From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 02:25:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA16038; Fri, 1 May 1998 02:24:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 02:24:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805010326.XAA14503 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1998 23:21:55 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"t-lzm2.0.Sw3.3JPIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18092 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gene - > There is little question that with this kind of > dramatic excess temperature, implying a > serious excess power source of some low but > significant wattage(*), appropriate > insulation of the cell should lead rather > quickly (one hopes) to a self-sustaining > device. I used to bug Chris Tinsley when I first met him online about getting to that self-sustaining demo unit level with CF. It was my guess then and now that it's the thing you have to achieve to force the effect to become a cognitave reality with the masses, short of having mass manufactured CF home power units, etc. Congratulations on getting some solid excess heat effects up and running right under your own roof! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 03:32:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA19021; Fri, 1 May 1998 03:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 03:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack mail1.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <35494D4E.1F67FFAA mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 04:19:26 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MdDp53.0.7f4.fGQIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18093 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: ....punish us evil humans by toasting us with just those very things - giant ball lightning pulses that will cause the earth to heat up and inflate, sinking the Hawaiian Islands, etc. etc. Frank Stenger wrote: There they go, Rick, making villains of my favorite anomally! :-( I just can't believe "my" ball lightning would be a party to sinking your islands. We had better keep an eye on the sun, Rick (thru glasses darkly!) - we don't want anything sneaking up on us! Frank Stenger Hi Frank, I no longer can resist telling of my own encounter with ball lightning. A number of years ago, during a summer electrical storm, a ball of lightning came through the glass of the outside door of my living room. It slowly, on a straight course, moved through the living room coming close to the face of one of my sons who was sitting on a couch. Finally, it disappeared into the thermostat, burning out the thermostat. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 04:16:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA10723; Fri, 1 May 1998 04:12:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 04:12:36 -0700 Message-ID: <19980501111209.16481.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.17] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 04:12:09 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"9Gzv23.0.Od2.ZuQIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18094 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Vorts, Sorry for my ignorance, but what is D2? Would I be right in saying that when you heat the empty vessel using a set amount of power it reaches 180 Celcius. So for a given amount of insulation you require X amount of power to sustain 180 C. When you then fill the vessel with the catalyst D2 and heat it again to 180 Celcius it continues past 180 to 200 Celcius for the same power input to the heaters? So there is some sort of reaction above 180 that allows it to prgress to 200C. I take it that the shift in temp. will not occur below the baseline temp. of 173 C or whatever it was. I imagine your best option would be to scrap all your insulation and place the vessel into a larger polished tube suspended by glass thread and evacuate it to a vacuum, with polished surfaces on all parts the radiated energy with be kept to a minimum. If you then heat the outer cylinder to 180C then watch to see if the inner vessel rises to 200C. Heating the outer cylinder to 180c will negate any losses through insulation, so a rise in temp. on the inner vessel should be excess energy....hey presto! Rob King Stafford, England ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 04:49:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA13851; Fri, 1 May 1998 04:42:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 04:42:11 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980501114216.00695238 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 07:42:16 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"4VB602.0.LO3.IKRIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18095 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:28 PM 4/30/98 -0400, Eugene Mallove wrote: >Vortexians: > >PRELIMINARY CONFIRMATION TEST OF DR. LESLIE CASE'S CATALYTIC FUSION > >As to the suggestion that methane forming reactions can be responsible >for the temperature rise -- methane does NOT form below 1500 C according >to Perkins at United Catalysts. Further more, why would they form only >with D2? Further and finally, chemical reactions from such a small >reaction mass could not produce watts of power for weeks on end. > >More comments later... > >Best, > > >Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief >Infinite Energy Magazine >Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. >PO Box 2816 >Concord, NH 03302 > > Phone: 603-228-4516 > Fax: 603-224-5975 > editor infinite-energy.com > > http://www.infinite-energy.com > Thank you Gene for a complete description of Dr. Case's experiment demonstrated so soon after ICCF-7. These results and comments raises several questions. 1. The statement that methane does not form below 1500 deg C implies that it is not done catalytically with Pd since Pd melts at 1550 deg C and certainly sinters well below this temperature so that catalytic activity would be lost. 2. The question "why would [methane (CD4)] form only with D2" is not valid since it hasn't been demostrated that CH4 does not form with H2. (Adsorption of CH4 by the activated carbon prevented its detection by mass spec analysis). 3. Can an economic assessment be done with the results obtained so far? I know that improvements can be made but it would be nice to know what target performance is necessary to achieve economic production of heat. Dr. Case mentioned that the current results would not produce an economical source of power. 4. Can a conversion figure be calculated from a quantitative measurement of He^4 (asssuming this is the only source of the excess heat) and can this be corrolated with the estimated heat produced? This datum could be used to calculate the length of time the reaction could run before recharging is necessary. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 05:27:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA18531; Fri, 1 May 1998 05:19:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 05:19:43 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980501021901.006e05b8 postoffice.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 02:19:01 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: jeff fink Subject: Re: [WAY OFF TOPIC] Gun control In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FhVoA2.0.RX4.UtRIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18096 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:29 AM 4/29/98 +1000, you wrote: > > > Do you feel safer at >night with a weapon next your bed, knowing that if there is a burgular he >may also be armed? Was Waco worth it? Of course it is your decision. > >Martin Sevior > > > >Wake up! No matter what laws are passed, the burglar will always be armed. How much bolder will he get knowing that all his potential victims are totally disarmed? Jeff Fink From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 06:44:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA30891; Fri, 1 May 1998 06:37:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 06:37:31 -0700 Message-Id: <199805011337.JAA02484 mercury.mv.net> Subject: More on Case Confirmation - Mallove 5/1/98 Date: Fri, 1 May 98 09:39:59 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"PELWL.0.YY7.Q0TIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18097 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians: In my haste to send your the report on confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion work, I slipped in a few errors: 1. The footnote about estimating excess power I had inadvertently inverted a fraction in my computation. The estimate should have been about 7.5 watts, not 23 watts: 55V X 1.67 A = 91.9 watts input power 178.1 C - 18 C (ambient) = 160.1 C rise for that input power 91.9/160.1 = 0.57 watt/deg C estimated calorimeter constant (IF roughly linear -- big IF at the high temperature end. The estimate may be too conservative.) Therefore: 13.2 C elevation X 0.57 w/C = 7.57 watt s estimated excess power 2. The temperature of the D2 run at 7:37 pm on 4/30/98 was 191.0 C. but by 7: 42 pm was 191.3 C, hence the 191.3 - 178.1 = 13.2 C elevation -- forgot to tell you about the 7:42 pm point. Dr. Case says that he has developed his own proprietary catalyst that is better than the available commercial stuff. He says this new catalyst typically will give temperature rises in the range 20 to 30 C above baseline. It seems to me, however, that the off-the shelf G-75D or E should be quite good enough for demos and self-sustaining devices. Dr. Case means business with this. He is going to ramp up the commercialization of this very rapidly with demonstration units and joint ventures with any power companies --or any other entities -- that are willing to climb aboard. He recognizes that individual dwell ling units that heat and generate electricity are going top be a major target. Getting the power density up higher is a key goal for him. He is particularly interested in getting this power source to countries such as China, which are about to do such foolish things as blocking the Yangtze River with giant hydro dams. Dr. Case grew up in Oklahoma, but has lived in Massachusetts and New Hampshire most of his adult life. For a time he had his own polymer chemistry firm in the Nashua, NH area. He has taught Chemical engineering at Tufts and at Purdue University. Dr. Case has four degrees from MIT -- two S.B degrees (Chem E and Industrial engineering as it used to be called), and an Sc.D. in Chem E., and I believe a business management degree. I need to look up the exact dates. His father was a geochemist who worked in Oklahoma for Gulf Oil Corp all his life -- helping it deal with water pollution problems in water pumped up with the oil. Dr. Case is well-traveled in Asia and in Europe. His hobbies include classical music and wine tasting! He never misses an opportunity to visit fine vineyards. His late wife was a Ph.D. physical chemist who was born in Philadelphia on July 4the! Her parents were native Germans who returned to Germany, but then after her youth she came back to the US. Case's brother is a retired manager from the General Electric power systems area. All in all, Les Case is a fascinating person adn his work is wonderful. Best, Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302 Phone: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 07:16:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA08552; Fri, 1 May 1998 07:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 07:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3549D850.5C2D interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 10:12:32 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dhMBY.0.T52.aYTIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18098 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Taylor J. Smith wrote: > (snip) > I no longer can resist telling of my own encounter > with ball lightning. A number of years ago, during > a summer electrical storm, a ball of lightning came > through the glass of the outside door of my living > room. It slowly, on a straight course, moved through > the living room coming close to the face of one of my > sons who was sitting on a couch. Finally, it disappeared > into the thermostat, burning out the thermostat. Gosh, Jack, do you remember any more details? How about the door-glass details? Did you find any effects on the glass" About how big was the ball? Any sound with the ball? How bright? Was it smooth, fuzzy, "sparky", etc. Any details of the thermostat damage? Did your son smell anything - (nitrogen oxides, etc.)? I realize that in the surprise of the moment, all but the general overall impact of the encounter are often lost. This encounter is very typical - I have had letters from people describing about the same experience. Glad no one was hurt by the incident, Jack! Now, if someone can tell me how this little bugger (BL) can get around its prohibition by the "virial theorem", I'll be a happy old dude! May I say that I don't intend to turn this list into a ball lightning list - my interest in BL is from the anomalous energy standpoint - how does it store energy? - Does it have a hot core that could be used for fusion reactions? - Does it exhibit a magnetic dipole characteristic such that it could be "captured" by an active EM suspension system? - If captured and suspended, could its energy be replenished (laser, electron beam, microwave?)? Thanks for the report, Jack! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 07:31:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA09964; Fri, 1 May 1998 07:26:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 07:26:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00c501bd750b$d07ec1a0$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: More on Case Confirmation - Mallove 5/1/98 Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:16:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"m6vqf3.0.cR2.ckTIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18099 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex With D2 and Pd-Carbon in the Case Cell, maybe adding some Thorium, Uranium, or Plutonium Carbides might make things REALLY INTERESTING! :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 08:04:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA10820; Fri, 1 May 1998 07:52:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 07:52:15 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08D7 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Joe Champion Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 07:51:46 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"GTnr7.0.ze2.U6UIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18100 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Thank you for the information. Tis sad. In another generation he might have been another Death Valley Scotty. Hank > ---------- > From: Barry Merriman[SMTP:barry math.ucla.edu] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, April 30, 1998 12:26 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Joe Champion > > Jerry W. Decker wrote: > > > > > Joe Champion ... > > He has taken an extended vacation at the request of the State of > > Arizona. > > > > Since some folks are asking me, I will confirm that my > preliminary finding is that this is indeed true---i.e. > Joe Champion is going to be in jail for at least several > years, and up to 10. > > All I have to add is that, based on my close relationship > with Joe the past 2 years, I would say that both legally > and morally Joe deserves what he got. He's a very likable fellow, > at a casual level, but he definitely violated his parole and > also ripped off many people by selling them unworkable transmutation > schemes. And he is what ordinary people would call a pathological > liar, although technically he mainly exagerates things to > ridiculous extremes. Two typical cases of interest to vortex readers > illustrating this would be > > (1) 2 years ago, JC announced here that he would have an > on site demo in August of his industrial transmuation process, > and invited 12 scientists to attend and verify. This was the > point at which I first got involved, in fact. Subsequent > investigation showed that the the owners of the site > of Joe's intended demo had no idea of his plans, and > also no further interest in Joe's processes. The reality > was that, at the time Joe announced his on site demo, > Joe was fishing around for a site + someone > to construct all the equipment, and it was just a pie-in-the-sky > dream that it would ever take place at all---the processses > in question were not even working, much less at a large scale. > The discrepancy between what Joe publicly said was