him not post his PR here, no? Live by the sword, die by the sword. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 16:58:13 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA08339; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:44:01 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:44:01 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:48:50 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"9Fv3H3.0.822.E1Kyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3771 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 5:17 PM 1/30/97, Evan Soule wrote: > >I would hope that polite public disagreement would be acceptable to any >reasonable individual. If the word "otherwise" includes insulting >comments, sarcasm, ridicule, and/or profanity directed at myself and/or >Joseph Newman, then I will endeavor not to clutter up the List with my >detailed reply to such behavior. A response to such behavior, IMO, should >be handled privately. Should one wish to view this as "private" >harassment, I consider this operationally more appropriate (especially in >deference to other members of the List) than initiated "public" harassment. > >I would hope that the best approach for everyone would be to maintain >reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness. > >Sincerely, > >Evan Soule' So then, what comment of mine do you feel is worthy of your private or public harassment of me? Have I made a remark not up to "reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness?" I do not see where anything I have said is not worthy of public discussion on this list or not relevent to issues before this news list. Nor do I see where I have not dealt in any manner not characteristic of this list. Perhaps you can clue me in a bit? My offense seems to be disagreement. As to *your* behaviour, I view threats of lawsuit as the worst form of suppression of free speech or scientific research, and far beyond reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness. For example, you threatened: ">My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book >(which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic >technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this >moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the >above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue." Could you please indicate the basis upon which you could sue, since you have not been issued a patent on "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system?" Do you not have to have a patent in order to sue for infringement? Further, how is it that you expect a patent to be issued for a generic idea like "technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system," as opposed to a specific device or method? Isn't this expectation completely against current patent law and procedures? As to your argument: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the Applicant.__", does this not refer to *issued patents* not patent applications? My experience is that one can not write anything he choses for claims and have them accepted. I readily agree there has been some shabby treatment of Evan Soule' and Joe Newman here, not appropriate or typical of this list. However, this threat of suit is an important and substantive issue, an issue that strikes at the core of freedom of expression and the scientific efforts underway here and on the freenrg list. Since this threat is relevent and applicable to me and other members of the list who are currently working on free energy electromagnetic systems, as well as to those working on anti-gravity systems, it deserves open discussion and respectful debate, and should not be swept under the rug. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 21:36:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA11385; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:15:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:15:03 -0800 Date: 31 Jan 97 00:17:32 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: God out of bounds too! Message-ID: <970131051732_72240.1256_EHB34-1 CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Skw1X3.0.gn2.L_Nyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3772 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Barry writes: Are you saying you have no curiosity about why some people exhibit exceedingly bizarre behavior? Not here. That subject is off-topic and it has become disruptive. In business dealings, it is common to consider the character of those you will be dealing with . . . Are you thinking of DOING BUSINESS with Newman?!? Good grief!!! . . . I think Newmans character deserves some discussion for any potential investors reading this. Yes, but not here. This is not a business forum, or a pop-psychology forum. An occasional message about these topics is fine, but this discussion has degenerated into an unwelcome, unfunny flame war, so I wish you would stop it, as a favor to me. That's the last I'll post about Newman, I promise. I'd like to say a few words about balloons though. There was a good article about the three circumnavigation attempts in the New York Times Tuesday science page last week. Some interesting points: * They are hybrid helium + hot air balloons, for very interesting reasons I won't go into. The technique was invented by an 18th century French nobleman, who used it with great success until he accidentally ignited the hydrogen balloon, becoming the first person to die in an aviation accident. * They failed mainly because of dumb mistakes, some made at the last minute by exhausted ground crew. That says a lot about the need for managing people in high tech ventures of this nature. * One of the gondolas was not pressurized! People are amazed that the pilot is alright. He trained for months to get used to high altitudes. * The main engineering challenge is energy management, preventing heat losses, and other thermodynamic problems. I predict someone will succeed in a few years. It would be a cinch with CF. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 21:51:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA15468; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:35:35 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:35:35 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970131053900.0066b864 sparc1> X-Sender: kennel sparc1 (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:39:00 +0900 To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Elliot Kennel Subject: Newman's stuff Resent-Message-ID: <"jovF13.0.cn3.cIOyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3773 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I did a search on Joseph Newman, and found that in the 1980s he was associated with a machine which according to the National Bureau of Standards was capable of producing spurious results on power measuring equipment, but which he was touting as an overunity device. =20 =20 Best regards, Elliot Kennel Sapporo Japan From The Washington Post July 23, 1986, Wednesday, Final Edition, First Section; A19, "Is It Perpetual Motion?; Inventor Has Science Offices Spinning" by Boyce Rensberger. Newman, a self-taught inventor from Lucedale, Miss., has been battling for nearly seven years to obtain a patent on his machine, which he claims produces more electrical energy than it consumes from a battery pack. The court ordered Newman to submit his machine for testing by the National Bureau of Standards=85 After spending more than $75,000 to test the device, the bureau last week submitted a 36-page report to the court that concluded, "At all conditions tested, the input power exceeded the output power. That is, the device did not deliver more energy than it used." The machine's efficiency varied according to the test conditions, with output ranging between 27 percent and 67 percent ofthe energy consumed=85 The Bureau of Standards report says=85that because of the way the device works -- rapidly starting, stopping and reversing the flow -- it produces sharp "spikes" in energy output that give spuriously high readings on conventional measuring equipment=85 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 23:41:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA05582; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:23:12 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:23:12 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Good advice on patents To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 01:26:30 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <970130154032_72240.1256_EHB51-2 CompuServe.COM> from "Jed Rothwell" at Jan 30, 97 10:40:32 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-Zzx31.0.3N1.VtPyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3774 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed writes: > 1. As someone here pointed out, after the logjam breaks the P.O. might start > handing out o-u patents, so you want to reserve your place in line. But priority of invention is not tied to the date of application, but to the date one can prove that they actually invented the thing. > 2. Even if you do not plan to seriously pursue a patent, you wouldn't want > your competitor to get one and then charge *you* royalties! Your old patent > filing will prevent anyone else from getting one. Or your notarized log books, etc. The USPTO offers a service called Disclosure Documents, which for a $10 fee, you can send them 8.5x11 single sided pages describing your invention. This is not a patent application, but the USPTO keeps the Disclosure Document (confidentially) for two years. So the date they receive it becomes officially recognized for priority purposes, just as if it were notarized. You have a year after you start to manufacture and sell your invention before you must apply for a patent -- or lose the right to patent it. Whether you apply for a patent or not, if you can prove priority of invention, then no one else can ever obtain a patent which locks you out. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 23:46:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA07898; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:36:29 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:36:29 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:42:41 +0100 Message-Id: <199701310742.IAA22473 mail.bbtt.com> X-Sender: harti bbtt.de (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: harti bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) Subject: Barry Merriman lies..... Resent-Message-ID: <"L5SwV1.0.Ix1.v3Qyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3775 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >My primary purpose in this is to counter a Joe Newman/Evan Soule >"press release" (ultimately intended to round up investors, I imagine), >with a little pro-bono scientific and historical analysis to the >effect that > >(a) Newman has a long, discredited history, including failure > of his devices under careful scientific experimental=20 > investiagtion. Hey buddy, don=B4t spread these lies here ! You have absolutely no understanding of Newman machines=20 which all your other postings prove ! It is just not true ! Newman machines have been proven by many tests to be overunity. The problem is, you don=B4t care to study these tests... >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist,=20 >UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program =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 You seem to be one of these ATOMIC POWER PLANTS gurus, which do not want their asses being kicked by new technology ! Sorry buddy, you have a dying job... Your ass will be kicked soon, when Cold Fusion will take off soon ! >(b) Application of known principles to Newmans inventions clearly > suggest they will not work, so investors beware. Another lie again here... If you continue this over here I suggest you will be not just kicked off your chair but also out of Vortex ! BTW, I have seen Joe Newman=B4s Helium ballon experiment and it indeed raises up, when he energizes the coil around the Helium ballon. So building it much bigger could make a controlled ballon airship. >As for the story about Joe Newman and underage girls: that >is very tangential to the issues at hand, but its a nice=20 >shorthand way of conveying to people that this fellow has >some screws loose: of course, if it is not true I would never >repeat it, so I would like to see clear evidence that it >is not, in contradiction to what was published in a nationaly >syndicated column, The Straight Dope. Probably this story was made up by a mad writer, when J.Newman wanted to marry his secretary. His sectretary had a daugther, so this writer just wrote: he wanted to marry both of them... Was probably a story to discredit JN and his work... Maybe Evan can clear it up, if Joe did sue this newspaper writer.... Stefan Hartmann. -- Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 email: harti harti.de harti@bbtt.de Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jan 30 23:52:25 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA09013; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:41:51 -0800 Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:41:51 -0800 Message-Id: From: jlogajan skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: PTO To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 01:45:03 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Evan Soule" at Jan 30, 97 12:07:01 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4aR6u1.0.eC2.y8Qyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3776 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > Over the years, Joe may have been talking with the wrong people. On many > occasions, the first question asked by interested corporations was, "Do you > have a patent?" If this was not the case, then such companies' replies was > some version of, "Well, call us when you have secured your patent rights." I guess I can't discount the occurance of such responses. Still, I have this feeling that if someone were truly interested in the technology, they'd find a way to proceed. > While Joe's principal goal is now to manufacture this technology himself, > it might be helpful to know applicable manufacturers who would produce a > mass-marketable commercial product _without_ patent protection. I guess I don't understand the question. If Joe contracts with manufacturers, all they care about is getting paid for the production run. If you want them to underwrite the whole operation themselves, then yeah, they'd be more demanding ... but that is really not in keeping with your suggestion that Joe would manufacture the technology himself. > You also wrote, "it is really doubtful that patent issuance disputes break > down into "haves" versus "have nots." It is interesting that top patent > officials sometimes leave the PTO to work for major corporations that > become the recipients of _extremely_ financially lucrative patents (patents > which were processed/approved during the top official's tenureship) --- > this can be especially true in the pharmauceutical industry. No doubt this > is a simple case of good public relations. I imagine pharmauceutical companies are issued drug patents because they invent new drugs, while your basement bomber doesn't invent too many new drugs because the capital investment required to synthesize new drugs (not to mention clinically test them in accord with FDA requirements) is staggeringly large. Or it could be a conspiracy. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 01:00:06 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA17143; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:34:45 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:34:45 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:24:23 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <32f1ac3e.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: "vortex" Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: Please.. Resent-Message-ID: <"QIlVR3.0.mB4.awQyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3777 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Please: a) Postpone any discusions re. the Newman demo after this event when we shall have more, up-to-date information; b) Those members of this group who are intellectually younger than 11 years should think three times before sending one message; c) Be serious, or if you are not, try to fake seriousness. Some of us are unfortunately busy, have to pay for these messages and are deeply interested in cold fusion, vortex based generators, and adjacent subjects. Thank you, no answer requested. Peter -- dr. Peter Gluck Institute of Isotopic and Molecular Technology Fax:064-420042 Cluj-Napoca, str. Donath 65-103, P.O.Box 700 Tel:064-184037/144 Cluj 5, 3400 Romania Home: 064-174976 E-mail: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro , peterg@oc1.itim-cj.ro From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 02:23:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA28069; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:05:50 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:05:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:08:36 -0800 Message-Id: <199701311008.CAA29538 dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Griggs of Hydrodynamics To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Resent-Message-ID: <"BsIdR2.0.Vs6.yFSyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3779 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 30, 1997 A few days ago, I called on James Griggs of Hydrodynamics. The man is BUSY. Hydrodynamics is a seven man company and they are fully involved with orders from large corporations desiring the pump's many capabilities of handling liquids of various mixtures. It is not just the heating ability of the pump (still showing about same O/U) but it's decontmination and recovery capabilities that many industries are attracted to. This was mentioned by him at Eugene Mallove's January seminar in 1996 (unfortunately, there is no seminar this year). The last O/U tests were taken about 4-5 months ago and O/U was indicated --- regardless of the change of material used to construct the pump --- from aluminum to steel. It was in the aluminum rotor that physical changes were observed and displayed along with 'anolomous' O/U effects. Improvements upon O/U performance is not an overriding priority since this is not the main selling point or where the business is coming from. Griggs is not ignoring it however. O/U is interesting to scientists and they want to study the pump in detail (which is fine) BUT scientists do not buy pumps. That is, unfortunately, there is no business with scientists. But there sure is controversey and he does not need it. I believe he does not openly advertise O/U. Until contoversy dies down, it is an incidental bonus. Griggs is building the pump that 'Gene (and Jed, Chris, and Clarke) has ordered for their laboratory at his cost. He would not sell it at retail to them anyway in their science pursuits. Business first to survive and expand, then science. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 02:33:15 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA27638; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:01:03 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:01:03 -0800 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970131100805.0066b9e8 atlantic.net> X-Sender: johmann atlantic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:08:05 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Call for a moderator! Resent-Message-ID: <"3S-GW2.0.hl6.UBSyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3778 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Below is a private e-mail to my post. Note that when I wrote "their kind of trash" I meant what they were posting, but it was obviously misunderstood as referring to them personally as trash. In retrospect, to avoid the ambiguity, I should have said "their trash." My purpose in posting this is to make clear what kind of person or persons we are dealing with under the name of Evan Soule or Joseph Newman. They should not be allowed to post to this moderated e-mail list. Also, Barry Merriman is doing a public service by exposing the entire sordid story regarding Joseph Newman and his associates, if any. "The Straight Dope" is a legitimate source, IMO. --------------------- the e-mail sent to me is below ----------------------- From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Private Response >Agreed. > >Bill Beatty (moderator), please stop Evan Soule and Joe Newman from >posting to this list. > >Their kind of trash belongs in free-energy (unless the free-energy group >can't stomach it either). > >Kurt Johmann Dear Kurt (Private Post), When you are confronted with something you don't like to hear, you call for censorship. The only type of trash that belongs in the trash are intellectually dishonest cretins such as yourself. Yes, you are difficult for any sincere and honest person to stomach. But I guess someone has to do it. If you've enjoyed this post, great! And if you find it difficult to stomach, you have a nice day anyway -- I know I will! ;-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:52:18 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09586; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:57 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:57 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:47:51 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: God is out of bounds too! Resent-Message-ID: <"JV53L3.0.dL2.zgTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3783 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> To: Vortex >> >> Barry writes: >> >> >> God is out of bounds too! > >Jed: I agree with you in principle that sex, god, and the >zodiac sign are are irrelevant for judging scientific >theories (well, maybe not the zodiac... :-). > >However, once ones theories have been judged on their >merits---based on the triad of theory, experiment, and >the free market---and found lacking, it is no longer an >issue of science alone. The issue then becomes sociological >and psychological---i.e. what motivates this individual? > >With Newman, we are well beyond the issues of scientific >judgement alone, and well into the question of what the >hell is this guy thinking? > >Are you saying you have no curiosity about why some people >exhibit exceedingly bizarre behavior? > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Dear Barry, Different strokes.... what I find curious and bizarre is a "Asst. Professor of Mathematics" engaging in the initiation of unsubstantiated character assassination. Indeed, I ask myself, what (psychologically) motivates this individual? Of course, I have my own answers but I will reserve them for a private discussion. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:52:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09515; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:44 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:44 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:47:43 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: PTO Resent-Message-ID: <"RCFqt3.0.bK2.ogTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3781 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Evan Soule wrote: snip--- >> While Joe's principal goal is now to manufacture this technology himself, >> it might be helpful to know applicable manufacturers who would produce a >> mass-marketable commercial product _without_ patent protection. > >I guess I don't understand the question. If Joe contracts with manufacturers, >all they care about is getting paid for the production run. If you want them >to underwrite the whole operation themselves, then yeah, they'd be more >demanding ... but that is really not in keeping with your suggestion that >Joe would manufacture the technology himself. This is for the sake of my curiosity. If you know of manufacturers who would be willing to underwrite the production of new technology without patent protection, I would be interested in learning who they are. > >> You also wrote, "it is really doubtful that patent issuance disputes break >> down into "haves" versus "have nots." It is interesting that top patent >> officials sometimes leave the PTO to work for major corporations that >> become the recipients of _extremely_ financially lucrative patents (patents >> which were processed/approved during the top official's tenureship) --- >> this can be especially true in the pharmauceutical industry. No doubt this >> is a simple case of good public relations. > >I imagine pharmauceutical companies are issued drug patents because they >invent new drugs, while your basement bomber doesn't invent too many new >drugs because the capital investment required to synthesize new drugs >(not to mention clinically test them in accord with FDA requirements) >is staggeringly large. > >Or it could be a conspiracy. :-) > >-- > - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - > - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - Conspiracies? Simple incompetence, a la Donovan F. Duggan, will do. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:52:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09668; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:43:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:43:14 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:48:01 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"rarWk.0.yM2.EhTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3786 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Re: Clarification snip--- Mr. Heffner wrote: >So then, what comment of mine do you feel is worthy of your private or >public harassment of me? Have I made a remark not up to "reasonable public >standards of interpersonal respect and politeness?" I do not see where >anything I have said is not worthy of public discussion on this list or not >relevent to issues before this news list. Nor do I see where I have not >dealt in any manner not characteristic of this list. Perhaps you can clue >me in a bit? My offense seems to be disagreement. Dear Mr. Heffner, The irony of this discussion is that I really do not have an argument with you. But in earlier posting you operationally appeared to be seeking explicitness with respect to _future_ interactions, so I have endeavored to respond in an explicit manner which would accommodate such future interactions be they polite (preferred) or insulting (not preferred). > >As to *your* behaviour, I view threats of lawsuit as the worst form of >suppression of free speech or scientific research, and far beyond >reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness. > >For example, you threatened: For the sake of explicitness --- I wish to strive to get this clear with respect to your words *your* and "you" above --- the statement below was explicitly stated by Joseph Newman and signed in the post by Joseph Newman (and transcribed by myself). I would presume you accept this as the case. If you do not, I have no other means at my disposal to prove otherwise except that you may feel free to call Joseph Newman at (601) 947-7147 [best times 9:30am-10:30am; 9-10pm M-F] and verify that he did indeed state to me the quoted area below. It is probable (judging by your earlier remarks) that you have no interest in calling Joseph Newman --- nevertheless, I felt obliged to operationally state the manner in which you could directly contact him. > >">My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book >>(which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic >>technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >>into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this >>moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the >>above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue." > > >Could you please indicate the basis upon which you could sue, since you >have not been issued a patent on "any electromagnetic technology having >greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system?" Do >you not have to have a patent in order to sue for infringement? Further, >how is it that you expect a patent to be issued for a generic idea like >"technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >into the system," as opposed to a specific device or method? Isn't this >expectation completely against current patent law and procedures? As to >your argument: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the >patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the >Applicant.