a major > planned (he had a date, site, ect) demo event, and reality, > was vast. > > (2) Sometime later, also announce here on vortex, > there was the great "Hafnium Event", in > which Joe's processes, under the execution of a third > party, were producing a grey metal > that turned out to be Hafnium, in "gram" (!) > quantities from kilogram quantities of ingredients. Privately > Joe told me it was infact 100's of gram quantities. The > reality was that the process was indeed producing 100's > of grams of grey material, most of which was salts. The > mass-spec done at UCLA showed it had hafnium in it, in > minute amounts, and analytical chemical tests done at a > reputable commercial lab put the level of Hafnium (as > well as Zr, Gold, Silver and Platinum) at less than 10 ppm. > Also, I have subsequently interviewed the other parties > that had tested the material prior to Joe's public announcemnts > > here, and none of them put the Hf content at beyond a few > ppm (the tests I had done were by far the most reliable). > Thus, Joe had no reason to think there were more than ppm > levels, which could easily have been contimation, given the > setup that was producing the material. > So, given that Hf was present at the level of a few ppm, > we again have a case were Joe was off by a factor of > 100,000 in his statements. > > I could easily give another 5 or so first hand stories like > the above, and probably 100 second hand stories, but the > above make the point with stuff that was actually published here > on Vortex. Joe is a pathological exagerator---that is fact, > no ad hominum. > > As for the technical question of whether Joe really does > have processes that can turn lead into gold, all I can say > is that after numerous repeated attemtps, he was never able to > transmit to me a repeatable experiment. It remains a mystery > as to how his processes have been able to convince a few certain > credible others of the reality of the effect---I still plan to > get to the bottom of that, and really Joe is not needed to answer this > question....he doesn't know the answer himself, I'm convinced, > nor does he have the ability to demosntrate a repeatable > process that might shed light on the answer, nor can anything > he says be trusted. > > But, for the record, my own personal experience so far suggests > that Joe has absolutely no ability to make gold, but does > have the ability to muddy the waters enough to keep the dream > alive for himself and others. > > > > -- > Barry Merriman > Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math > Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program > email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 08:30:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17768; Fri, 1 May 1998 08:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9 css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 10:21:17 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D@interlaced.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bTIRx3.0.WL4.WZUIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18101 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Francis J. Stenger wrote: > Now, if someone can tell me how this little bugger (BL) can get around > its prohibition by the "virial theorem", I'll be a happy old dude! The "virial theorem"? My apologies to the list if this is something basic I should know. What is it? > May I say that I don't intend to turn this list into a ball lightning > list - my interest in BL is from the anomalous energy standpoint - how > does it store energy? - Does it have a hot core that could be used for > fusion reactions? - Does it exhibit a magnetic dipole characteristic > such that it could be "captured" by an active EM suspension system? - > If captured and suspended, could its energy be replenished (laser, > electron beam, microwave?)? Seems extremely relevent and of interest (well, to me at least ). Why is it that you are aprehensive about starting a BL thread? 8^) John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 08:39:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA18129; Fri, 1 May 1998 08:34:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:34:23 -0700 Message-ID: <3549DC6C.3899 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 09:30:04 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com, drom@vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la utkux.utk.edu, orian001@maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti@aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani frascati.infn.it, opa@aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak nosc.mil, bossp@nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly mse.ogi.edu, dg@cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell lanl.gov, sphkoji@sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos juno.com, g-miley@uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti msn.com, design73@aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre qm.sri.com, tchubb@aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger eneco-usa.com, cincygrp@ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Rothwell: Case cell abstract 04/26/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34DFC098.4EB3@e arthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6 earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earthlink.net> <3 4EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6F8AA.1837@ea rthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthlink.net> <350! 4077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350DAD0F.535F@e arthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@earthlink.net> < 35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <35173888.2F66@ea rthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@earthlink.ne t> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <352D3FA7.574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@earthlink.net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <3547586D.E74@! eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"A6f-P2.0.BR4.-jUIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18102 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: CATALYTIC FUSION OF DEUTERIUM By: Leslie C. Case, Sc.D. After much experimentation, I have found specific conditions under which D2 gas catalytically fuses to helium-4. Some of the prior cold-fusion work mayhave adventitiously depended on such a catalytic effect. In my process, D2 gas is contacted at super-atmospheric pressure and a temperature of about 130 to 275 deg C, with a supported metal catalyst. I have looked at many such catalysts, and found that a platinum-group metal supported on activated carbon, at a loading of about ~ to 1% on the substrate, seems to be preferred. Pd. Pt. Ir and Rh all work, and Pd seems preferred. Other supported catalysts may ultimately be found to also work. The process does not produce neutrons, or tritium, but two analyses of long-term tests have found about 100 ppm. of helium-4 in the fuel gas. Suitable equipment for this process is displayed. About 50 to 100 g. of candidate catalyst is loaded into the vessel, and the apparatus is sequentially tested with H2 and D2 gas at the same power input into the heating mantle. If the catalyst is active for D2 fusion, the temperature reached with D2 is more than 5 deg C higher than with H2. This process shows promise for cheap, large-scale energy production for the future. [Comments by Rothwell, 04/26/98] L.C. Case: Gas loading with commercial hydrogenation catalysts consisting of ~1% palladium on activated carbon. The cell must be maintained at a temperature between 150 and 250 deg C, no higher or lower. It is first loaded with hydrogen, which cleans the catalyst and purges oxygen. It is then evacuated and loaded with deuterium. The temperature rises 5 to 30 deg C over the baseline temperature established with hydrogen, indicating 10 to 30 watts of excess heat. The excess heat lasts for weeks. He has never let it run indefinitely. He quenches the heat by letting the cell cool. The experiment has been repeated dozens of times successfully. Cravens commented that the treatment with hydrogen may be important. It serves as a null run and it cleans the catalyst. Someone asked Case whether the hydrogen blanks might be producing heat. He responded that he would have no way of telling; he only knows that deuterium is much warmer. (He ignores differences less than 5 deg C.) I was suspicious that this might be an artifact of the different conduction coefficients of deuterium and hydrogen. Such problems were reported by Mizuno, Oriani and others working with gas calorimeters. I asked Case about the position of the thermocouples, gas pressure, calibration techniques and the cell wall temperature. I am satisfied this type of artifact is not a factor. In his conference summation, McKubre cited this as one of the most significant papers because Case appears to have developed a 100% reproducible process, and because he is willing to publish all details about experiment. Mallove and I agree that this may be the most important experiment in cold fusion. At present, Case uses an uninsulated steel cell which he holds at the critical temperature with an electric heater. We advised him to move the cell to an insulated container, perhaps a Dewar, and to turn off the electric heater once the reaction begins. If this is a genuine cold fusion excess heat reaction, the cell should self-heat and remain hot indefinitely with no input, probably for years. This test would do away with the need for calorimetry and resolve all doubts about the existence of the excess heat. Case is a retired chemical engineer who has decades of experience working with these catalysts. Beginning in 1989, he scoured the catalogs and requested sample materials from several chemical companies. He tested hundreds of samples at different temperatures and pressures, in an Edisonian search for one that would rapidly absorb deuterium and develop excess heat reliably. He finally found a particular type of catalyst that is available from three suppliers. He has filed for an international patent, which requires that all details be revealed even before the patent is granted. I do not have the patent number or the catalog part numbers, but I will get them soon. Case has agreed to bring his cell to Mallove's laboratory in Bow, New Hampshire next Thursday for independent verification. The materials in this cell simple and cheap. The chemical companies can supply tons of the catalyst, and only 50 to 100 grams of the catalyst is need for each small cell, so this would make an ideal demonstration cell. If we determine it works, we hope to license the device, manufacture and sell hundreds of demonstration kits within one month. We move fast here at Infinite Energy! Case took samples to Prague where he rented the use of a nuclear research laboratory to search for neutrons during the heat events, but after extensive research he determined there are none. Case took a cell that had run for weeks to Oak Ridge. They found 100 ppm helium in the used gas, and no significant helium in the unused gas or catalyst material. [comment by Rothwell, 04/27/98] Case said that above 250 deg C the metal is sintered, and the catalytic effect is permanently lost. Someone at the conference told me he thinks that temperature is not high enough to sinter palladium, so perhaps the carbon substrate is destroyed. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 08:47:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA21843; Fri, 1 May 1998 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:44:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805010326.XAA14503 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:43:10 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"hfzmU3.0.CL5.9tUIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18103 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gene reports interesting preliminary results with Les Case's gas loaded catalyst experiment. I await results with the system placed inside a calorimeter. My concerns with the simple system Case described at ICCF7 are: 1. D2 is only about 0.7 times as thermally conductive as H2, so the use of the H2 run as a control for the D2 run is not justified. The H2-filled tank ought to conduct heat from the heated bottom to the open-to-the-air (ie. cooled) top more than the D2-filled tank. Thus, the H2-filled tank would be cooled more than the D2-filled one. This effect would produce a false excess heat from D2. 2. The various kinds of catalytic grains that Case has tested almost certainly have different thermal conductivities, which would also influence the temperature at the thermowell. This effect might account for some of the catalysts appearing to produce excess heat and others not. 3. There are probably other, less obvious confounding factors that we have not thought of yet. My point is, the present experiment measures temperature, not heat (energy). As designed, it cannot produce any logical conclusion. Calorimetry is necessary. 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 May 1 08:56:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA22767; Fri, 1 May 1998 08:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980501104732.00bad800 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 10:47:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion In-Reply-To: References: <199805010326.XAA14503 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ryj2y1.0.aZ5.wxUIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18104 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:43 5/1/98 -0800, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >My point is, the present experiment measures temperature, not heat >(energy). As designed, it cannot produce any logical conclusion. >Calorimetry is necessary. I'm on it! Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 08:55:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA21829; Fri, 1 May 1998 08:51:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:51:18 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:46:41 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Comments about Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805011150_MC2-3B9F-CF10 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"2frjq.0.kK5.qzUIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18105 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I talked to Gene and Dr. Case at length yesterday. Perhaps I can address some of the comments made here. Scott Little wrote: We then heated the chamber to ~175C. That takes only ~20 watts in our system. Only ~20 watts is good. The 50 g sample Gene tested may have produced as much as 20 watts. If you put 100 g in your cell and it produces heat, maybe you can turn off your auxiliary heater and have it self-heat. It ended up around 40 psi. . . . Perhaps some of the H2 gas reacted with something in/on the catalyst (oxygen?). . . . Maybe we have a leak....:( Probably you had oxygen. When you dump the hydrogen, look for vapor and water. Purge it repeatedly with H until you see stable pressure and temperature. Several people have speculated that this might be a chemical reaction. I think at this point we should accept Case's reports at face value. I do not mean we should automatically believe him, but he passed the first verification test, his credibility stands high with me, and his statements should be admitted as evidence just as we would admit statements made by any other scientist. His credibility is much higher than that of, say, Notoya or Ragland, because nobody has been able to independently verify their work. Case says the cell has produced excess heat for up to three weeks, and it showed no sign of petering out. Let me state categorically: *this rules out a chemical reaction*. I hope we do not have to debate that point here. The only "chemical" reactions not ruled out would be the exotic shrinking hydrogen reactions postulated by Mills. Unless we find a reason to discount Case's claims, I think we can put aside the chemical explanation. As far as I can see, the only potential weakness remaining in his work is the gas calorimetry. I spoke with him about that yesterday and again confirmed that the catalyst sits in direct contact with the steel. The thermocouple is in contact with the grains of the catalyst, which resembles salt. I do not see how gas conductivity could cause a 10 deg C artifact with this arrangement. Furthermore, as he pointed out, he ran with deuterium hundreds of times and saw no excess, using other catalysts at other temperatures. So, my the answer to Martin Sevior's question # 1, "Is it possible that impurities in the D2 are causing chemical reactions in the system?" is no. It might have been possible