__", does this not refer to *issued patents* not patent >applications? My experience is that one can not write anything he choses >for claims and have them accepted. I am not going to enter with you into a direct legal discussion with respect to the specifics of Patent Law. Should anyone wish to do so, they may contact Joseph Newman directly and he will provide them with an appropriate response. I will state that there is a legal strategy. Whether Joseph Newman would wish to publicly discuss the specifics of that strategy -- especially at this time -- would be at his option. > >I readily agree there has been some shabby treatment of Evan Soule' and Joe >Newman here, not appropriate or typical of this list. However, this threat >of suit is an important and substantive issue, an issue that strikes at the >core of freedom of expression and the scientific efforts underway here and >on the freenrg list. Since this threat is relevent and applicable to me >and other members of the list who are currently working on free energy >electromagnetic systems, as well as to those working on anti-gravity >systems, it deserves open discussion and respectful debate, and should not >be swept under the rug. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner And to add: without discussing the specifics of a legal strategy or of Patent Law, I will state that --- personally speaking --- I place the blame for any artificially-induced, (litigational) log jam squarely on the shoulders of bureaucrats at the Patent Office. "Years ago," according to the expert testimony of a Patent Law Legal Expert and Counsel to the Senate dealing with Patent Office affairs, "a patent should have been issued to Joseph Newman on the basis of their _own_ rules of operation." [He cited the specific rules in detail.] Because of technical incompetents such as patent examiner Donovan F. Duggan, Joseph Newman has had to fight for his patent. This is far from over. Had the patent originally been issued many years ago, then those who have downstream derivatives/improvements of his technology would (IMO) be honestly entitled to such patents as appropriate for such improvements. This is the way it should have happened. Since it didn't, everyone, as appropriate, may have the opportunity to do it the hard way. As I said above, the fundamental blame lies with the Patent Office. BTW, JN was told by a Committee of Patent Examiners that, "Mr. Newman, we believe your invention works, but your technical description is inadequate." Upon appeal to a higher board of patent office supervisors, he was told, "Mr. Newman, your technical description is adequate, but your invention does not work." Well, you can't have it both ways. This is but a VERY small sampling of the totally ludicrous behavior on the part of patent office bureaucrats. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:52:30 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09647; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:43:09 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:43:09 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:47:57 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Subject: Matter in Motion Resent-Message-ID: <"unLiB2.0.cM2.9hTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3785 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Matter in Motion >Evan Soule wrote: >> >> These "scholarly" treatises were intended as PROOFS as to why >> man would NEVER fly in a heavier-than-air machine: > >There is one important distinction: the Newcomb article you >generously provided attempted to rule out the general >possibility of manned heavier than air flight. But the author >simply cast his generalities a little too far---he does >indeed prove you cannot simply scale up birds or birdlike >craft to large proprotions (the gossamar albatross craft >is about the limit). That however does not rule out the >Wright's craft, which slip through these assumptions (by >having a powerfull engine, not anticipated by newcomb). > >In contrast, I analyzed a *specific design* for a specific >family of crafts due to Joe Newman, using standard >electromagnetic theory and fluid dynamics. I was not making >generalites, I was analyzing his specific device. It simply >will not work as a practicle device---by many orders >of magnitude---by known principles of fluids dynamics and >electromagnetics. In that regard, my argument is much more >like Newcomb saying that if you made a 10 foot long scaled >up exact replica of a hummingbird, it definitely will not >fly, which is very true. However, my argument is much more >rigorous, since I computed the actual lift forces and torques >available to operate newmans machine. Where is the undue >generalization here? _______________________________________________ You have apparently missed the point of my post. And a point I am now making goes is more fundamental than the details of either my post or your post. I suppose it is one of attitude. Here we have a pompous mathematician such as Newcomb providing his pronouncement to the world about the possiblilty of heavier-than-air flight. It is my prediction that ultimately his sole claim to fame was that he was a clown who was making pronouncements which were especially ironic given the year 1903. I said that fortunately the Wright Brothers did not have the time to read the mathematical pronouncements of Dr. Newcomb. I really mean this. An innovator of a more timid or gentle nature may have had the misfortune to read Dr. Newcomb's "scholarly" treatise and possibly be discouraged from making that extra effort needed to bring forth his innovation despite the usual negativism and intellectually-dishonest types. This is why I am so hostile (for want of a better word) to the Dr. Newcomb-types. To express it a bit poetically: "It is the Wright Brother-types who will ultimately launch our Species to the Stars." Those research mathematicians and scientists who are truly competent will unquestionably make possible the technical systems needed to volitionally compliment the fundamental efforts of the Wright Brother types. And in rare cases we are fortunate to have innovators who are both gifted mathematicial and mechanical geniuses --- Maxwell is an excellent case in point. But Michael Faraday --- essentially a self-educated individual who was a _mechanical genius_ was, in fact, a mathematician of HIGH ORDER. In my opinion, Joseph Newman is also a mechanical genius who fundamentally and deeply understands the mechanical nature of (electro)magnetic fields. I also believe that, like Faraday, he will eventually find his Maxwell. In this regard, and as I have stated previously, the *PHYSICAL* lines of force represent kinetic energy --- and that the energy in electromagnetic phenomena consists of ***MATTER IN MOTION***. Joseph Newman has a very fundamental mechanical understanding of this "MATTER IN MOTION" which is apparently quite foreign to some who claim an interest in science. But, ... patience....the right mathematician will come along who will be __both__ highly adept at mathematics _and_ at fundamentally understanding mechanical models. _______________________________________________ snip--- > >My primary purpose in this is to counter a Joe Newman/Evan Soule >"press release" (ultimately intended to round up investors, I imagine), >with a little pro-bono scientific and historical analysis to the >effect that _______________________________________________ I presume that is beyond your paradigm that Joseph Newman sincerely and profoundly wishes to do what he can with his mechanical insights to provide a means of enabling humanity to safely and inexpensively (relatively-speaking) reach out to the stars. _______________________________________________ > >(a) Newman has a long, discredited history, including failure > of his devices under careful scientific experimental > investiagtion. _______________________________________________ This is factually incorrect. Allow me to repeat my statement for the purpose of explicitness: this is factually incorrect. If you are referring to the discredited NBS test -- that test was performed incompetently. And this is a most generous statement. _______________________________________________ > >(b) Application of known principles to Newmans inventions clearly > suggest they will not work, so investors beware. _______________________________________________ Yes, Joseph Newman has discovered new mechanical principles of science which __extend__ our understanding of (electro)magnetism into new areas. And please permit me to blow your "'investor comments' out of the water." Joseph Newman has openly and strongly urged anyone interested in investing in his technology to __FIRST__ build their __own__ device and have it independently tested and corroborated by scientists of their choosing. _______________________________________________ > >As for the story about Joe Newman and underage girls: that >is very tangential to the issues at hand, but its a nice >shorthand way of conveying to people that this fellow has >some screws loose: of course, if it is not true I would never >repeat it, so I would like to see clear evidence that it >is not, in contradiction to what was published in a nationaly >syndicated column, The Straight Dope. > > >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry _______________________________________________ I may be wrong, but I believe we operate under a system of "innocent until proven guilty." In this instance some malicious gossip-monger in Chicago (I presume) has apparently promulgated lies which you have chosen to accept and pass on as correct. I have stated that Joseph Newman is "innocent" of the charges (lies) which you have chosen to publicly state on this list. I believe you bear a burden of responsibility to prove your (passed-on) accusations. In other words, apply the same rigor you claim to apply in mathematics to this question as well. And I only ask this because you chose to introduce the subject in the first place. _______________________________________________ Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:52:34 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09614; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:43:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:43:00 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:47:53 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Frank & Goddard Resent-Message-ID: <"Fe5Vr3.0.2M2.2hTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3784 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Greg Watson wrote: >> >> >> ANYONE who uses character assination to disprove any idea, no matter >> how wild, is in my humble opinion lower than a snails slimy belly. >> > >It is trivially clear that character assasination cannot disprove >a postulate about the physical world. > >However, Newman is operating outside the realm of scientific >inquiry. He is looking for investors. This involves a complex >mix of science, psychology and sociology, with heavy >emphasis on the latter two, and it must >be addressed on all these fronts. On the science side, >I posted a detailed classical >refutation of his invention. If he wants to claim to >have invented anti-gravity, let him come out and say it, >instead of obscuring it with borrowed scientific jargon. >But I will not withhold comments on the character side as well, >if I have reason to believe they are true. And if they are not >true, let them be refuted...I'm not the source for these >claims, all my knowledge of JN comes from reading published >mass media. _____________________________________________ Thanks for admitting the source of your knowledge regarding Joseph Newman. It was the "mass media" who referred to the "Flying Brothers" (Wilbur and Orville Wright) as the "Lying Brothers." It was a member of the mass media who refused to published anything about the details of humanity's first recorded flight because he was unimpressed with the "shortness" of the flight. I believe that this member of the mass media deserves to be remembered for his insightful comment....oblivion would be too kind. His name was ***MR. FRANK TUNISON***. When Lorin Wright (brother of Wilbur and Orville) submitted to Frank (who represented the Associated Press) the telegram from the Wright Brothers in Kitty Hawk announcing the details of their First Flight, Frank responded that he didn't think a flight of less than a minute was a worthy news item and he seemed annoyed over being bothered about such nonsense. While there are some member of the mass media who are indeed responsible journalists, all too often they fall into the category of a Frank Tunison. _______________________________________________ > >In short, what Joe Newman does is not scientific, and so an >entirely scientific response does not properly address >the situation. In business dealings, it is common to consider >the character of those you will be dealing with, and I think >Newmans character deserves some discussion for any potential >investors reading this. _____________________________________________ Joseph Newman is most rigorous in his application of the scientific method. He has been so for over three decades. In fact, it is this rigorous approach which caused him to examine the fundamental forces of nature in a new way, in a new paradigm --- which challenges some basic assumptions of the current scientific establishment. I addressed the "investor issue" in another post. Allow me to pass on a paraphrased statement (transcribed) from Joseph Newman addressed to you, Barry Merriman: "These negative comments are of the same unthinking mind as those in the conventional scientific community (and others) who spoke against Goddard to the degree that even the mass media reported such negativism and, at one point, even highschool students 'knew' that a rocket would not work outside the Earth's atmosphere because of an absence of air for the rocket to push again. Goddard was literally hounded out of his own state. After he ws dead, the U.S.government then, and only then, paid his estate $1,000,000 for the use of his patents. And when Von Braun saw Goddard's patent, he basically said, 'My God! Goddard was way ahead of us all!,' and Von Braun was amazed at the U.S. government's and the scientific community's lack of interest in Goddard's work in rocketry which close-minded people NOW ironically state that 'This is the __only__ way to reach outer space or to travel into outer space.' By your words you demonstrate that you would most definitely have so reacted to Goddard's work back in his early years by virtue of the same response that you have presented against me. The truth of this statement speaks for itself to all objective people." My comment: If Goddard had lived* a more tranquil life and been received by more open minds, he may have lived longer and we might now be well on our way to the stars. This is called __negative leverage__ and touches the essence of my deep intolerance for the behavior exhibited by the petty, negative mentality of those who opposed Goddard. [*And while this _is_ speculation, our species never even had the opportunity to experience the benefit of the doubt.] ______________________________________________ > >If Newman is allowed to post his press releases here, fishing >for investors, then this other discussion must also be tolerated. >One simple solution would be to have him not post his PR here, >no? Live by the sword, die by the sword. >-- >Barry Merriman >Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry Whoops. A false assumption, Barry Merriman. I will state catagorically that the reason __I__ chose to post information about the upcoming event in St. Louis was in the hope that there were some members of this List (perhaps living in the St. Louis area) who might be interested in learning more about Joseph Newman's ____technology_____. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:53:08 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09567; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:54 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:54 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:47:48 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Time Resent-Message-ID: <"lDQsO3.0.LL2.xgTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3782 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Barry Merriman writes: >> Top 10 List of Things Wrong With Joe Newman > >Here's my own top 5 list. > > 5. No product, or demo kit available after all these > years, except for sale of books and video tapes. > > 4. Scientifically illiterate, and incapable of engaging > in meaningfull dialog. > > 3. Ill-defined and non-sensical explanations of > the operating principles of his "inventions", > with many ideas openly borrowed from others. > > 2. Belligerent claims of ownership of all possible > free-energy and anti-gravity technologies. > >And the number one thing wrong with Joseph Newman: > > 1. Still causing me to waste my time. > >Regards, >Robert Stirniman Out of deference to the moderator's post I will not post my specific replies to your comments above -- replies which would offer an alternative perspective. If anyone would wish me to privately answer the above remarks I will do so. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 03:53:56 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA09345; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:42:26 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:47:26 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Newman's stuff Resent-Message-ID: <"KC5HD3.0.sH2.WgTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3780 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > I did a search on Joseph Newman, and found that in the 1980s he was >associated with a machine which according to the National Bureau of >Standards was capable of producing spurious results on power measuring >equipment, but which he was touting as an overunity device. > >Best regards, >Elliot Kennel >Sapporo Japan > > From The Washington Post July 23, 1986, Wednesday, Final Edition, >First Section; A19, "Is It Perpetual Motion?; Inventor Has Science Offices >Spinning" by Boyce Rensberger. > Newman, a self-taught inventor from Lucedale, Miss., has been >battling for >nearly seven years to obtain a patent on his machine, which he claims >produces more electrical energy than it consumes from a battery pack. The >court ordered Newman to submit his machine for testing by the National >Bureau of Standards=85 > After spending more than $75,000 to test the device, the bureau >last week >submitted a 36-page report to the court that concluded, "At all conditions >tested, the input power exceeded the output power. That is, the device did >not deliver more energy than it used." The machine's efficiency varied >according to the test conditions, with output ranging between 27 percent an= d >67 percent ofthe energy consumed=85 > The Bureau of Standards report says=85that because of the way the d= evice >works -- rapidly starting, stopping and reversing the flow -- it produces >sharp "spikes" in energy output that give spuriously high readings on >conventional measuring equipment=85 I assume that my earlier post regarding the discredited NBS report was received. Should anyone wish a copy, I would be happy to forward same. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 04:24:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA11498; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 04:00:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 04:00:26 -0800 Message-ID: <32F1D772.1449 mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 21:58:50 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: newman-l emachine.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Analysis of Newman's ELECTROMAGNETIC AIR/SPACE VEHICLE References: <32F05D52.237C228A@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SIRDn3.0.Xp2.OxTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3788 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > > As for JN toy demo: it definitely _does not_ lift > itself via the magnetic field of the earth. It certainly > can rotate, just as does a compass needle. But as noted, > the lift force will produce motions roughly 10^8 times > slower than the rotational ones. > Hi Barry, Glad to see some real data. Thanks. Don't get me wrong, I am not a Newman supporter, but equally I am not a Newman doubter. What I do, however is to listen to new ideas and try to understand the basis of what is being proposed. I have not had long to think about the lift device, but can already see several interesting things. Suppose we use a low current to rotate the balloon into alignment with the earth's magnetic field. As power is applied, the balloon will like all magnets be rotated to align its poles earthS NballoonS Nearth. As the balloon aligns with the earth's field it will experience a downward force due to the small difference in the field strength from the top to the bottom of the balloon. The top of the coil will be attracted upward less than the bottom will be attracted downward. No magnetic lift here. But what happens if we now reverse the current flow and increase it say 1000 times? I suggest that as the coil is now aligned with the earth's field, and that the config now is earthS SballoonN Nearth, the balloon will be repelled away from the earth. Of curse it will also start to rotate to align its new pole with the earth. But maybe we then switch the current to aligning when say it is 10 degrees off axis. I guess it would sort of wobble as it rose. Care to do an analysis of this config? Current 1 to align, current -1000 to lift? I have. Its very interesting. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 04:53:49 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA11386; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:59:47 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:59:47 -0800 Message-ID: <32F1DA46.9FE mail.enternet.com.au> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:10:54 +1030 From: Greg Watson Reply-To: gwatson enternet.com.au Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, newman-l@emachine.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE References: <3.0.32.19970129203247.0072d290 aa.net> <32F04922.844@mail.enternet.com.au> <32F0B6A5.56E2@tiac.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DJ7Ie.0.qn2.nwTyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3787 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bob Shannon wrote: > > If Mr. Newman's claims can be backed up, what has he to fear from this > type of discussion? It's free publicity, and he stands to gain another > true believer who has the background to express the operation of Mr. > Newman's machine to other orthodox scientists. > > If this is not the place, what then is? Hi Bob, What I said was that discussions involving character assination of idea presenters have no palace in any discussion of ideas. Full Stop. The ideas themselves. They are fair game for one and all. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson, Greg Watson Consulting, Adelaide, South Australia, gwatson enternet.com.au From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 07:26:35 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA02424; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:55:14 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:55:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:58:29 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Call for a moderator! In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970131100805.0066b9e8 atlantic.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9etME1.0.lb.GVWyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3791 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, Kurt Johmann wrote: > > Below is a private e-mail to my post. Note that when I wrote "their kind > of trash" I meant what they were posting, but it was obviously Oops! Ignore that previous "call for a moderator" copy of Kurt's message, I went to hit ^C to cancel but hit send! Rats! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 07:37:29 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA05531; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:13:32 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:13:32 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:18:25 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"EYcgl3.0.JM1.MmWyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3793 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 6:48 AM 1/31/97, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >Mr. Heffner wrote: [snip] >>As to *your* behaviour, I view threats of lawsuit as the worst form of >>suppression of free speech or scientific research, and far beyond >>reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness. >> >>For example, you threatened: Evan Soule' responded: > >For the sake of explicitness --- I wish to strive to get this clear with >respect to your words *your* and "you" above --- the statement below was >explicitly stated by Joseph Newman and signed in the post by Joseph Newman >(and transcribed by myself). I would presume you accept this as the case. >If you do not, I have no other means at my disposal to prove otherwise >except that you may feel free to call Joseph Newman at (601) 947-7147 [best >times 9:30am-10:30am; 9-10pm M-F] and verify that he did indeed state to me >the quoted area below. It is probable (judging by your earlier remarks) >that you have no interest in calling Joseph Newman --- nevertheless, I felt >obliged to operationally state the manner in which you could directly >contact him. Mr. Soule', your signature block indicates you are: ">Evan Soule' >Director of Information >NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS" You posted the following threat signed by Joseph Newman: >>">My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book >>>(which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic >>>technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >>>into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this >>>moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the >>>above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue." To which I responded: >>Could you please indicate the basis upon which you could sue, since you >>have not been issued a patent on "any electromagnetic technology having >>greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system?" Do >>you not have to have a patent in order to sue for infringement? Further, >>how is it that you expect a patent to be issued for a generic idea like >>"technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >>into the system," as opposed to a specific device or method? Isn't this >>expectation completely against current patent law and procedures? As to >>your argument: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the >>patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the >>Applicant.__", does this not refer to *issued patents* not patent >>applications? My experience is that one can not write anything he choses >>for claims and have them accepted. To which you repond: >I am not going to enter with you into a direct legal discussion with >respect to the specifics of Patent Law. Should anyone wish to do so, they >may contact Joseph Newman directly and he will provide them with an >appropriate response. I will state that there is a legal strategy. >Whether Joseph Newman would wish to publicly discuss the specifics of that >strategy -- especially at this time -- would be at his option. To which I respond: This list and the freenrg list are chartered for and comprised of various individuals engaged in free energy (o-u) research and development. Numerous participants, myself included, are engaged in research to attempt to develop o-u electromagnetic devices, or devices involving electromagnetism. As "Director of Information, NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS", by posting a public threat to sue us for engaging in a chartered purpose of the list you have already engaged yourself in a public legal discussion. However, it would be essential to know if this supposed intellectual property right that is the basis of your proposed suit is not a property of NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS and if the threat to sue is strictly a personal threat by Joseph Newman? In any event, since the threat was publically posted, the responses and clarification or retraction should be publically posted as well. Without furhter clarification of these facts, please assume "you" refers to "NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS" of which you are a stated representative, i.e. "Director of Information". Since we on the news lists, and myself in particular, are already engaged in both a synergistic group effort or mutual support to develop and produce o-u devices, some of which are electromagnetic, as well as similar private activities, you owe us an answer as to the basis of the suit you have threatened against such activities and the cloud you have placed over activities here. I, for one, do not intend to cease and desist these activities without some resonable public statement on your part as to the claims of NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS or Joe Newman in particular that give basis to the threat of suit. Unless soundly substantiated or publically retracted, such a threat is nothing more or less than bullyish network terrorism. A threat to take property is only subordinate to a threat to take life and limb. I repeat the questions: (1) Could you please indicate the basis upon which you could sue, since you have not been issued a patent on "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system?" (2) Do you not have to have a patent in order to sue for infringement? (3) Further, how is it that you expect a patent to be issued for a generic idea like "technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system," as opposed to a specific device or method? (4) Isn't this expectation completely against current patent law and procedures? (5) As to your argument: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the Applicant.__", does this not refer to *issued patents* not patent applications? My experience is that one can not write anything he choses for claims and have them accepted. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 07:41:00 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA04956; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:10:49 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:10:49 -0800 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970131161349.00c2f2a8 bahnhof.se> X-Sender: david bahnhof.se X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:13:55 +0100 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: David Jonsson Subject: Poliakov sending Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"sO_hZ1.0.ID1.tjWyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3792 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Have you received the envelope? David From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 07:42:04 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA01625; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:50:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:50:34 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:55:09 -0800 Message-Id: <199701311555.HAA23215 netserve.kfalls.net> X-Sender: me2 kfalls.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: ME2 KFALLS.NET (Don Evans) Subject: misner effect Resent-Message-ID: <"ar2kr1.0.IP.sQWyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3789 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >hello everyone, i need some information if someone can help i have a couple of questions that would help in my understanding of what is going on in a super conductor the questiona are as follows. > >1. when using the misner effect to levitate a magnet is the effect actually a magnetic effect? (repultion of simalr forces) > >2. are there any lines of force plotted for this force(misner), i know what the lines of force look like for a magnet and these(misner), seem to be not pole specific for the magnet ie. you can spin the magnet and both n and s pole repell equally, therefor misner is simalar to a monopole that repels equally all magnetic forces. > >3. does a magnet seem to focus the misner effect to itself ? example the greatest force seems to consentrate towards the center on a disk shaped htsc. > >if anyone has some answers to these question and has graphs or charts i would gladly pay for them. > > >thank you don evans > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 07:53:11 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA11241; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:42:24 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:42:24 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701310937.ZM11516 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:37:55 -0600 In-Reply-To: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) "Griggs of Hydrodynamics" (Jan 31, 4:15am) References: <199701311008.CAA29538 dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Griggs of Hydrodynamics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Gm3V51.0.Ql2.TBXyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3794 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Jan 31, 4:15am, Akira Kawasaki wrote: > A few days ago, I called on James Griggs of Hydrodynamics. > Griggs is building the pump that 'Gene (and Jed, Chris, and Clarke) has > ordered for their laboratory at his cost. He would not sell it at > retail to them anyway in their science pursuits. Commendable sense of priorities. Please keep us informed on this topic and evaluations of this device. There are some independent o/u pump ideas I am working on that may inadvetantly overlap or replicate this device. (hopefully not!) Any info you can point me in the direction of would be helpful. Thanks! -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 08:19:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA16562; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:06:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:06:26 -0800 From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:09:23 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970131110558_817962846 emout08.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: mono pole dipoe Resent-Message-ID: <"2ylkP.0.i24.0YXyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3795 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The force between two monopoles varies as the square of their seperation distance. Dipoles separated by distance much shorter than their length have two poles in close proximity. These two poles act effectively as monopoles. The force between them varies as 1/r. The interaction of all the poles must be considered (not just the closest poles as in the case with short separations) with dipoles separtated at distances greater than their length. The superposition of the forces reveals that the long range translational force between two dipoles drops off at the 4th power of the separation distace. Any force that drops off as the fourth power effectively drops to zero real quick. The only force that is really ramains is a rotational one. At intermediate ranges of about one dipole length the translation force varies as the cube of the distance 1/rrr. If Newmans machine employs a two dipoles separated at great length it cannot work no matter how strong the magnet. It may spin but it will never lift. An answer to the problem would be to use a magnetic monopole. Where are we going to get one of thouse!! I don't know! I've went the other way in my formulations. I believe that gravitational dipoles are produced by condensed electrons (superconductors). Pick my link then pick Elektromagnum then pick "The Source of Inertial and Grav Mass" Frank Znidarsic fznidarsic aol.com 481 Boyer St. http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html Johnstown, Pa. 15906 Automatic links: Home_Page Send_E-mail From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 08:45:57 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA19699; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:20:48 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:20:48 -0800 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199701310742.IAA22473 mail.bbtt.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:23:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Barry Merriman lies..... Resent-Message-ID: <"uDDAY3.0.Zp4.QlXyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3796 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >BTW, I have seen Joe Newman=B4s Helium ballon experiment and it indeed >raises up, when he energizes the coil around the Helium ballon. >So building it much bigger could make a controlled ballon airship. A question to Stefan Hartmann here. How fast did it go up and what was the time lag? Also how fast does it sink when the power is turned off and with what time lag? If the effect is just from thermal heating of the balloon, as has been suggested by Bill Beaty, then there should be some thermal time lag but if the effect is electromagnetic the time lag should be very short, just the time to accelerate the balloon from the applied force. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov From vortex-digest-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 09:10:24 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA29157 for billb@eskimo.com; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:10:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:10:05 -0800 X-Envelope-From: ryb1989 dsuper.net Fri Jan 31 09:09:55 1997 Received: from oracle (porthole.dsuper.net [198.168.78.63]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA29089; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:09:53 -0800 Received: from asc3-addr-77.dsuper.net by oracle; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/08Jul96-0617PM) id AA05366; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:13:32 -0500 Message-Id: <9701311713.AA05366 oracle> From: "ryb1989" To: , Subject: Re: Newman on Fridenburg 's radio show Old-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:13:34 -0500 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-digest Status: RO X-Status: I was able to listen to the long interview/questions from auditors on Radionet via Real Audio on WSPL.It was 8:00 pm PACIFIC time ;a 3 hr show thus on the East Coast it ran from 11:00 pm till 2:00 am. The talk show host is amicable,not too many commercials and let us say, less flashy than Art Bell and hence more credible (?).J.Newman was on his show about 1 yr ago.Mr Fridenburg admits he is a skeptic but open minded and from viewing Newman's latest video he is more and more of a believer. The first 2 hrs were devoted to J. Newman exposing his theories.I must state that Mr Newman is NOT media savvy,NOT a slick talker,does not have a BOSTON accent.But then he is your average inventor that stumbled upon something big. Then in the last hr call were taken,some from listeners that HAD purchased his book/videos and constructed motors as per his specs and they did output energy.In fact the talk show host was going to visit such an individual soon to see it for himself. Yes,Mr. Newman did mention his book/video,upcoming public meeting in St.Louis and plug at local hotel,so what ?Skeptics,believers needed to know where it was after all !Mr Newman does not think highly of physicists and so do I to a certain extent.. However he did mention that-he did try to produce his motor in Mexico,a president of a company offered him to after seeing his demo of last year with his motor driven water-pump.But lo and behold ,as soon as he had met them,made the prototype and tried to go down there so they could study it and start producing it,the president of that company had been mysteriously replaced and new management did not want to see him,hear about it ever again ! He no longer has his "infamous electric car",used the parts for other projects. His energy device for each home,could would be about $6,000 to $9,000 per unit(price would go down if massly produced and unit be smaller),when asked by a caller that was willing to produce it and even went so far to give him $100,000 if he proved to him that his machine 'motor' worked ! after a few exchanges it was agreed that for a $1,000 bet this caller(chap in $$$ means I presume)would fly in to see Mr Newman with the radio talk show host and if Mr Newman proved that his motor could function for 2 hrs,outputting more energy than it was put inside,the $1,000 would be his;then they would talk about mass producing the device..So folks stay tuned ! Mr Newman did talk a bit about his Helium energy-machine powered;also stated that in future he could use his machine to transmutate-change one element into another;if I understood correctly(Real audio connection was BAD and lost connection a few times)you could produce gold,wathever from thin air(meaning electrons/atoms)-a bit like the gizmo is doing in Star Trek TV series.And travel to the stars,beyond speed of light too.His book mentions certain astronomical/physical/statistical relationships-can easily be checked I presumate.. Finally,an overall good show and the talk show host will be following the upcoming events I trust.He did state that AFTER Mr NEWMAN did appear on his show last year he got lotsa flack,responses from the scientifc community debasing Mr Newman as a fraud,crank,cook,weirdo,etc..for weeks and months.yet NO one of them did ever tried to directly contact Mr Newman or confront him with his theories. Mr Newman has stated that is the past he had invited Ph. D's in physicists,etc to confront him and publicly debunk his theory,etc..would show them his motor, le tthem examine it and see it worked and try to find out any hidden conventional energy source,yet NO ONE HAS EVER BOTHERED TO TAKE HIM UP IN HIS NUMEROUS CHALLANGES. I am asking the BIG MOUTHS of this LIST and as well as of the FREE ENERGY LIST that are physicists,etc to take him up on his word.GET his book($75 US),his video($35 US) and make one of his motor-if you are blocked,aske help from Newman's Website,e-mail list-if you do not want to DIRTY your hand,ask your students to do it as a semester project to prove/disprove his theories.PUT UP OR SHUT UP ! If you want to find out more go to: http://www.regularguy.com the Web site of Roger Fredinburg and from there you cna click on the AudioNet icon..I do not know if his shows are archived or not.. Yours,Ryb. P.S. I will be shorlty ordering Mr Newman's Book and video and additional infos,etc and seek help from mechanically oriented people in order to construct such a device (apparently you do not have to spend a fortune to demonstrate its workingness..) . N.B. As far as I can determine the works of Tesla,Moray and others are all in similar vein;I do not know if Mr Newman is in contact with people pursuing research into these domains.I do think that there are many ways to tap the "sea of energy"(or space grid if you like) that surrounds us.An example- Mr Newman stated that with his machine one could transmute elements and as I have read in past few weeks on this list cold fusion tends to just do that to a degree.Maybe a blending of energy producing machines could produce faster results..Newman's theories not within framework of conventional theory? As long as it WORKS,then the theory can be developped afterwards.. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 09:23:19 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA29187; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:10:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:10:13 -0800 Message-Id: <9701311713.AA05366 oracle> From: "ryb1989" To: , Subject: Re: Newman on Fridenburg 's radio show Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:13:34 -0500 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yRCcT2.0.v77.mTYyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3797 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I was able to listen to the long interview/questions from auditors on Radionet via Real Audio on WSPL.It was 8:00 pm PACIFIC time ;a 3 hr show thus on the East Coast it ran from 11:00 pm till 2:00 am. The talk show host is amicable,not too many commercials and let us say, less flashy than Art Bell and hence more credible (?).J.Newman was on his show about 1 yr ago.Mr Fridenburg admits he is a skeptic but open minded and from viewing Newman's latest video he is more and more of a believer. The first 2 hrs were devoted to J. Newman exposing his theories.I must state that Mr Newman is NOT media savvy,NOT a slick talker,does not have a BOSTON accent.But then he is your average inventor that stumbled upon something big. Then in the last hr call were taken,some from listeners that HAD purchased his book/videos and constructed motors as per his specs and they did output energy.In fact the talk show host was going to visit such an individual soon to see it for himself. Yes,Mr. Newman did mention his book/video,upcoming public meeting in St.Louis and plug at local hotel,so what ?Skeptics,believers needed to know where it was after all !Mr Newman does not think highly of physicists and so do I to a certain extent.. However he did mention that-he did try to produce his motor in Mexico,a president of a company offered him to after seeing his demo of last year with his motor driven water-pump.But lo and behold ,as soon as he had met them,made the prototype and tried to go down there so they could study it and start producing it,the president of that company had been mysteriously replaced and new management did not want to see him,hear about it ever again ! He no longer has his "infamous electric car",used the parts for other projects. His energy device for each home,could would be about $6,000 to $9,000 per unit(price would go down if massly produced and unit be smaller),when asked by a caller that was willing to produce it and even went so far to give him $100,000 if he proved to him that his machine 'motor' worked ! after a few exchanges it was agreed that for a $1,000 bet this caller(chap in $$$ means I presume)would fly in to see Mr Newman with the radio talk show host and if Mr Newman proved that his motor could function for 2 hrs,outputting more energy than it was put inside,the $1,000 would be his;then they would talk about mass producing the device..So folks stay tuned ! Mr Newman did talk a bit about his Helium energy-machine powered;also stated that in future he could use his machine to transmutate-change one element into another;if I understood correctly(Real audio connection was BAD and lost connection a few times)you could produce gold,wathever from thin air(meaning electrons/atoms)-a bit like the gizmo is doing in Star Trek TV series.And travel to the stars,beyond speed of light too.His book mentions certain astronomical/physical/statistical relationships-can easily be checked I presumate.. Finally,an overall good show and the talk show host will be following the upcoming events I trust.He did state that AFTER Mr NEWMAN did appear on his show last year he got lotsa flack,responses from the scientifc community debasing Mr Newman as a fraud,crank,cook,weirdo,etc..for weeks and months.yet NO one of them did ever tried to directly contact Mr Newman or confront him with his theories. Mr Newman has stated that is the past he had invited Ph. D's in physicists,etc to confront him and publicly debunk his theory,etc..would show them his motor, le tthem examine it and see it worked and try to find out any hidden conventional energy source,yet NO ONE HAS EVER BOTHERED TO TAKE HIM UP IN HIS NUMEROUS CHALLANGES. I am asking the BIG MOUTHS of this LIST and as well as of the FREE ENERGY LIST that are physicists,etc to take him up on his word.GET his book($75 US),his video($35 US) and make one of his motor-if you are blocked,aske help from Newman's Website,e-mail list-if you do not want to DIRTY your hand,ask your students to do it as a semester project to prove/disprove his theories.PUT UP OR SHUT UP ! If you want to find out more go to: http://www.regularguy.com the Web site of Roger Fredinburg and from there you cna click on the AudioNet icon..I do not know if his shows are archived or not.. Yours,Ryb. P.S. I will be shorlty ordering Mr Newman's Book and video and additional infos,etc and seek help from mechanically oriented people in order to construct such a device (apparently you do not have to spend a fortune to demonstrate its workingness..) . N.B. As far as I can determine the works of Tesla,Moray and others are all in similar vein;I do not know if Mr Newman is in contact with people pursuing research into these domains.I do think that there are many ways to tap the "sea of energy"(or space grid if you like) that surrounds us.An example- Mr Newman stated that with his machine one could transmute elements and as I have read in past few weeks on this list cold fusion tends to just do that to a degree.Maybe a blending of energy producing machines could produce faster results..Newman's theories not within framework of conventional theory? As long as it WORKS,then the theory can be developped afterwards.. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 11:24:07 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA17067; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:43:00 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:43:00 -0800 Message-ID: <32F1F7A1.53F6 tiac.net> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:46:09 +0000 From: Bob Shannon Reply-To: bshannon tiac.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Newman on Fridenburg 's radio show References: <9701311713.AA05366 oracle> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"groy01.0.WA4.oqZyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3798 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ryb1989 wrote: > Finally,an overall good show and the talk show host will be following the > upcoming events I trust.He did state that AFTER Mr NEWMAN did appear on his > show last year he got lotsa flack,responses from the scientifc community > debasing Mr Newman as a fraud,crank,cook,weirdo,etc..for weeks and > months.yet NO one of them did ever tried to directly contact Mr Newman or > confront him with his theories. Mr. Newman has been contacted directly with direct experimental evidence against his theory and demonstrations. His response to honest inquiry was hostile, and lacked any signs of objectivity. This is my direct personal experiance. Check your facts, and review the archives from freenrg-l. > Mr Newman has stated that is the past he had invited Ph. D's in > physicists,etc to confront him and publicly debunk his theory,etc..would > show them his motor, le tthem examine it and see it worked and try to find > out any hidden conventional energy source,yet NO ONE HAS EVER BOTHERED TO > TAKE HIM UP IN HIS NUMEROUS CHALLANGES. Again, when he has been confronted with direct experimental evidence against his claims, the response was that Mr. Newman would debate the issues only after a fully mechanical theory was offered to compete with his own. This is not an intellectually honest way to address direct experimental evidence. > I am asking the BIG MOUTHS of this LIST and as well as of the FREE ENERGY > LIST that are physicists,etc to take him up on his word.GET his book($75 > US),his video($35 US) and make one of his motor-if you are blocked,aske > help from Newman's Website,e-mail list-if you do not want to DIRTY your > hand,ask your students to do it as a semester project to prove/disprove his > theories.PUT UP OR SHUT UP ! Check your facts again. Your posting 'has issues where the facts are concerned". > P.S. I will be shorlty ordering Mr Newman's Book and video and additional > infos,etc and seek help from mechanically oriented people in order to > construct such a device > (apparently you do not have to spend a fortune to demonstrate its > workingness..) . Please realize that there are people who have tested and built Newman devices, and have not found evidence for over unity operation. Please check both sides of the coin before you assume you know the whole story. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 11:38:20 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA02425; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:16:52 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:16:52 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:19:53 -0800 Message-Id: <199701311919.LAA07400 li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien pop3.oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: address Resent-Message-ID: <"SBjqz.0.cb.UKayo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3799 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Ross I have a copy of the paper you want but I have missplaced your address >again. >Forgive me, I'm sort of in a quandary traveling all over the place >interviewing. > >Frank Znidarsic Hi Frank; My provider had me change the address to pick up mail, and for a while the wrong address was getting out as my return address. If you respond to this one, it ought to work. tessien oro.net Thanks, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 11:52:28 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA11205; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:39:53 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:39:53 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:43:18 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Newman on Fridenburg 's radio show Resent-Message-ID: <"r9LaK.0.Zk2.sfayo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3800 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >ryb1989 wrote: > >> Finally,an overall good show and the talk show host will be following the >> upcoming events I trust.He did state that AFTER Mr NEWMAN did appear on his >> show last year he got lotsa flack,responses from the scientifc community >> debasing Mr Newman as a fraud,crank,cook,weirdo,etc..for weeks and >> months.yet NO one of them did ever tried to directly contact Mr Newman or >> confront him with his theories. > >Mr. Newman has been contacted directly with direct experimental evidence >against his theory and demonstrations. His response to honest inquiry >was hostile, and lacked any signs of objectivity. Dear Bob, With respect to objectivity, this is your interpretation of the conversation. Joe had a different opinion of the nature of his conversation with you. And I'll give you an example of the type of experimentor with whom Joe is especially receptive: In the latter part of 1995, an individual obtained Joe's book. This gentleman proceeded to read and re-read the book (he said it took him three readings) until he felt he has mastered it. He then proceeded to contact Joe directly by telephone with several __very specific technical questions__ concerning construction details. It was obvious to Joe that the gentleman had truly mastered his book. Joe was happy to assist him with answers to his specific questions. I believe there were one or two more additional such telephone conversations. That was the last Joe heard of this individual until several months later when he received --- out of the blue --- a videotape from this gentleman. The videotape featured a model of Joe's technology and the gentleman indicated that he was obtaining results which one would expect from an understanding of Joe's technical process. The point that I am making is that when one is sincere and has demonstrated a genuine interest in his technology, Joe is very receptive and open. If one endeavors to communicate in a manner which may be interpreted by Joe as being something other than sincere and genuinely interested in the technology, Joe will be less than receptive ....if not hostile. >Please realize that there are people who have tested and built Newman >devices, and have not found evidence for over unity operation. Please >check both sides of the coin before you assume you know the whole story. Bob, I would sincerely and honestly be interested in receiving data regarding your above statement...preferably (if possible) with photographs (oscilloscope and standard). If possible please Fax send to: P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, Louisiana 70157-7684. If you like, you can call me collect at (504) 524-3063 with the cost of sending the materials and I can arrange to send you a check to cover shipping/copying costs if this is convenient. Best regards, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 14:07:14 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA06861; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:31:05 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:31:05 -0800 Message-ID: <32F21E3F.176 tiac.net> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:30:55 +0000 From: Bob Shannon Reply-To: bshannon tiac.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Evan Soule CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Newman on Fridenburg 's radio show References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ga-oH.0.6h1.NIcyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3803 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Evan Soule wrote: > Dear Bob, > > With respect to objectivity, this is your interpretation of the > conversation. Joe had a different opinion of the nature of his > conversation with you. This is not unexpected, as we are discussing rather subjective issues at this point. > And I'll give you an example of the type of experimentor with whom Joe is > especially receptive: > The point that I am making is that when one is sincere and has demonstrated > a genuine interest in his technology, Joe is very receptive and open. If > one endeavors to communicate in a manner which may be interpreted by Joe as > being something other than sincere and genuinely interested in the > technology, Joe will be less than receptive ....if not hostile. I think its a bit more complex than that Evan. I called Mr. Newman, and told him that the two coil experiment had captured my interest to such a degree that I was compeled to reproduce the experiment myself. I further stated that I had observed the sort of behavior Mr. Newman had described. This appeared to please Mr. Newman, which is perfectly natural. Then I stated that it appears that the behavior of the experiment appears to be fully described by conventional, if somewhat unusual phenomena. My intent was to find if these phenomena had been ruled out my Mr. Newman, as I might have missed something. Before I completed the sentance, Mr. Newman began his personal attacks, with foul language and threats of violence directed against me. At the very second something that might not fit into his view entered the discussion, any receptivity totally disappeard, along with all objectivity. I have no doubt that Mr. Newman's reaction would be quite different had I not raised any questions against his theory. Mr. Newman was steadfast in his conclusions, and saw no need to revisit the test in question. To this date, Newman Energy Products has not addressed this technical issue. Mr. Soule, I find your work ethic highly commendable. Our country would be in a far better position if this degree of work ethic were more common. Were I Joe Newman, I'd give you a raise in a heartbeat, whatever your current compensation might be. It's been more than earned in my opinion. In my opinion, Mr. Newman's objectivity and intellectual honesty is another matter however. I've made my tests, and provided my results already. I have found that many have taken this route before me, without resolution. I see no reason to hope that any ammount of data, of what ever nature, could hope to change Mr. Newman's mind. With unaddressed issues on the table, of what use would further data be? I must confess a degree of admiration for his dedication and persistance, but I can see no use in further technical exchange on this matter. I have done my part already, and was less than satisfied with the response to my efforts. I did learn quite a lot from the exchange however. Having benifited from the experiance, I shall stand aside, and observe. Should Newman Energy Products choose to revisit the tests in question, and integrate the total energy over time delivered to both coils, my opinion of Mr. Newman's objectivity would have to change. Respectfuly, Bob Shannon. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 14:22:58 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA08902; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:38:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:38:56 -0800 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:40:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: misner effect Resent-Message-ID: <"IxkUp2.0.vA2.jPcyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3804 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You seem pretty confused about the Meissner (not misner) effect. I'm not at all an expert, but I'll try to help a a bit where I can. The Meissner effect is the expulsion of all magnetic flux (except from a very thin surface "skin" layer) by a superconductor. Therefore, a superconductor behaves as a perfectly diamagnetic material, and therefore, it always repels ANY source of magnetic flux. >>1. when using the misner effect to levitate a magnet is the effect actually >a magnetic effect? (repultion of simalr forces) See above. >>2. are there any lines of force plotted for this force(misner), i know what >the lines of force look like for a magnet and these(misner), seem to be not >pole specific for the magnet ie. you can spin the magnet and both n and s >pole repell equally, therefor misner is simalar to a monopole that repels >equally all magnetic forces. Magnetic lines are excluded from a type-I superconductor and from type-II superconductor at low field strength. Thus, field lines must always go around the superconductor and never penetrate it. This is true, whether the magnet rotates or is static. (At higher fields, magnetic flux penetrates type-II, and the Meissner effect no longer applies. At sufficiently high field, both kinds of superconductivity are destroyed.) There is no magnetic monopole; at least no one has found experimental evidence for one, despite some serious searching. >>3. does a magnet seem to focus the misner effect to itself ? example the >greatest force seems to consentrate towards the center on a disk shaped htsc. >> >>if anyone has some answers to these question and has graphs or charts i >would gladly pay for them. "Focus" is the wrong concept. The repulsive force by Meissner flux exclusion depends on geometry, of course. If the superconductor is a disk, the repulsion of a magnet would be greatest when the latter is over the center of the disk. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 14:40:05 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18149; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:17:22 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:17:22 -0800 Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:16:41 -0800 Message-Id: <199701312216.OAA22166 dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: Griggs of Hydrodynamics To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: 76570.2270 compuserve.com Cc: griggs mindspring.com Resent-Message-ID: <"S3e633.0.TR4.mzcyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3805 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: January 31, 1997, You wrote: > >Commendable sense of priorities. Please keep us informed on this >topic and evaluations of this device. There are some independent o/u >pump ideas I am working on that may inadvetantly overlap or replicate >this device. (hopefully not!) Any info you can point me in the >direction of would be helpful. >Thanks! -john >John E. Steck Motorola CSS > Although the vortex is read by Dr. Eugene Mallove, I have fowarded your posting to him. He and several others have covered Gigg's device from its early development and investigated the over-unity aspects after Griggs sought him out because of anolomous excess-energy results. Griggs of Hydrodynamics is an engineer who developed a rotary compression heating pump without any mind to develop an over-unity device but this is what happened. He has patented his design and is on contract to develop various large sizes of his pump. James L. Griggs has an e-mail address: griggs mindspring.com Dr. Eugene Mallove has: 76570.2270 compuserve.com You might want to look into Mallove's 'Infinite Energy' magazines and also the earlier 'Cold Fusion' magazine where he was chief editor. They cover the Griggs pumps and other designs extensively. There is also a website mainted by John Logajan that covers the Griggs Hydrosonic pump. http:/www.skypoint.com.subscribers/jlogajan/ -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 15:35:38 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA26048; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:50:26 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:50:26 -0800 From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9701311646.ZM13704 me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:46:21 -0600 In-Reply-To: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) "Re: Griggs of Hydrodynamics" (Jan 31, 4:16pm) References: <199701312216.OAA22166 dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Griggs of Hydrodynamics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"asm5S2.0.rM6.lSdyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3806 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Jan 31, 4:16pm, Akira Kawasaki wrote: > James L. Griggs has an e-mail address: griggs mindspring.com > > Dr. Eugene Mallove has: 76570.2270 compuserve.com > > You might want to look into Mallove's 'Infinite Energy' magazines and > also the earlier 'Cold Fusion' magazine where he was chief editor. They > cover the Griggs pumps and other designs extensively. There is also a > website mainted by John Logajan that covers the Griggs Hydrosonic pump. > http:/www.skypoint.com.subscribers/jlogajan/ Had JL's page bookmarked already (thanks anyway!), but I looked again and didn't see anything on Griggs (likely missed in my haste). I recall discussions not too long ago on vortex, but I did not put 2+2 together at that time. I'll start digging. Good chance I have something bookmarked on my "to do" list about Griggs but haven't got that far down the list yet (grows fast, shrinks slow). My own fault for not paying better attention. Appreciate the info. -john -- John E. Steck Motorola CSS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 16:43:43 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA18510; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:32:56 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:32:56 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 19:34:09 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: josephnewman earthlink.net (Evan Soule) Subject: Re: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"lZZOI.0.7X4.pyeyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3807 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Explicitly directed to the attention of Mr. Horace Heffner: >At 6:48 AM 1/31/97, Evan Soule wrote: >[snip] > >>Mr. Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>>As to *your* behaviour, I view threats of lawsuit as the worst form of >>>suppression of free speech or scientific research, and far beyond >>>reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness. >>> >>>For example, you threatened: > >Evan Soule' responded: > >> >>For the sake of explicitness --- I wish to strive to get this clear with >>respect to your words *your* and "you" above --- the statement below was >>explicitly stated by Joseph Newman and signed in the post by Joseph Newman >>(and transcribed by myself). I would presume you accept this as the case. >>If you do not, I have no other means at my disposal to prove otherwise >>except that you may feel free to call Joseph Newman at (601) 947-7147 [best >>times 9:30am-10:30am; 9-10pm M-F] and verify that he did indeed state to me >>the quoted area below. It is probable (judging by your earlier remarks) >>that you have no interest in calling Joseph Newman --- nevertheless, I felt >>obliged to operationally state the manner in which you could directly >>contact him. > >Mr. Soule', your signature block indicates you are: > > ">Evan Soule' > >Director of Information > >NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS" > >You posted the following threat signed by Joseph Newman: > >>>">My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book >>>>(which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic >>>>technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >>>>into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this >>>>moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the >>>>above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue." > >To which I responded: > >>>Could you please indicate the basis upon which you could sue, since you >>>have not been issued a patent on "any electromagnetic technology having >>>greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system?" Do >>>you not have to have a patent in order to sue for infringement? Further, >>>how is it that you expect a patent to be issued for a generic idea like >>>"technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >>>into the system," as opposed to a specific device or method? Isn't this >>>expectation completely against current patent law and procedures? As to >>>your argument: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the >>>patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the >>>Applicant.__", does this not refer to *issued patents* not patent >>>applications? My experience is that one can not write anything he choses >>>for claims and have them accepted. > >To which you repond: > >>I am not going to enter with you into a direct legal discussion with >>respect to the specifics of Patent Law. Should anyone wish to do so, they >>may contact Joseph Newman directly and he will provide them with an >>appropriate response. I will state that there is a legal strategy. >>Whether Joseph Newman would wish to publicly discuss the specifics of that >>strategy -- especially at this time -- would be at his option. > >To which I respond: > >This list and the freenrg list are chartered for and comprised of various >individuals engaged in free energy (o-u) research and development. Numerous >participants, myself included, are engaged in research to attempt to >develop o-u electromagnetic devices, or devices involving electromagnetism. >As "Director of Information, NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS", by posting a public >threat to sue us for engaging in a chartered purpose of the list you have >already engaged yourself in a public legal discussion. However, it would >be essential to know if this supposed intellectual property right that is >the basis of your proposed suit is not a property of NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS >and if the threat to sue is strictly a personal threat by Joseph Newman? >In any event, since the threat was publically posted, the responses and >clarification or retraction should be publically posted as well. Without >furhter clarification of these facts, please assume "you" refers to "NEWMAN >ENERGY PRODUCTS" of which you are a stated representative, i.e. "Director >of Information". Dear Mr. Heffner, Thank you for clarifying your usage of the word "you" and "your" which I interpreted as an ambiguous usage on your part. And, once again for the sake of explicitness, you have now used the terminology "us" above. The original post to which you have referred was directed to the attention of one particular individual. It would appear as though you have "pluralized" the parameters of the original post. As to whether litigation, as appropriate, would be initiated under the aegis of Newman Energy Products and/or Joseph Newman --- this would be a decision to be made, as appropriate, by Joseph Newman. If you wish to pursue the opportunity to obtain a further elaboration to this question, you may pursue same directly from Joseph Newman via his address or telephone number which have been previously posted. > >Since we on the news lists, and myself in particular, are already engaged >in both a synergistic group effort or mutual support to develop and produce >o-u devices, some of which are electromagnetic, as well as similar private >activities, you owe us an answer as to the basis of the suit you have >threatened against such activities and the cloud you have placed over >activities here. I, for one, do not intend to cease and desist these >activities without some resonable public statement on your part as to the >claims of NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS or Joe Newman in particular that give >basis to the threat of suit. Unless soundly substantiated or publically >retracted, such a threat is nothing more or less than bullyish network >terrorism. A threat to take property is only subordinate to a threat to >take life and limb. Since, in my paradigm, life and limb are also forms of property, i.e., primordial property, I will make the assumption that you are referring to secondary property, i.e., tangible derivatives of primary property (property in ideas). In this context I would therefore agree that the threat by anyone to take secondary property is subordinate to a threat to take primordial property. However, the active plunder of primary property (and its secondary property derivatives) has consequences that may become more absolutely important than either a threat to take secondary property or a threat to take primordial property. You wrote above: "As to *your* behaviour, I view threats of lawsuit as the worst form of suppression of free speech or scientific research, and far beyond reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness." I would differ with you, Mr. Heffner. I would state that the worst form of suppression of free speech or scientific research is the *plunder of one individual's primary property by another*. By stealing such property --- in this case the intellectual property (primary property) of a given innovator --- the incentive of that innovator and of innovators in general may be ultimately destroyed. The effects of such plunder can be devastating to the given innovator(s) and can consequently be destructive to the very progress of civilization. Such plunder would be far beyond reasonable public standards of interpersonal respect and politeness in terms of its absolute importance. Here is my, personal, "reasonable public statement" to you: Joseph Newman made an earlier statement which was not specifically directed at you. And I will say this to you just as I would say it to the "directee": if you have any question about the nature, content, extent, or intent of Joseph Newman's statement, then I would invite you to directly contact Joseph Newman as I have indicated before. Sincerely, Evan Soule' Director of Information NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS josephnewman earthlink.net (504) 524-3063 P.O. Box 57684, New Orleans, LA 70157-7684 Websites: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/6087 http://www.infochase.com/us/master/index.html http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Newman/index.html Postscript: I faxed the above information to Joseph Newman and he responded with the following: "Friday, January 31, 1997 To: All Potential Thieves of My Life's Work for Humanity Mr. Heffner writes and asks if I would be specific as to what I would do if someone plundered my technology? Exactly what I have always said. I will sue anyone who does so. That person, if honest, would contact me and make a legitimate License Agreement. THEFT is not "scientific research," but THEFT! Scientific research verifies the Discovery by the Creative Individual --- it does not steal it! Every honest person knows this. HOWEVER, __anyone__ can build this technology for themselves and their own utilization and experimentation. They cannot sell it for purposes of commercialization. Joseph W. Newman" "Friday .... Newman" [Transcribed by Evan Soule'] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 18:48:47 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA13270; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:38:40 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:38:40 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:40:23 -0900 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Clarification Resent-Message-ID: <"4Z6hZ1.0.BF3.jogyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3808 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:34 PM 1/31/97, Evan Soule wrote: [snip] >I faxed the above information to Joseph Newman and he responded with the >following: > >"Friday, January 31, 1997 > >To: All Potential Thieves of My Life's Work for Humanity > >Mr. Heffner writes and asks if I would be specific as to what I would do if >someone plundered my technology? > >Exactly what I have always said. I will sue anyone who does so. That >person, if >honest, would contact me and make a legitimate License Agreement. THEFT is >not "scientific research," but THEFT! Scientific research verifies the >Discovery by the Creative Individual --- it does not steal it! Every >honest person knows this. > >HOWEVER, __anyone__ can build this technology for themselves and their own >utilization and experimentation. They cannot sell it for purposes of >commercialization. > > Joseph W. Newman" > > >"Friday .... Newman" [Transcribed by Evan Soule'] This is a *gross* misstatement (and evasion) of my question. I did not ask what Joe Newman would do, that was already explicitly stated by him, i.e. he will sue. I'll rephrase my question so it is hopefully more clear. My question is by what basis (i.e. by what legal theory, by what wild stretch of the imagination) does Joe Newman, NEWMAN ENERGY PRODUCTS, or its Director of Information who posted the threat on behalf of one or the other, claim any right to sue anyone for producing "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system". To be extra clear I will quote the original posted threat to sue: ">>>My original patent application as documented over 15 years ago and my book >>>(which has been read worldwide) explicitly states that any electromagnetic >>>technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted >>>into the system is my invention. I am putting you on notice as of this >>>moment that I would view any attempt on your part to produce the >>>above-described technology as that of a thief whom I will sue." If you do not have any basis for sueing for such then such a suit or the threat to sue would be malicious and frivilous. Furthermore, your threat places a cloud over potentially productive work for humanity and some of the work specificaly done by various subscribers to the vortex and freenrg lists. Do you think the costly, original, and innovative work that is going on here is so Joe Newman can claim control of it when and if it comes to fruition? I think we who are developing free energy EM technology for market have a need to know exactly what basis you have for making your public threat - so we can decide upon a proper course of action before expending further time and energy. Exactly how and why, on what basis, can do you claim "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system". Again I repeat the now further clarified specific questions which remain completely unanswered: (1) Could you please indicate the basis upon which you could sue, since you have not been issued a patent on "any electromagnetic technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system?" (2) Do you not have to have a patent in order to sue for infringement? (3) Further, how is it that you expect a patent to be issued for a generic idea like "technology having greater output energy than energy externally inputted into the system," as opposed to a specific device or method? (4) Isn't this expectation completely against current patent law and procedures? (5) As to your argument: "From the widest to the narrowest interpretation of the patent claims, such claims will be upheld in the __language of the Applicant.__", does this not refer to *issued patents* not patent applications? My experience is that one can not write anything he choses for claims and have them accepted. Whoever is making the threat of suit please answer the questions or publically withdraw the threat. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 20:23:23 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA17335; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:55:34 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:55:34 -0800 Message-ID: <32F20898.784B tiac.net> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:58:32 +0000 From: Bob Shannon Reply-To: bshannon tiac.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Barry Merriman lies..... References: <199701310742.IAA22473 mail.bbtt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aP76I3.0.fE4.luayo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3801 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > >My primary purpose in this is to counter a Joe Newman/Evan Soule > >"press release" (ultimately intended to round up investors, I imagine), > >with a little pro-bono scientific and historical analysis to the > >effect that > > > >(a) Newman has a long, discredited history, including failure > > of his devices under careful scientific experimental > > investiagtion. > > Hey buddy, donīt spread these lies here ! Mr. Merriman is stating his opinion, which can be supported with evidence. This is a quite different thing than spreading lies. > You have absolutely no understanding of Newman machines > which all your other postings prove ! > It is just not true ! Newman machines have been proven > by many tests to be overunity. > The problem is, you donīt care to study these tests... There are also a number of tests which do not support Mr. Newman's claims, so we can claim evidence for, and against Mr. Newman's case. While you may chose to accept that Mr. Newman has proven his claims, others disagree, and find issues with the supporting tests. Several experiments show only conventional effects where Mr. Newman claims unconventional effects. Newman Energy Products has not yet addressed these points in a satisfactory manner, and as a result, the discussion was removed from freenrg-l. > >(b) Application of known principles to Newmans inventions clearly > > suggest they will not work, so investors beware. > > Another lie again here... > > If you continue this over here I suggest you will be not just kicked > off your chair but also out of Vortex ! Careful Stefan, The statement above is an opinion, not a lie. An opinion you do not share does not become a lie. We are all entitled to our own opinions, and the free expression of them. Newman was 'kicked off' freenrg-l for not addressing technical points raised in an objective manner. As Mr. Merriman has not lied as you state, but has stated his opinions with which you disagree. Your flirting with lible here. > BTW, I have seen Joe Newmanīs Helium ballon experiment and it indeed > raises up, when he energizes the coil around the Helium ballon. > > So building it much bigger could make a controlled ballon airship. Not so. If Mr. Newman has the power source on board, and if no displacement lift (due to helium, or other lighter than air gas) is used, then he might have something. But deplacement lift falls off very quickly as altitude increases, so there is a maximum practical altitude beyond which displacement lift no longer provides any lifting force at all. You would be supprised how fast the Earth's atmosphere thins as altitude increases. If the device cannot lift it's power source without the aid of displacement lift, it is clearly impractical. Also, the problem of heating of the helium has not been addressed as yet. This same objection was raised long ago, and is documented on the web. With such major issues present, how can you assume that the device can be scaled up to a self powered, load carring aircraft? This is a case where as Mr. Merriman states "Application of known principles to Newmans inventions clearly suggest they will not work", which shows that Mr. Merriman was not telling a lie at all, but stating his opinion, which can be supported by facts. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jan 31 23:59:48 1997 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA24626; Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:50:13 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:50:13 -0800 From: Chuck Davis To: rife-list eskimo.com CC: BCC:mind-l gate.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, choaspsyc list.uvm.edu Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:49:38 -0800 Message-ID: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.4 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Subject: Book ??? (fwd) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"DAkv43.0.b06.oMlyo" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3809 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I figure that one of you great spirits might know. I could find it. *** Forwarded message, originally written by Duc Nguyen on 31-Jan-97 *** Dear Mr. Davis, Would you please let me know where I can get the book " Einstein doesn't work here anymore ". Thank you very much for your help. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Duc Nguyen vcnguyen acs.ucalgary.ca -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-'