in our test but the other tests performed by Case himself rule out this hypothesis. Martin's second question can be addressed with some a common sense, I think: 2. Is there some way we can estimate the resolution of the Oak Ridge 4He measurement. The Mass of D2 is pretty close the 4He so it is an important point. We could call them I suppose, but let us be reasonable. Everyone knows that helium-4 and deuterium molecules have are close (4.00260 versus 4.02820 amu). The people at Oak Ridge knew they were receiving a sample of D2 gas. They are not fools. Obviously they would take steps to reduce the D2 content of the sample, and they would use a spectrograph with sufficiently high resolution. Who wouldn't? I don't like to be sarcastic, but I find it strange that people wonder whether the experts in mass spectrometry at a National Laboratory are aware of these elementary concerns. This is a bit like wondering whether the scientists at the French Atomic Energy Commission thought to look for plated-out thorium in their Cincinnati Group replication. Yes, they spent two months doing things like that. (To be specific, they scraped the inside of the container.) Martin's third question is a good one: "3. What was the concentration of 4He in the D2 prior to the energy generating run?" Maybe we *should* call Oak Ridge. Maybe Case gave Gene some of these details. Horace Heffner writes: One possible problem is temperature might run away, due to lack of cooling. If this happens, the experiment is already a monumental success. That is a problem, and it has happened. But the temperature does not run away for long. Over 250 deg C because the catalyst self-destructs and the reaction halts abruptly. It is a good fail safe mechanism. Unfortunately it means that generators based on this technology will have poor Carnot efficiency, so they will have to be large. Home heaters and generators would be feasible but an automobile engine might not be. Conventional fission reactors also operate at around 200 deg C. This is a waste of fuel but it reduces the wear and tear on the equipment. Rob King asks what is D2. Deuterium molecules. Deuterium atoms in mass matrimony, presided over by a microscopic Reverend Moon. I have always wondered what happens with an odd number of atoms, with one left over. King asks: "Would I be right in saying that when you heat the empty vessel using a set amount of power it reaches 180 Celsius." I do not know if he has tried it with a vacuum. In our tests it was ~179 deg C with hydrogen, 191 deg C with deuterium. I take it that the shift in temp. will not occur below the baseline temp. of 173 C or whatever it was. Correct. That is Case's observation, not ours. Gene did not observe a null deuterium run. I imagine your best option would be to scrap all your insulation and place the vessel into a larger polished tube suspended by glass thread and evacuate it to a vacuum, with polished surfaces on all parts the radiated energy with be kept to a minimum. Yes, that is a Dewar cell -- what we have been talking about. The catalyst cannot be held in a vacuum, however. Ed Strojny wonders: Can an economic assessment be done with the results obtained so far? I know that improvements can be made but it would be nice to know what target performance is necessary to achieve economic production of heat. Dr. Case mentioned that the current results would not produce an economical source of power. I talked to Case about this, and I disagree with his analysis. It is too pessimistic. He bases his analysis on building large, centralized power plants. I believe this technology would make these plants obsolete. Small generators in the house, or tiny battery-like generators in every machine would eliminate the need for centralized generation plants, and this would save about one-third of the cost. Deuterium gas fuel cost virtually nothing, so this would eliminate another third of the cost. So even if the palladium catalyst was expensive and the Carnot efficiency made the devices bulky, it would still be much cheaper than conventional energy because it starts off with a 66% advantage. The only pitfall would be if the palladium itself is consumed by the reaction as the primary fuel, in transmutation. Palladium is far cheaper and more plentiful than uranium, and uranium is cheaper than oil, so if the complex Pd transmutation reactions Mizuno and Miley observe are the primary source of the heat, and these reactions produce roughly as much heat as U fission, a Pd-energy based economy would be viable. If it turns out the Pd reactions produce a thousand or million times less energy per unit mass of Pd fuel compared to U fission, we would have problem. My guess is that many different nuclear reactions occur, including some kind of D-D reaction. I suppose we will learn to "tune" the cells so that most of the heat comes from deuterium, and the palladium is consumed slowly if at all. In that case a Pd-cell economy would be a piece of cake. It would require little more Pd than our present economy. 26% of our present energy consumption already depends on palladium, in the catalytic converters used in gasoline engines. Here is a very rough estimate of costs. Gene used ~50 grams of catalyst of 0.4% Pd, or 0.2 grams of Pd. It produced 10 or 20 watts. The catalyst was nowhere near its upper limit of 250 deg C. Assuming we could safely run it at 220 deg C without triggering a runaway we would get far more out of it than Gene saw at 190 deg C. We know that it has been run at these temperatures. Furthermore, there is no mechanism for rapidly removing the heat from it in this setup, as there would be in a generator, so it is likely that much more heat could be generated without a self-destructive reaction. We know that power density will rise indefinitely until the device self destructs, so the faster we remove the heat, the more energy we get per unit of mass. A fission reactor style fuel rod might be a good approach. At the rate of 10 to 20 watts per 0.2 g of Pd, rate, a home co-generator with a peak capacity of 60 KW heat, 20 KW electricity (which would be extravagant) would require 600 to 1200 grams of Pd. One ounce of Pd presently costs $332 per ounce, which is more than gold. This is because of machinations of the Russian cartel. Not long ago the price was $100 and there is no reason to think it will not soon fall back. Cartels never last long. Anyway, at $100 per ounce 1200 grams would cost $4,200 which is pretty hefty, but I think the 10 to 20 watt estimate is absurd. I expect we can improve it by a factor of 10 easily. Another way of looking at it is the cost quoted by United Catalysts for 1000 grams of G75-E material: $1000, according to Mark Hugo, who talked to Dan Perkins. Assuming 50 grams produces 10 watts, 1000 grams would produce 200 watts, but it would be more like 2000 watts at high temperatures with effective heat removal. That looks discouraging but I'll bet if you ordered 20 tons of the stuff the price would be much lower. Can a conversion figure be calculated from a quantitative measurement of He^4 . . . This datum could be used to calculate the length of time the reaction could run before recharging is necessary. Another reason to call Oak Ridge. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:18:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA26190; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:14:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:14:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:20:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"WfpQK1.0.5P6.uJVIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18107 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:28 PM 4/30/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: [snip] >The cell used is an old WW-II short cylindrical oxygen tank of 1.6 liters >capacity. [snip] >He has held >elevations of this sort for at least three weeks -- and even then turned >the system off not because it had failed, but to have the gases tested. >He has found from 90 to 100 ppm Helium-4 in gas from his cells tested at >Oak Ridge National Lab - far above the 6 ppm atmospheric background. [snip] A rough calculation of fusion energy for 90 ppm helium: Let's assume 96 ppm He, and 6 ppm background, thus 90 ppm generated. The 1.6 l gas at 50 lbs guage pressure is equivalent to (15+50/15)1.6 l, or about 6.9 l at atmospheric pressure. At 183 C that is 273/(273 + 183)6.9 l, or about 4.1 l of D2 at STP. At 90 ppm there is (9x10^-5)(4.1 l)= 3.69x10^-4 l of He. The density of He is 0.187 g/l. There is thus (0.187 g/l)(3.69x10^-4 l) = 6.9x10^-5 g of helium produced in the 3 weeks of the Case experiment. That is about 6.9x10^-5 g/(4 g/mole) = 1.725x10^-5 moles of He. Given AMU's involved: D 2x 2.0140 = 4.029 He 4.0260 = 4.026 ====== 0.003 AMU There is thus (931.5 MeV/AMU)(0.003 AMU) = 2.79 MeV per He created, or 2.79 MeV/He. It doesn't matter exactly how the D gets converted to He, only the starting and ending masses. Applying Avrogadro's number we now have (1.725x10^-5 moles)(6.02x10^23 He/mole)(1.602x10^-19 J/eV)(2.79x10^6 eV/He)= 4.6x10^6 J created over the 3 week period. Assuming 21 days for the experiment, the 4.6 MJ created is spread over 21*24*60*60 = 1.81x10^6 seconds. The power output accounted for by fusion would thus be (4.6 J)/(1.81 s)= 2.5 J/s = 2.5 watts, so we are very roughly in the ballpark. If 90 ppm helium accounts for 2.5 W output over 3 weeks, then 360 ppm would be expected to account for the 10 W output. Still, assuming the caculation is correct, this seems very encouraging, when we consider that helium may be trapped in the catalyst or tank walls, that there may be sampling errors, that the exact run time and power are not accurately known, nor is the error known on the helium measurements at 90 ppm. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:16:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA27093; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:13:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:13:01 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805011150_MC2-3B9F-CF10 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:13:35 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Comments about Case Resent-Message-ID: <"_bmkd.0.Ad6.CIVIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18108 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: >... Conventional fission reactors also operate at >around 200 deg C. This is a waste of fuel but it reduces the wear and tear on >the equipment. Actually, no. They run at about 300 C, but I don't remember the actual temperature. The reason is a consequence of the choice of pressurized water, at or near boiling, as the primary core coolant. Then the technologically maximum pressure that the reactor vessel can manage sets the water and/or steam pressure and hence its temperature as well. Superheating is impossible in this arrangement. 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 May 1 09:16:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA27054; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:12:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:12:50 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:20:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"sXrDk.0.ec6.1IVIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18106 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:28 PM 4/30/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: > >As to the suggestion that methane forming reactions can be responsible >for the temperature rise -- methane does NOT form below 1500 C according >to Perkins at United Catalysts. Methane is one of the least exothermic compounds that could form, as Fred Sparber demonstrated. Also, it is detectable and was not found. I wonder about reaction/adsorbtion of H2 or D2 in the steel tank walls, especially since some water was present in the initial cycles. Iron/iron oxide was at one time one of the major options for hydrogen storage in vehicles. This may not be much of an issue calorimetry wise, but safety wise, a (possibly unstable) tank of 50 lbs pressure hydrogen is a potential bomb. >Further more, why would they form only >with D2? Further and finally, chemical reactions from such a small >reaction mass could not produce watts of power for weeks on end. Good points! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:39:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA31219; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:35:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:35:01 -0700 Message-Id: <199805011635.MAA07331 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Case Run 1 underway Date: Fri, 1 May 98 12:37:28 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"3UqDr.0.hd7.qcVIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18110 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott: >Hopefully I will also observe the same "excess temperature". Much more >hopefully, my water-flow calorimetry will confirm that the excess >temperature is also genuine excess heat! I am quite sure that you will succeed IF you use the recommended catalyst and the heating conditions of the catlyst bed are not disturbed by any sort of new configuration. The catalyst MUST stay in the range 150 C to 250 C. Case says that 175 to 190 C is ideal. He suggested that subsequently I could push the variac voltage to 60 V. Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:40:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA30983; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:34:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:34:51 -0700 Message-Id: <199805011634.MAA07284 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 98 12:37:17 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"6zc43.0.-Z7.gcVIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18109 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Strojny wrote: >Thank you Gene for a complete description of Dr. Case's experiment >demonstrated so soon after ICCF-7. You're welcome! > >These results and comments raises several questions. > >1. The statement that methane does not form below 1500 deg C implies that it >is not done catalytically with Pd since Pd melts at 1550 deg C and certainly >sinters well below this temperature so that catalytic activity would be lost. Yes, the sintering of Pd destroys the activity above 250 C -- makes for a safe experiment, however! > >2. The question "why would [methane (CD4)] form only with D2" is not valid >since it hasn't been demostrated that CH4 does not form with H2. >(Adsorption of CH4 by the activated carbon prevented its detection by mass >spec analysis). If the gas discharge on evacuation does not burn, then there would insignificant CH4, I trust. > >3. Can an economic assessment be done with the results obtained so far? I >know that improvements can be made but it would be nice to know what target >performance is necessary to achieve economic production of heat. Dr. Case >mentioned that the current results would not produce an economical source of >power. With this catalyst we are at about 0.15 Watts/gram catlyst -- or possibly more if the excess heat is underestimated. Case would like as a figure of merit to be at 1 watt/gram catlyst. He thinks that would be very a very attractive range. > >4. Can a conversion figure be calculated from a quantitative measurement of >He^4 (asssuming this is the only source of the excess heat) and can this be >corrolated with the estimated heat produced? This datum could be used to >calculate the length of time the reaction could run before recharging is >necessary. Let's see: 1.6 liters at 50 psi = 0.24 moles D2 gas 0.24 moles X 6.02 x 10^23 D-pairs/mole D2 gas x 1.6 x 10^-19 ev/Joule x 23.8 MeV/reaction X 10^6 ev/MeV = 5.5 x 10^11 joules release if all D is reacted to produce He-4. At 7.5 watts, this is 7.33 x 10^10 sec = 2,330 years. Have I done the numbers correctly? Help me, please, you hot fusioneers! Gene Mallove > >Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:45:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA29836; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805011635.MAA07326 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 98 12:37:26 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"LIG3M1.0.6I7.ceVIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18111 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Martin wrote: >1. Is it possible that impurities in the D2 are causing chemical >reactions in the system? This is high purity D2. I consider it impossible that chemistry from contaminants or the D2 itself could do anything to change my conclusion. I take Case's word that the excess temperature has persisted for weeks on end AND that D2 used with an *ineffective* catalyst will NOT give excess temperature above baseline. To me that ends the matter of "chemical explanation." > >2. Is there some way we can estimate the resolution of the Oak Ridge 4He >measurement. The Mass of D2 is pretty close the 4He so it is an important >point. I believe that Case burned the D2 to D2O and recovered the helium -- he was well aware of the possible problem with D2 confusion. I will get more info on this. > >3. What was the concentration of 4He in the D2 prior to the energy >generating run? That would be lovely to know. I do not think this was done. Dr. Case has not been familiar with the perceived need for the level of proof that we in this community demand. I will make sure that these checks are done. > Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:45:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA31264; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:35:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:35:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199805011635.MAA07359 mercury.mv.net> Subject: RE: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 98 12:37:33 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"FGA8j2.0.Ie7.ycVIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18112 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Did you obtain any of the used catalyst for further analysis? > >Brendan Hall Unfortunately, no. We will soon generate enough of this right here adn weill have plenty of stuff to analyze. Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 09:56:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA03290; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:51:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:51:03 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:58:24 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Comments about Case Resent-Message-ID: <"bQYQU3.0.Ep.rrVIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18114 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:46 AM 5/1/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >Several people have speculated that this might be a chemical reaction. I think we *examined* chemical reactions and determined the experiment is "beyond chemical." I think there is universal agreement on that point now - but will be quickly corrected if not! >Horace Heffner writes: > > One possible problem is temperature might run away, due to lack of > cooling. If this happens, the experiment is already a monumental > success. > >That is a problem, and it has happened. But the temperature does not run away >for long. Over 250 deg C because the catalyst self-destructs and the reaction >halts abruptly. This is a good reason to boil water by transferring the heat to the water through an appropriate thermal resistance, to maintain thermal equilibrium. It also avoids the need to pressurize the water. It has since occurred to me that a thermal runaway, being a brief event, could be caused by chemical means. Still, the fact it has happened is exciting. >It is a good fail safe mechanism. Unfortunately it means that >generators based on this technology will have poor Carnot efficiency, so they >will have to be large. Home heaters and generators would be feasible but an >automobile engine might not be. This level of output, and device size, would be useful for 24 hour/day battery charging in electric vehicles. The 200 W/kg has aeronautical applications as well. Also for home air conditioning, or refrigeration in remote areas. The value of heat can be very high in remote areas of Alaska by the way. I sure would like to have the Alaska franchise! 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:00:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02777; Fri, 1 May 1998 09:52:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:52:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <015201bd7520$a9f5bf60$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:46:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"grsYs2.0.Hh._sVIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18113 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: E.F. Mallove To: VORTEX Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 10:42 AM Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion >Martin wrote: > > >>1. Is it possible that impurities in the D2 are causing chemical >>reactions in the system? One very interesting "impurity" will be the Hydrogen that was left over in the preprocessing. This could make some interesting "fusion?" pathways with the Deuterium. Regards, Frederick > >This is high purity D2. I consider it impossible that chemistry from >contaminants or the D2 itself could do anything to change my conclusion. >I take Case's word that the excess temperature has persisted for weeks on >end AND that D2 used with an *ineffective* catalyst will NOT give excess >temperature above baseline. To me that ends the matter of "chemical >explanation." >> >>2. Is there some way we can estimate the resolution of the Oak Ridge 4He >>measurement. The Mass of D2 is pretty close the 4He so it is an important >>point. > >I believe that Case burned the D2 to D2O and recovered the helium -- he >was well aware of the possible problem with D2 confusion. I will get more >info on this. >> >>3. What was the concentration of 4He in the D2 prior to the energy >>generating run? > >That would be lovely to know. I do not think this was done. Dr. Case has >not been familiar with the perceived need for the level of proof that we >in this community demand. I will make sure that these checks are done. >> > > >Best, Gene Mallove > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:06:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05705; Fri, 1 May 1998 10:02:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:02:44 -0700 Message-Id: <199805011702.NAA12603 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 98 13:05:10 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"nzfG73.0.zO1.o0WIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18115 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Schaeffer wrote: >My point is, the present experiment measures temperature, not heat >(energy). As designed, it cannot produce any logical conclusion. >Calorimetry is necessary. I disagree and agree! I agree that self-sustaining (the ultimate calorimeter) may be necessary here politically, but scientifically I think this is experiment is very convincing already, precisely because the D2 tests on ineffective catalysts give baseline temperature. That is proof enough for me that the D2/H2 conductivity arguments do not apply. Note that the conductivity of the steel may be governing here. The catalyst is in direct contact with the steel. Remember that! Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:13:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05094; Fri, 1 May 1998 10:04:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:04:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805011702.NAA12594 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 98 13:05:08 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"a7K_F.0.TF1.d2WIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18116 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I'm on it! > >Scott Scott, I would get ready to make a self-sustainer, since I suspect that NO calorimtery will convince the needed majority of fence stradlers. The only calorimetry that is "politically correct" in this field (sadly) seems to be self-sustaining. For certain negativists like Morrison or Jones or Blue or Huizenga we'll have to challenge them to remain in an enclosed, insulated room with a 1 kW self-sustainer. We will establish a series of such room "calorimters" -- the first "Tb skeptic" to cry "Uncle" will be allowed out. The rest will be left to bake alive -- a fitting fate. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:11:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA06708; Fri, 1 May 1998 10:07:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:07:27 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <016f01bd7523$048a0060$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Comments about Case Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:02:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"3N5Fk.0.je1.D5WIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18117 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 10:54 AM Subject: Re: Comments about Case >At 11:46 AM 5/1/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: >[snip] >>Several people have speculated that this might be a chemical reaction. > >I think we *examined* chemical reactions and determined the experiment is >"beyond chemical." I think there is universal agreement on that point now Agreed, Horace. If EVERY 2 Carbon Atoms in the l20 grams was a triple Alkyne bond of +220,000 joules of exotherm upon deuteration that would be 60*110,000 ~= 6,600,000 joules released (and not too likely). If it is, it would make one helluva thermal storage device. :-) Regards, Frederick >- but will be quickly corrected if not! > > >>Horace Heffner writes: >> >> One possible problem is temperature might run away, due to lack of >> cooling. If this happens, the experiment is already a monumental >> success. >> >>That is a problem, and it has happened. But the temperature does not run away >>for long. Over 250 deg C because the catalyst self-destructs and the reaction >>halts abruptly. > >This is a good reason to boil water by transferring the heat to the water >through an appropriate thermal resistance, to maintain thermal equilibrium. >It also avoids the need to pressurize the water. > >It has since occurred to me that a thermal runaway, being a brief event, >could be caused by chemical means. Still, the fact it has happened is >exciting. > > >>It is a good fail safe mechanism. Unfortunately it means that >>generators based on this technology will have poor Carnot efficiency, so they >>will have to be large. Home heaters and generators would be feasible but an >>automobile engine might not be. > >This level of output, and device size, would be useful for 24 hour/day >battery charging in electric vehicles. The 200 W/kg has aeronautical >applications as well. Also for home air conditioning, or refrigeration in >remote areas. The value of heat can be very high in remote areas of Alaska >by the way. I sure would like to have the Alaska franchise! 8^) > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:31:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11186; Fri, 1 May 1998 10:28:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:28:08 -0700 Message-Id: <199805011728.NAA16256 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 98 13:30:31 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"yYGEL2.0.ck2.dOWIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18118 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: >I used to bug Chris Tinsley when I first met him online about getting to >that self-sustaining demo unit level with CF. It was my guess then and now >that it's the thing you have to achieve to force the effect to become a >cognitave reality with the masses, short of having mass manufactured CF >home power units, etc. Congratulations on getting some solid excess heat >effects up and running right under your own roof! I wish Chris had lived to see this day! He'd have had a blast with this! I trust that one or more self-sustainers will appear shortly -- I hope no later than a month from now. Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:36:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA00402; Fri, 1 May 1998 10:34:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:34:08 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:40:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Helium energy calc corrected Resent-Message-ID: <"JZkJH1.0.B6.FUWIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18119 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:28 PM 4/30/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: [snip] >The cell used is an old WW-II short cylindrical oxygen tank of 1.6 liters >capacity. [snip] >He has held >elevations of this sort for at least three weeks -- and even then turned >the system off not because it had failed, but to have the gases tested. >He has found from 90 to 100 ppm Helium-4 in gas from his cells tested at >Oak Ridge National Lab - far above the 6 ppm atmospheric background. [snip] A rough calculation of fusion energy for 90 ppm helium: Let's assume 96 ppm He, and 6 ppm background, thus 90 ppm generated. The 1.6 l gas at 50 lbs guage pressure is equivalent to (15+50/15)1.6 l, or about 6.9 l at atmospheric pressure. At 183 C that is 273/(273 + 183)6.9 l, or about 4.1 l of D2 at STP. At 90 ppm there is (9x10^-5)(4.1 l)= 3.69x10^-4 l of He. The density of He is 0.187 g/l. There is thus (0.187 g/l)(3.69x10^-4 l) = 6.9x10^-5 g of helium produced in the 3 weeks of the Case experiment. That is about 6.9x10^-5 g/(4 g/mole) = 1.725x10^-5 moles of He. Given AMU's involved: D 2x 2.0140 = 4.028 He 4.00260 = 4.003 ====== 0.025 AMU There is thus (931.5 MeV/AMU)(0.025 AMU) = 23.3 MeV per He created, or 23.3 MeV/He. It doesn't matter exactly how the D gets converted to He, only the starting and ending masses. Applying Avrogadro's number we now have (1.725x10^-5 moles)(6.02x10^23 He/mole)(1.602x10^-19 J/eV)(23.3x10^6 eV/He)= 3.8x10^6 7 created over the 3 week period. Assuming 21 days for the experiment, the 39 MJ created is spread over 21*24*60*60 = 1.81x10^6 seconds. The power output accounted for by fusion would thus be (39 J)/(1.81 s)= 2.5 J/s = 21.5 watts, so we are very roughly in the ballpark. Assuming the calculation is correct this time, this seems very encouraging, when we consider that helium may be trapped in the catalyst or tank walls, that there may be sampling errors, that the initial He concetration is unknown, that the exact run time and power are not accurately known, nor is the error known on the helium measurements at 90 ppm. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 10:38:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA00765; Fri, 1 May 1998 10:36:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:36:44 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:44:05 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Helium energy calc corrected Resent-Message-ID: <"QKKOj1.0.tB.hWWIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18120 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:28 PM 4/30/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: [snip] >The cell used is an old WW-II short cylindrical oxygen tank of 1.6 liters >capacity. [snip] >He has held >elevations of this sort for at least three weeks -- and even then turned >the system off not because it had failed, but to have the gases tested. >He has found from 90 to 100 ppm Helium-4 in gas from his cells tested at >Oak Ridge National Lab - far above the 6 ppm atmospheric background. [snip] A rough calculation of fusion energy for 90 ppm helium: Let's assume 96 ppm He, and 6 ppm background, thus 90 ppm generated. The 1.6 l gas at 50 lbs guage pressure is equivalent to (15+50/15)1.6 l, or about 6.9 l at atmospheric pressure. At 183 C that is 273/(273 + 183)6.9 l, or about 4.1 l of D2 at STP. At 90 ppm there is (9x10^-5)(4.1 l)= 3.69x10^-4 l of He. The density of He is 0.187 g/l. There is thus (0.187 g/l)(3.69x10^-4 l) = 6.9x10^-5 g of helium produced in the 3 weeks of the Case experiment. That is about 6.9x10^-5 g/(4 g/mole) = 1.725x10^-5 moles of He. Given AMU's involved: D 2x 2.0140 = 4.028 He 4.00260 = 4.003 ====== 0.025 AMU There is thus (931.5 MeV/AMU)(0.025 AMU) = 23.3 MeV per He created, or 23.3 MeV/He. It doesn't matter exactly how the D gets converted to He, only the starting and ending masses. Applying Avrogadro's number we now have (1.725x10^-5 moles)(6.02x10^23 He/mole)(1.602x10^-19 J/eV)(23.3x10^6 eV/He)= 3.88x10^7 J created over the 3 week period. Assuming 21 days for the experiment, the 39 MJ created is spread over 21*24*60*60 = 1.81x10^6 seconds. The power output accounted for by fusion would thus be (39 J)/(1.81 s)= 2.5 J/s = 21.5 watts, so we are very roughly in the ballpark. Assuming the calculation is correct this time, this seems very encouraging, when we consider that helium may be trapped in the catalyst or tank walls, that there may be sampling errors, that the initial helium concetration is unknown, that the exact run time and power are not accurately known, nor is the error known on the helium measurements at 90 ppm. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 11:22:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02471; Fri, 1 May 1998 11:20:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:20:52 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:28:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"b54Tp3.0.Xc.3AXIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18121 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:37 PM 5/1/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: > >1.6 liters at 50 psi = 0.24 moles D2 gas Is that psi or psig? That was measured at around 183 C, right? If it is psig, then I get 4.1 l D2 at STP, which, at 0.18 g/l is 0.74 g, or 0.185 moles of D2. If it is psi, then I get 3.17 l D2 at STP, which, at 0.18 g/l is 0.57 g, or 0.142 moles of D2. > >0.24 moles X 6.02 x 10^23 D-pairs/mole D2 gas x 1.6 x 10^-19 ev/Joule x >23.8 MeV/reaction >X 10^6 ev/MeV = 5.5 x 10^11 joules release if all D is reacted to produce >He-4. Using the best available AMU for deuterium, i.e. 2.0140: D 2x 2.0140 = 4.028 He 4.00260 = 4.003 ====== 0.025 AMU There is thus (931.5 MeV/AMU)(0.025 AMU) = 23.3 MeV Do I have a mistake here? Is D + D fusion energy better known from some other basis? > >At 7.5 watts, this is 7.33 x 10^10 sec = 2,330 years. Have I done the >numbers correctly? Help me, please, you hot fusioneers! Hmmmm.. "The Fusioneers" or just "Fusioneers" sounds like a good title for a movie. If an Elizabeth Shue sequel, "Hot Fusioneers" may be a more apt title. If one of these titles is used I will demand a $1 royalty fee! 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 12:22:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA24449; Fri, 1 May 1998 12:20:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:20:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01b001bd7535$44354460$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:13:40 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"OXv6h.0.tz5.c1YIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18122 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 12:21 PM Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Horace wrote: > >Using the best available AMU for deuterium, i.e. 2.0140: > >D 2x 2.0140 = 4.028 >He 4.00260 = 4.003 > ====== > 0.025 AMU > >There is thus (931.5 MeV/AMU)(0.025 AMU) = 23.3 MeV > >Do I have a mistake here? Is D + D fusion energy better known from some >other basis? > No mistake Horace. The two conventional Hot Fusion D-D pathways are: 1, D + D ---> He3 + neutron + 3.25 Mev 2, D + D ---> Tritium (H3) + proton + 4.0 Mev The D + D ---> He4 + 24.0 Mev has been the "Bone of Contention" since the outset of CF, because it violates conservation laws, along with how to get over the coulomb repulsion barrier Force Z1*Z2*kq^2/r^2, or potential barrier Energy Z1*Z2*kq^2/r CF is showing that there is a "Quantum Mechanical Tunneling" Mechanism (that probably explains Hot Fusion Too) short of Mev brute force collisions that is taking place. If you use the electron-Deuteron collision of about 1.0 ev forming a neutrino-antineutrino pair from the virtual photon of the electron- deuteron (or electron-proton) collision which is ACCEPTED QED PHYSICS this can form the Quasi-DINEUTRON (oN2) which can couple to a deuteron 1H2 forming 1H4 which beta decays to He4 + e- + a neutrino which can carry the 24.0 Mev and PHYSICS WILL NO LONGER BE VIOLATED! The jury is still out as to whether or not the 24 Mev neutrino will "thermalize" by colliding with the resident electrons: .51 Mev/49 Mev and Wo * 1/(2^n) energy dissipation in subsequent electron-electron collisions sans ionizing radiation to speak of. The "Stripping" of the neutron from deuterium, which should require 2.23 Mev in 1.0 ev plasmas is a damn good clue that the Quasi-Dineutron is forming there in HF, and since the DINEUTRON that has been postulated and sought for decades is "unbound" by several Kev, thus only short-lived, makes the Quasi-Dineutron, a deuteron with a Mills Hydrino end, and a Neutron end. :-) If your gonna stick you neck out, might as well be all the way. :-) By, Order of the Tortoise! Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 12:25:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA24631; Fri, 1 May 1998 12:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:16:18 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805011518_MC2-3BA8-D7F5 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Konp42.0.n06.32YIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18123 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:Schaffer gav.gat.com Mike Schaffer writes: 1. D2 is only about 0.7 times as thermally conductive as H2, so the use of the H2 run as a control for the D2 run is not justified. The H2-filled tank ought to conduct heat from the heated bottom to the open-to-the-air (ie. cooled) top more than the D2-filled tank. The catalyst is in contact with cannister so the major heat loss path is along the steel walls of the cannister, not through the gas within it. Gas conduction and convection to the top of the cell plays a minor role. Let me put it this way: if this experiment was designed to measure the heat conductivity of gas, everyone would say it is absurd. In Mizuno's gas calorimeter, the sample is suspended in the middle of the canister, attached to the lid by a small rod which does not conduct much heat. With this arrangement, gas conduction and convection *will* play a major role in heat transfer. 2. The various kinds of catalytic grains that Case has tested almost certainly have different thermal conductivities, which would also influence the temperature at the thermowell. This effect might account for some of the catalysts appearing to produce excess heat and others not. Take one set of catalytic grains: Sample X. At temperatures below 150 deg C, it acts the same in H2 as D2. At temperatures above 250 it again acts the same. Why would the thermal conductivity of a sample vary in this one narrow temperature range, 150 to 250 deg C? After you heat Sample X past 250 it never produces the elevated temperature again. Why would heating the sample permanently change its thermal conductivity to a huge extent? And if heating did change the thermal conductivity (presumably by sintering or destroying the carbon substrate), why would it not change it below 150 or above 250 deg C? As far as I know, thermal conductivity of solid materials is fairly linear and unchanging. 3. There are probably other, less obvious confounding factors that we have not thought of yet. Well, I cannot think of any. There may be others, but if we do not think of them they don't count! My point is, the present experiment measures temperature, not heat (energy). As designed, it cannot produce any logical conclusion. Calorimetry is necessary. I would rephrase that "better calorimetry is necessary." All calorimetry boils down to measuring temperatures. Case is using a crude form of isoperibolic calorimetry. Although it is crude, the S/N ratio is high. If we can make the thing self sustain and produce palpable levels of heat then no calorimetry will be necessary. That is the ideal test. Elsewhere, Mike corrects my statement that fission reactors run at about 200 deg C: Actually, no. They run at about 300 C, but I don't remember the actual temperature. The reason is a consequence of the choice of pressurized water, at or near boiling, as the primary core coolant. Then the technologically maximum pressure that the reactor vessel can manage sets the water and/or steam pressure and hence its temperature as well. Superheating is impossible in this arrangement. I would put it another way. The choice of pressurized water is a consequence of economics. The uranium fuel itself could be run at a higher temperature in some other reactor design. The pressurized water design is limited to relatively low temperatures, much lower than combustion reactors. I have read this makes Carnot efficiency low compared to combustion plants. It wastes fuel. However, the fuel cost per BTU is much cheaper than oil or coal, and the turbines and other equipment in the plant is relatively expensive. So it makes economic sense to run the equipment at mild temperatures and prolong equipment life. In other words, superheating is impossible and undesirable. If it was desired they would not had selected this design in the first place. That's my understanding, anyway, based on books I read years ago. I can't cite 'em. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 12:39:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA09388; Fri, 1 May 1998 12:35:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:35:09 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354A23E7.68BE math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 12:35:03 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion References: <199805011702.NAA12594 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5iIl3.0.XI2.iFYIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18124 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > > -- the first "Tb skeptic" to cry > "Uncle" will be allowed out. The rest will be left to bake alive -- a > fitting fate. I suggest that before everyone gets all self-congratulatory, we should quit presuming the outcome and focus on figuring how the device works. The results reported by Gene are fantastic---but only in so much as they promise that we can get to the bottom of this, becuase it is reproducible. Its a long way for verification of "cold fusion", though. Speculation is not of much import when there is a working device to be studied, but just to quell the euphoria, I would note that the mere fact that D2 behaves different than H2 is not necessarily so surprising....if the device works by ordinary means, we are presumably talking about a surface catalyzed chemical reaction. D2 is much less mobile than H2 on a surface due to its greater mass, and thus it will "sit in place" longer, and be more likely to engage in whatever reactions are possible. This could easily explain a significant enhancement of D2 reactivity. Or, perhaps the heavier D2, not being able to achieve the necessary "escape velocity", tends to leave more of the reaction energy in the catalytic substrate, which, being close to the thermocouple, tends to give a higher T reading. Etc. Some form of calorimetric study, run long enough to definitely exceed the possible energy output of the chemical ingredients, is required for meaningful demonstration. Any attempt to build the case (no pun intended) based on piecing together circumstantial evidence such as isotope dependent temperature readings, is asking to be fooled. Obviously, Case has optimized the system to perform in a way that appears anomalous, or we wouldn't be here discussing this....but that could just as easily mean that he discovered an effect such as the above, rather than "cold fusion". -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 13:00:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA28775; Fri, 1 May 1998 12:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:54:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"nFmOu1.0.X17.7SYIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18125 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:13 PM 5/1/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >The D + D ---> He4 + 24.0 Mev has been the "Bone of Contention" since the >outset of CF, because it violates conservation laws, along with how to get >over the coulomb repulsion barrier Force Z1*Z2*kq^2/r^2, or potential >barrier Energy Z1*Z2*kq^2/r OK, so we should use 23.3 Mev? Or 24.0 MeV? What, exactly, is the best accepted number for D + D reaction energy? >If your gonna stick you neck out, might as well be all the way. :-) By, >Order of the Tortoise! Well, you did an excellent job of it this time, Fred! More believable than Joe C. and you're not even asking for money! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 13:10:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02287; Fri, 1 May 1998 13:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:59:11 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805011959.OAA20887 dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> From: rwall ix.netcom.com (Richard Wayne Wall) Subject: RE: Joe Champion To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"kktyl1.0.eZ.khYIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18126 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hank wrote: > >Barry > Thank you for the information. Tis sad. In another generation he >might have been another Death Valley Scotty. > >Hank > >> ---------- >> From: Barry Merriman[SMTP:barry math.ucla.edu] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 1998 12:26 PM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: Joe Champion >> >> Jerry W. Decker wrote: >> > >> >> > Joe Champion ... >> > He has taken an extended vacation at the request of the State of >> > Arizona. >> > >> >> Since some folks are asking me, I will confirm that my >> preliminary finding is that this is indeed true---i.e. >> Joe Champion is going to be in jail for at least several >> years, and up to 10. >> >> All I have to add is that, based on my close relationship >> with Joe the past 2 years, I would say that both legally >> and morally Joe deserves what he got. He's a very likable fellow, >> at a casual level, but he definitely violated his parole and >> also ripped off many people by selling them unworkable transmutation >> schemes. And he is what ordinary people would call a pathological >> liar, although technically he mainly exagerates things to >> ridiculous extremes. Two typical cases of interest to vortex readers >> illustrating this would be >> >> (1) 2 years ago, JC announced here that he would have an >> on site demo in August of his industrial transmuation process, >> and invited 12 scientists to attend and verify. This was the >> point at which I first got involved, in fact. Subsequent >> investigation showed that the the owners of the site >> of Joe's intended demo had no idea of his plans, and >> also no further interest in Joe's processes. The reality >> was that, at the time Joe announced his on site demo, >> Joe was fishing around for a site + someone >> to construct all the equipment, and it was just a pie-in-the-sky >> dream that it would ever take place at all---the processses >> in question were not even working, much less at a large scale. >> The discrepancy between what Joe publicly said was a major >> planned (he had a date, site, ect) demo event, and reality, >> was vast. >> >> (2) Sometime later, also announce here on vortex, >> there was the great "Hafnium Event", in >> which Joe's processes, under the execution of a third >> party, were producing a grey metal >> that turned out to be Hafnium, in "gram" (!) >> quantities from kilogram quantities of ingredients. Privately >> Joe told me it was infact 100's of gram quantities. The >> reality was that the process was indeed producing 100's >> of grams of grey material, most of which was salts. The >> mass-spec done at UCLA showed it had hafnium in it, in >> minute amounts, and analytical chemical tests done at a >> reputable commercial lab put the level of Hafnium (as >> well as Zr, Gold, Silver and Platinum) at less than 10 ppm. >> Also, I have subsequently interviewed the other parties >> that had tested the material prior to Joe's public announcemnts >> >> here, and none of them put the Hf content at beyond a few >> ppm (the tests I had done were by far the most reliable). >> Thus, Joe had no reason to think there were more than ppm >> levels, which could easily have been contimation, given the >> setup that was producing the material. >> So, given that Hf was present at the level of a few ppm, >> we again have a case were Joe was off by a factor of >> 100,000 in his statements. >> >> I could easily give another 5 or so first hand stories like >> the above, and probably 100 second hand stories, but the >> above make the point with stuff that was actually published here >> on Vortex. Joe is a pathological exagerator---that is fact, >> no ad hominum. >> >> As for the technical question of whether Joe really does >> have processes that can turn lead into gold, all I can say >> is that after numerous repeated attemtps, he was never able to >> transmit to me a repeatable experiment. It remains a mystery >> as to how his processes have been able to convince a few certain >> credible others of the reality of the effect---I still plan to >> get to the bottom of that, and really Joe is not needed to answer >> this >> question....he doesn't know the answer himself, I'm convinced, >> nor does he have the ability to demosntrate a repeatable >> process that might shed light on the answer, nor can anything >> he says be trusted. >> >> But, for the record, my own personal experience so far suggests >> that Joe has absolutely no ability to make gold, but does >> have the ability to muddy the waters enough to keep the dream >> alive for himself and others. >> >> >> >> -- >> Barry Merriman >> Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math >> Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program >> email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 5/1/98 Unfortunately frauds and charlatans abound universally and not only on this list. Although the law is often slow and cumbersome, it is designed to protect the unwary. So it is with the apprehension and punishment of Joe Champion, if the above report is true. This example should serve as warning to those who risk defrauding others. US Postal laws are particularly well suited for prosecution of those who use the US mails to defraud. It is a criminal offense with severe punishment for those who are convicted of using US mails to defraud. Mail fraud is legally well defined, and not as some who might wish define it in his or her own terms. Refund does not remove the stigma of fraud. It is not unreasonable to believe that other frauds may have taken place on this list and warrants may possibly exist at this time. Perhaps they may even apply to those abroad and they are just waiting for service. Richard Wall, J.D. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 13:23:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02035; Fri, 1 May 1998 13:18:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:18:06 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:15:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Joe Champion In-Reply-To: <199805011959.OAA20887 dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"afVHJ.0.jV.ztYIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18127 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 1 May 1998, Richard Wayne Wall wrote: This example should serve as warning to those who risk defrauding others. US Postal laws are particularly well suited for prosecution of those who use the US mails to defraud. It is a criminal offense with severe punishment for those who are convicted of using US mails to defraud. Mail fraud is legally well defined, and not as some who might wish define it in his or her own terms. Refund does not remove the stigma of fraud. ------------- My Snail-Mail says "YOU'VE JUST WON $10,000,000.00!" Now there's 'A'nother class case action I liked to see! -=se=- steve (off to buy a boat with MY new found money:) ekwall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 13:40:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA06913; Fri, 1 May 1998 13:30:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:30:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:24:28 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Scott Little's calorimeter Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805011626_MC2-3B9A-4F97 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"8_-3v3.0.oh1.J3ZIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18128 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Gene; Mark Hugo; >INTERNET:little eden.com Gene Mallove and others should look at the pictures in: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/setup.html Scott Little's calorimeter is gas cell filled nearly to the top with catalyst. I suppose there is enough room in there for the gas, but it might take several hydrogen purge cycles. The cell has three temperature probes in the catalyst, at different heights, but the calorimetry is not based upon them. It is flow calorimetry. The probes in the catalyst tell Scott when the sample has reached the correct temperature range. Gas conductivity is not an issue with this design. If the temperature and pressure do not stabilize with hydrogen gas, the catalyst is dirty or the cell is leaking, so do not go to step 2 with deuterium. Before filling the cylinder with H2 or D2 gas, be sure to bleed some gas out of the hose to flush out the air. I think it is important to keep air out of the cell. Fred Sparber made an important point: One very interesting "impurity" will be the Hydrogen that was left over in the preprocessing. This could make some interesting "fusion?" pathways with the Deuterium. And if the hydrogen does not play role in the nuclear reaction, it would explain why the heat gradually increases over the three week run. Presumably it takes a while for the residual hydrogen to drift out. I believe deuterium is preferentially absorbed by Pd. I wonder if Scott's calorimeter will hold enough deuterium to swamp the hydrogen left in Pd and tucked in the carbon. If it does not generate heat after a few days, perhaps he should purge the deuterium to flush out hydrogen, and then reload with pure deuterium. These comment may seem a little obvious to readers, but I like to spell things out to avoid confusion. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 14:21:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA15079; Fri, 1 May 1998 14:19:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:19:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01f201bd7545$eab70ca0$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:11:57 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"YhLNr1.0.Ih3.8nZIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18129 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: While you're dancing around the Maypole Horace, consider this: H H | | H-C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C-H Then add H2 or D2 to this Activated Carbon lattice structure that is about 1/2 gram/cm^3 with a surface area of 500 to 1500 Meter^2/gram. This gives you the chance of hydroginating-deuterating ten carbon atoms at about 10 Kilojoule/carbon atom. If the thermal preprocessing set up those sites, how many Kj of "free energy" could you get from 120 grams of catalyst neglecting the 0.5% Pd wt.,assuming that the Pd is breaking the H-H or D-D bonds for you? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 14:24:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03568; Fri, 1 May 1998 14:19:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:19:17 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:16:14 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Merriman comments on Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805011717_MC2-3BAB-7BF0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"o9wzE2.0.dt.JnZIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18130 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Barry Merriman writes: The results reported by Gene are fantastic---but only in so much as they promise that we can get to the bottom of this, because it is reproducible. It's a long way for verification of "cold fusion", though. I disagree. I think it will occur very soon. If a well insulated self sustaining device produces palpable heat for, say, one week, I think it will prove the issue beyond any rational doubt, once and for all. I challenge Barry to show this statement is incorrect: When a 50 gram device remains substantially hotter than the surroundings for a week, it must be is producing heat beyond chemistry. That is the crux of the matter. Barry's hypotheses about D2 being much less mobile than H2 on a surface or . . . . . .the heavier D2, not being able to achieve the necessary "escape velocity", tends to leave more of the reaction energy in the catalytic substrate, which, being close to the thermocouple, tends to give a higher T reading. Etc. . . . etc, etc, would all defeated by the self-heating test. I hope we agree on that. Frankly, I think these arguments are already defeated by the blank deuterium runs. As I explained to Mike Schaffer, the thermal conductivity of a sample will not vary in one narrow temperature range for no reason. It will not be permanently altered by heating above 250 deg C on one occasion. I think that a dead sample of catalytic material proves that "D2 escape velocities" and the thermocouple position have nothing to do with the effect. I think such hypotheses are close to handwaving, or fantasy, they are so unlikely in the face of the evidence. They require too many simultaneous miracles, and too many phenomena never observed heretofore. Who knows of a solid that mysteriously changes its conductivity in this fashion? If you discover one I suppose that would be a major scientific breakthrough in its own right. The alternative explanation, that this is a CF reaction, is far simpler. It requires no new "entities," so it survives Ockham's razor. Hundreds of other scientists have already observed Pd-D CF at high sigma, using every known calorimeter type, so the phenomenon must exist. Dr. Case sees the same thing many others have seen. He is using a tried-and-true, mainstream technique: gas loading. There is nothing surprising about his results unless you cling to the mindset that McKubre, Fleischmann, Huggins, Iwamura and the others have made undefinable, undetectable errors for nine years. I see no point in speculating about improbable new phenomena like solids that mysteriously change conductivity or new modes of D2 catalysis. All of this speculation will be swept aside in a few weeks if the self heater test works. If it does not work, *that* will be the time to invent exotic new theories about catalysis and conductivity. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 14:26:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA15842; Fri, 1 May 1998 14:22:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:22:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980501212006.15569.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [158.152.228.34] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Comments about Case Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 14:20:02 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"vE_9Y1.0.Gt3.RqZIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18131 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Vortex, I wrote: > I imagine your best option would be to scrap all your insulation and > place the vessel into a larger polished tube suspended by glass thread > and evacuate it to a vacuum, with polished surfaces on all parts the > radiated energy with be kept to a minimum. > Jed replied: >Yes, that is a Dewar cell -- what we have been talking about. The catalyst >cannot be held in a vacuum, however. Sorry Jed, but I think I didn't make myself very clear on that one. I meant place the experiment inside a sealed metal container which can be evacuated to a vacuum. Heat the outer container to 179 C. Pre-heat the inner vessel (which is sealed and pressurised with D2 and the catalyst inside it)to 179 C. Then once the inner vessel reaches the baseline temp. the outer vessel should be able to maintain the inner vessels temperature by radiated heat, so heating applied to the inner vessel can be stopped. It would be interesting to see if the inner vessel then were to drop in temp. when heating was removed and the temp. was just below the baseline, showing that the inner vessel was consuming the small amount of radiated heat from the outer vessel. The temp. of the inner vessel should now rise to burn-out at 250 C, as mentioned in other postings, unfortuneatly because the run-away heat cannot be extracted. I have to confess that I know nothing about chemistry as I never took this at college, my area is electronics, programming, I can only comment on the mechanical side of things and watch all those lovely atomic equations go straight over my head :( I am very excited by how things are progressing and like everyone look forward to seeing a posting saying that a self-sustained unit is operating, and has been for a long period. If I'm overstating all the obvious things here just tell me to shut-up. Good luck with all your test runs. Rob King Stafford England ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 14:32:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA07686; Fri, 1 May 1998 14:30:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:30:38 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980501163008.00bcb378 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 16:30:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case run 1 "results" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"HLYXS3.0.xt1.zxZIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18132 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: REMEMBER: I'm not using the G-75E catalyst yet. Today I completed three cycles with H2 much like the ones that Gene and Dr. Case performed yesterday. Temperatures were quite stable at the end of the 2nd and 3rd cycles and were between 170-200C depending upon probe location (hottest in the middle...coolest at the top). At the end of the 3rd H2 cycle, with everything nice and stable and Pin=Pout=25watts on the water-flow calorimetry, I quickly released the H2, evacuated the chamber, and replaced it with D2 (at the same 50 psi used on the previous cycles. All I saw was a small increase the Tmiddle reading...from 198C to ~202C. Pout remained right on top of Pin for 2+ hours after the switch and none of the catalyst temperatures began increasing like they did at Gene's. After 2+ hours of D2, I switched back to H2 to see if the 198-202 increase would reverse itself. It did not. Again Pout remained right on top of Pin. Thus this run has served only to confirm my calorimetry again and to identify one type of Pd-on-carbon catalyst that does not show the Case effect. (Aldrich #205672 1% Pd on activated carbon - fine powder). However, some questions have been raised by consideration of the differences between my apparatus and Case's: The most prominent difference is that my chamber is well insulated all around and is nominally at the same temperature throughout. Case's chamber is heated only from below and the upper portion is sitting out in the room air. Thus his chamber has large thermal gradients in it. Mine does not. Presumably, he also has a relatively large open space in his chamber which would permit significant convection currents in the hydrogen gas. Mine presently has very little open space. I wonder if the temperature gradient is important? I could approach Case's conditions by moving all my heater bands down to the very bottom of my chamber...and filling it only half full next time. Comments? 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 May 1 14:54:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA02210; Fri, 1 May 1998 14:50:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:50:46 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980501164823.01b43acc mail.airmail.net> X-Sender: danyork mail.airmail.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 16:48:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Dan York Subject: RE: Joe Champion In-Reply-To: <199805011959.OAA20887 dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-TNsr2.0.LY.rEaIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18134 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:59 PM 5/1/98 -0500, Richard Wayne Wall wrote: >5/1/98 > >Unfortunately frauds and charlatans abound universally and not only on >this list. Although the law is often slow and cumbersome, it is >designed to protect the unwary. So it is with the apprehension and >punishment of Joe Champion, if the above report is true. > >This example should serve as warning to those who risk defrauding >others. US Postal laws are particularly well suited for prosecution of >those who use the US mails to defraud. It is a criminal offense with >severe punishment for those who are convicted of using US mails to >defraud. Mail fraud is legally well defined, and not as some who >might wish define it in his or her own terms. Refund does not remove >the stigma of fraud. > >It is not unreasonable to believe that other frauds may have taken >place on this list and warrants may possibly exist at this time. >Perhaps they may even apply to those abroad and they are just waiting >for service. > >Richard Wall, J.D. Without respect to whether Joe has defrauded anyone or not, Joe's being sent to prison this time was for a probation violation, NOT for fraud. Part of his terms of probation was that he had to notify his probation officer of any contracts he engaged in and any bank accounts he had access to. About a year and a half ago Joe undertook a contract where he received some money which he put in the bank in an account in his wife's name, but that he could sign the checks. He did not notify his probation officer about the contract or the bank account. That is the violation that caused his probation to be revoked and his original maximum of 10 year sentence to be invoked. There were some other complaints but none that were prosecuted. Barry Merriman's characterization of Joe and the facts he presented are correct. Dan York From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 15:22:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA01454; Fri, 1 May 1998 15:19:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:19:19 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002101bd754e$aa43a260$168cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:15:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"zFfod.0.dM.bfaIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18135 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 3:36 PM Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Horace wrote: >At 3:11 PM 5/1/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>While you're dancing around the Maypole Horace, consider this: >> >> H H >> | | >>H-C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C-H >> > >Uh... per atom? However, for Ethylene, C2H4 (+16.3 Kcal/mole) the hydrogenation exotherm of the two unsaturated carbon atoms is 16,300*4.187/2 = 34.12 Kj/gram-mole of carbon atoms = 341 Kj for 120 grams of catalyst. These should all be reacted out in the H2 preprocessing. Thus, I see NO chemical process that could account for 39 Megajoules with the Deuterium,in 3 weeks. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 15:39:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA04436; Fri, 1 May 1998 15:37:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:37:20 -0700 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805011717_MC2-3BAB-7BF0 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:37:15 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Merriman comments on Case Resent-Message-ID: <"EF4IW3.0.D51.VwaIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18136 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Jed Rothwell's response to Barry Merriman's comments is remarkable in that it lays down a definitive test, > If a well insulated self >sustaining device produces palpable heat for, say, one week, I think it will >prove the issue beyond any rational doubt, once and for all. The success of this test will indeed prove cf to be real. The certain failure of the test, on the other hand, will do nothing to disprove the issue to the believers. I can imagine in a week or two Jed giving the explanation as to why the self sustaining test did not work. I would guess the reason being that the test actually was working fine but the insulation caused the temperature to go too high and the reaction was extinguished. It will be interesting seeing the various excuse themes that Jed comes up with. >Barry's hypotheses about D2 being much less mobile than H2 on a surface >or . . . > > . . .the heavier D2, not being able to achieve the necessary "escape > velocity", tends to leave more of the reaction energy in the catalytic > substrate, which, being close to the thermocouple, tends to give a > higher T reading. Etc. I thought that D2 was actually more mobile due to the fact that it is a Boson and not subject to the Pauli exclusion principle as is H2 which is a Fermion. >. . . etc, etc, would all defeated by the self-heating test. I hope we agree >on that. I certainly agree on that. >I see no point in speculating about improbable new phenomena like solids that >mysteriously change conductivity or new modes of D2 catalysis. All of this >speculation will be swept aside in a few weeks if the self heater test works. >If it does not work, *that* will be the time to invent exotic new theories >about catalysis and conductivity. The point is that the self heater test will not work and so we might as well speculate on the explanation of the existing experimental results now. Heat may be transported by molecular conduction, eddy conduction, or advection and different temperatures and different masses ( a factor of two here between D2 and H2 ) will cause a different mixture of the three effects and a different effective thermal conductivity. The observed temperature dependence does not appear that it will require "exotic" or "improbable" theories to explain. 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 Fri May 1 15:57:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08423; Fri, 1 May 1998 15:56:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:56:10 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980501163008.00bcb378 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:57:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case run 1 "results" Resent-Message-ID: <"zzWEo3.0.X32.9CbIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18137 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: >The most prominent difference is that my chamber is well insulated all >around and is nominally at the same temperature throughout. Case's chamber >is heated only from below and the upper portion is sitting out in the room >air. Thus his chamber has large thermal gradients in it. Mine does not. >Presumably, he also has a relatively large open space in his chamber which >would permit significant convection currents in the hydrogen gas. Mine >presently has very little open space. > >I wonder if the temperature gradient is important? I could approach Case's >conditions by moving all my heater bands down to the very bottom of my >chamber...and filling it only half full next time. > >Comments? Although I do not see how it could make a difference, I think you should plan to do at least some of your runs like Case: much less than half filled and heating only the bottom. 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 May 1 16:18:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA11917; Fri, 1 May 1998 16:15:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:15:43 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:22:51 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Wharton comments on Merriman Resent-Message-ID: <"bSlGP.0.wv2.TUbIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18138 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 6:37 PM 5/1/98, Larry Wharton wrote: [snip] > >The point is that the self heater test will not work Uh oh, we're into fortune telling now! >and so we might as >well speculate on the explanation of the existing experimental results now. >Heat may be transported by molecular conduction, eddy conduction, or >advection and different temperatures and different masses ( a factor of two >here between D2 and H2 ) will cause a different mixture of the three >effects and a different effective thermal conductivity. The observed >temperature dependence does not appear that it will require "exotic" or >"improbable" theories to explain. The differences between D2 and H2 do not explain why the Case experiment works with one catlyst and not another. Any explanation that works, if there be such, can not call on any one-way chemical reactions, and can not call on thermal characteristics of D2 and H2. Haven't we at least established that much? The chemical side of things is obvious, due to 39 MJ from 10 g of carbon. Admitted, we still need to get a better handle from Gene or Jed on the true parameters. Still chemical explanations based on any one way reactions are clearly out. Maybe some calorimetry affecting chemically based heat/cool loop thing Larry Wharton is well noted for might be conjured up. The explanation that the results are due to thermal properties of the gas is clearly shot down by the fact some catalysts show null results. That's 2 explanations down, assuming the facts are right. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 16:21:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03107; Fri, 1 May 1998 16:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:18:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:17:32 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"5f1SG1.0.Sm.JXbIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18139 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I agree with Jed that I cannot explain ALL the combined anomalies of Case's experiment conventionally. However, I still want to emphasize that his experiment is very poor for calorimetry. 1. Case's pressure tank is one of those aviation thin wall things. Furthermore, steel is a mediocre thermal conductor. Therefore, the wall is not obviously a good conductor. Nor is it obviously a bad conductor. It is hard to know how it affects the temperature. This is not good experimental design. 2. The catalyst consists of a multitude of small grains loosely resting against one another. Thermal conduction through the catalyst bed occurs mainly by small, low-force, contact points between grains. This yields very low overall thermal conduction. The thermal conduction is also dependent on the state of the grain surfaces, which affects the inter-grain contacts. 3. I might hypothesize that at some temperature, say about 170 C, certain brands of catalyst grains change their surface morphology or chemistry and join together well enough to increase inter-grain thermal conduction. This ought to raise the temperature at the thermal well, situated as it is between the heating from below and the cooling by the gas from above. Finally, I might hypothesize that at a still higher temperature, say about 250 C, the grains change again, this time irreversibly, into a state with less-conducting inter-grain contacts. Without calorimetry there are just too many questions. To its credit, Cases's experiment appears to be reproducible, so we can expect to make progress testing and understanding it. I am happy to see people making the effort. If things start to look promising, I might get motivated to modify my old glow discharge cold fusion apparatus to run up to 200 C (present limit, set by materials, is only about 100 C.) 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 May 1 16:49:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA00488; Fri, 1 May 1998 16:47:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:47:24 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:55:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"FXnfc2.0.Y7.BybIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18140 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:17 PM 5/1/98, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >3. I might hypothesize that at some temperature, say about 170 C, certain >brands of catalyst grains change their surface morphology or chemistry and >join together well enough to increase inter-grain thermal conduction. This >ought to raise the temperature at the thermal well, situated as it is >between the heating from below and the cooling by the gas from above. >Finally, I might hypothesize that at a still higher temperature, say about >250 C, the grains change again, this time irreversibly, into a state with >less-conducting inter-grain contacts. This does not explain why D2 works and H2 does not. By your explanation, the same catalyst should work about the same with the different gasses at the same temperature, i.e. the catalyst should deform and change thermal contact at a given temperature regardless of the gas present. > >Without calorimetry there are just too many questions. Amen. Without self running there are too many questions. >To its credit, Cases's experiment appears to be reproducible, so we can >expect to make progress testing and understanding it. I am happy to see >people making the effort. If things start to look promising, I might get >motivated to modify my old glow discharge cold fusion apparatus to run up >to 200 C (present limit, set by materials, is only about 100 C.) Yes, it *is* getting interesting isn't it? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:05:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA04015; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:02:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:02:44 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:09:52 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case run 1 "results" Resent-Message-ID: <"DB1SY1.0.d-.ZAcIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18141 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:30 PM 5/1/98, Scott Little wrote: [snip] > >However, some questions have been raised by consideration of the >differences between my apparatus and Case's: > >The most prominent difference is that my chamber is well insulated all >around and is nominally at the same temperature throughout. Case's chamber >is heated only from below and the upper portion is sitting out in the room >air. Thus his chamber has large thermal gradients in it. Mine does not. >Presumably, he also has a relatively large open space in his chamber which >would permit significant convection currents in the hydrogen gas. Mine >presently has very little open space. > >I wonder if the temperature gradient is important? I could approach Case's >conditions by moving all my heater bands down to the very bottom of my >chamber...and filling it only half full next time. > >Comments? I note from your drawing that the thermocouple wells stick way up into the chamber. If you fill with catalyst only part way then the business end of the wells will be in gass only. I note that Case's thermocouple wells go in the opposite direction, top to bottom, and terminate justt below the bottom of his tank. This could make D2 vs H2 thermal characteristics important, as well as thermal stratification. Maybe you should turn your cell upside down? Maybe only insert the internal thermocouple only part way into the well? The good news is, your wells being high, *you* should be more likely to get the false high reading. Gee, maybe there *is* a gas thermal property explanation in the offing here. Suppose a heavy hydrocarbon gas is manufactured by the special catalyst. It will sink to the bottom of Case's tank, and increase the temperature of the thermocouple well tip (and well in general) greatly, as it is a good conductor of heat. There is then a good heat conduction path from the heat source directly to the thermocouple. The only problem with this eplanation is a heavy hydrocarbon gas creating compound must be found that can be created with D2 and C but not H2 and C at the 185 C to 200 C temperature. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:12:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA05849; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:10:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:10:54 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:18:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case run 1 "results" Resent-Message-ID: <"viJOu.0.ER1.DIcIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18142 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:30 PM 5/1/98, Scott Little wrote: [snip] > >However, some questions have been raised by consideration of the >differences between my apparatus and Case's: > >The most prominent difference is that my chamber is well insulated all >around and is nominally at the same temperature throughout. Case's chamber >is heated only from below and the upper portion is sitting out in the room >air. Thus his chamber has large thermal gradients in it. Mine does not. >Presumably, he also has a relatively large open space in his chamber which >would permit significant convection currents in the hydrogen gas. Mine >presently has very little open space. > >I wonder if the temperature gradient is important? I could approach Case's >conditions by moving all my heater bands down to the very bottom of my >chamber...and filling it only half full next time. > >Comments? I note from your drawing that the thermocouple wells stick way up into the chamber. If you fill with catalyst only part way then the business end of the wells will be in gass only. I note that Case's thermocouple wells go in the opposite direction, top to bottom, and terminate justt below the bottom of his tank. This could make D2 vs H2 thermal characteristics important, as well as thermal stratification. Maybe you should turn your cell upside down? Maybe only insert the internal thermocouple only part way into the well? The good news is, your wells being high, *you* should be more likely to get the false high reading. Gee, maybe there *is* a gas thermal property explanation in the offing here. Suppose a heavy hydrocarbon gas is manufactured by the special catalyst. It will sink to the bottom of Case's tank, and increase the temperature of the thermocouple well tip (and well in general) greatly, as it is a good conductor of heat. There is then a good heat conduction path from the heat source directly to the thermocouple. The only problem with this eplanation is a heavy hydrocarbon gas creating compound must be found that can be created with D2 and C but not H2 and C at the 185 C to 200 C temperature. Actually the above is wrong because H2 is a very thermally conductive. There would have to be a hydrocarbon created that was *liquid* at the operating temperature and pressure, but which vaporized upon depressurization. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:21:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA12106; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:14:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:14:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Joe Champion Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 00:12:05 +0000 Message-ID: <19980502001201.AAB4962 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"tmVml2.0.-y2.cLcIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18144 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:26 PM 4/30/98 -0700, you wrote: >Jerry W. Decker wrote: >> > >> Joe Champion ... >> He has taken an extended vacation at the request of the State of >> Arizona. >> > Barry Merriman wrote: >Since some folks are asking me, I will confirm that my >preliminary finding is that this is indeed true---i.e. >Joe Champion is going to be in jail for at least several >years, and up to 10. > >All I have to add is that, based on my close relationship >with Joe the past 2 years, I would say that both legally >and morally Joe deserves what he got. One thing about participating in this list: it is never predictable. As bad as this may be for anyone who put any trust in Joe Champion, there is no reason that this revelation ought to diminish the legitimacy of the quest for good science at the fringe. Believing a deceiver is a result of the skills of the deceiver rather than the gullibility of the deceived, unless the deceived is testing the deceiver, as was the case with Barry and Gene. It is unfortunate that time and effort were wasted. This stuff brings out the worst and best in a lot of people. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:24:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA08021; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:22:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:22:49 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:30:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case run 1 "results" Resent-Message-ID: <"dojPT.0.Fz1.OTcIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18145 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:30 PM 5/1/98, Scott Little wrote: [snip] > >However, some questions have been raised by consideration of the >differences between my apparatus and Case's: > >The most prominent difference is that my chamber is well insulated all >around and is nominally at the same temperature throughout. Case's chamber >is heated only from below and the upper portion is sitting out in the room >air. Thus his chamber has large thermal gradients in it. Mine does not. >Presumably, he also has a relatively large open space in his chamber which >would permit significant convection currents in the hydrogen gas. Mine >presently has very little open space. > >I wonder if the temperature gradient is important? I could approach Case's >conditions by moving all my heater bands down to the very bottom of my >chamber...and filling it only half full next time. > >Comments? I note from your drawing that the thermocouple wells stick way up into the chamber. If you fill with catalyst only part way then the business end of the wells will be in gass only. I note that Case's thermocouple wells go in the opposite direction, top to bottom, and terminate justt below the bottom of his tank. This could make D2 vs H2 thermal characteristics important, as well as thermal stratification. Maybe you should turn your cell upside down? Maybe only insert the internal thermocouple only part way into the well? The good news is, your wells being high, *you* should be more likely to get the false high reading. Gee, maybe there *is* a gas thermal property explanation in the offing here. Suppose a heavy hydrocarbon gas is manufactured by the special catalyst. It will sink to the bottom of Case's tank, and increase the temperature of the thermocouple well tip (and well in general) greatly, as it is a good conductor of heat. There is then a good heat conduction path from the heat source directly to the thermocouple. The only problem with this eplanation is a heavy hydrocarbon gas creating compound must be found that can be created with D2 and C but not H2 and C at the 185 C to 200 C temperature. Actually the above is wrong because H2 is a very thermally conductive. There would have to be a hydrocarbon created that was *liquid* at the operating temperature and pressure, but which vaporized upon depressurization. Gosh, if a liquid hydrocarbon could form with just that right set of characteristics listed above, it should make the Case cell into one of Frank Stenger's clinker tubes. It would conduct heat by boiling the hydrocarbon and condensing it on the top of the chamber. Lots more heat conduction with a lower thermal difference in temperature from top to bottom. The top would reach a higher temperature with the same heat input, or less. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:36:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14707; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:28:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006201bd7560$721c2800$168cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Sunpower Home Page (http://www.sunpower.com/) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:17:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD752D.687AD360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"SAm8E1.0.fb3.4ZcIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18146 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD752D.687AD360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The Stirling engine is where the Case Converter would Shine. :-) http://www.sunpower.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD752D.687AD360 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Sunpower Home Page.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Sunpower Home Page.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.sunpower.com/ Modified=20311F6F5F75BD0171 ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BD752D.687AD360-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:37:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14752; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:29:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006301bd7560$7362b1c0$168cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: American Stirling Company - How Do They Work? (http://www.stirlingcycle.com/how Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:21:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002F_01BD752D.FFCC5040" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"zJbZn3.0.Fc3.8ZcIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18147 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BD752D.FFCC5040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 =20 -------------------------------------------------------- = =20 =20 home =95 coffee cup =95 gallery =95 how do they = work? =95 faq =95 links =95 japanese page e-mail =95 order=20 -------------------------------------------------------- = =20 =20 How Stirling Engines Work=20 Stirling engines can be hard to = understand. Here are the key points. Every Stirling engine has a sealed = cylinder with one part hot and the other cold. The working gas inside = the engine (which is often air, helium, or hydrogen) is moved by a = mechanism from the hot side to the cold side. When the gas is on the hot = side it expands and pushes up on a piston. When it moves back to the cold side it = contracts. Properly designed Stirling engines have two power pulses per = revolution, which can make them very smooth running. Two of the more common types are two = piston Stirling engines and displacer-type Stirling engines. The two = piston type Stirling engine has two power pistons. The displacer type = Stirling engine has one power piston and a displacer piston.=20 ------------------------------------------------ = =20 =20 The displacer type Stirling engine is = shown here. The space below the displacer piston is continously heated = by a heat source. The space above the displacer piston is continously = cooled. The displacer piston moves the air (displaces the air) from the = hot side to the cold side. The MM-1 Coffee Cup Stirling engine is this = type of engine. However, the MM-1 should never be heated with any heat = source hotter than boiling water. Click the following links to see the = operational principles of a displacer type Stirling engine. =20 =20 Still Illustrations (about 20K) Animated Illustrations (about 130K) =20 =20 =20 ------------------------------------------------ = =20 =20 The two piston type Stirling engine is = shown here. The space above the hot piston is continuously heated by a = heat source. The space above the cold piston is continuously cooled. Click the following links to see the = principles of operation of the two-piston type Stirling engine:=20 =20 =20 Still Illustrations (about 12K) Animated Illustrations (about 130K) =20 =20 A special thanks to Koichi Hirata for = the excellent illustrations! =20 =20 =20 =20 -------------------------------------------------------- = =20 =20 home =95 coffee cup =95 gallery =95 how do they = work? =95 faq =95 links =95 japanese page e-mail =95 order=20 -------------------------------------------------------- = =20 =20 Copyright =A9 1996 American Stirling Company Phone 217-351-5789 Fax 217-351-4150 Website by Webfodder =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BD752D.FFCC5040 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable American Stirling Company - How Do They = Work?
 
3D"American
home = • coffee cup • gallery • how = do they=20 work? • faq = • links • japanese=20 page
e-mail=20 • order
3D>How=20 Stirling Engines Work=20

Stirling engines can = be hard to=20 understand. Here are the key points. = Every=20 Stirling engine has a sealed cylinder = with one=20 part hot and the other cold. The working = gas=20 inside the engine (which is often air, = helium,=20 or hydrogen) is moved by a mechanism = from the=20 hot side to the cold side. When the gas = is on=20 the hot side it expands and pushes up on = a=20 piston.

When it moves back to = the cold=20 side it contracts. Properly designed = Stirling=20 engines have two power pulses per = revolution,=20 which can make them very smooth=20 running.

Two = of the more=20 common types are two=20 piston Stirling engines and displacer-type = Stirling=20 engines. The two piston type Stirling = engine has=20 two power pistons. The displacer type = Stirling=20 engine has one power piston and a = displacer=20 piston.

3D"DisplacerThe = displacer type=20 Stirling engine is shown here. The space = below=20 the displacer piston is continously = heated by a=20 heat source. The space above the = displacer=20 piston is continously cooled. The = displacer=20 piston moves the air (displaces the air) = from=20 the hot side to the cold side. The MM-1 Coffee Cup = Stirling=20 engine is this type of engine. However, the MM-1 should = never be=20 heated with any heat source hotter than = boiling=20 water.

Click = the=20 following links to see the operational=20 principles of a displacer type Stirling=20 engine.

Still = Illustrations (about=20 20K)
Animated=20 Illustrations (about=20 = 130K)

3D"2The two = piston type=20 Stirling engine is shown here. The space = above=20 the hot piston is continuously heated by = a heat=20 source. The space above the cold piston = is=20 continuously cooled.

Click = the following=20 links to see the principles of operation = of the=20 two-piston type Stirling engine:=20

Still = Illustrations=20 (about 12K)
Animated=20 Illustrations (about=20 130K)

A = special thanks=20 to Koichi=20 Hirata for the excellent=20 = illustrations!

home = • coffee cup • gallery • how = do they=20 work? • faq = • links • japanese=20 page
e-mail=20 • order

Copyright © 1996 American Stirling=20 Company
Phone 217-351-5789 Fax=20 217-351-4150
Website by Webfodder

------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BD752D.FFCC5040-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 17:39:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA17228; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:36:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008701bd7561$84077280$168cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Search NASA - Results (http://198.116.116.11/97is.vts) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:30:06 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0038_01BD752F.2A6644E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"VQCUd1.0.0D4.VgcIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18148 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01BD752F.2A6644E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nasa's Stirling Engine Effort http://198.116.116.11/97is.vts ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01BD752F.2A6644E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Search NASA - Results.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Search NASA - Results.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://198.116.116.11/97is.vts Modified=602D1D4C6175BD018A ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01BD752F.2A6644E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 18:03:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA22410; Fri, 1 May 1998 18:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 20:53:05 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: 39 MJ ...10 g carbon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"2v6lu.0.4U5.P1dIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18149 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Let me know what to put with 10 grams of carbon to get the heat.... we can probably do good in better gas mileage! buncha cut.............. On Fri, 1 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 6:37 PM 5/1/98, Larry Wharton wrote: > [snip] !!!!! > The chemical side of things is obvious, due to 39 MJ from 10 g of carbon. > Admitted, we still need to get a better handle from Gene or Jed on the true > parameters. > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 18:33:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA26904; Fri, 1 May 1998 18:25:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:25:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00a701bd7563$60884f80$168cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: American Stirling Company - Two Piston Animation (http://www.stirlingcycle.com/ Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:43:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0041_01BD7531.09FC0300" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"B-NPq.0.ZZ6.ENdIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18151 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01BD7531.09FC0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Maybe this is better to see the animation. http://www.stirlingcycle.com/piston_a.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01BD7531.09FC0300 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="American Stirling Company - Two Piston Animation.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="American Stirling Company - Two Piston Animation.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.stirlingcycle.com/piston_a.htm Modified=A07C042E6375BD01E4 ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01BD7531.09FC0300-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 19:31:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA26679; Fri, 1 May 1998 18:24:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:24:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001e01bd7564$c1952b80$2f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Stirling Technology (http://powerweb.lerc.nasa.gov/stirling/home.html) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:53:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD7532.672A9360" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"-NMxs3.0.GW6.2MdIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18150 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD7532.672A9360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://powerweb.lerc.nasa.gov/stirling/home.html ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD7532.672A9360 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Stirling Technology.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Stirling Technology.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://powerweb.lerc.nasa.gov/stirling/home.html Modified=60229A9F6475BD0152 ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD7532.672A9360-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 19:36:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA14284; Fri, 1 May 1998 19:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 19:34:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000101bd7571$f9ca9780$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Ball Lightning Generator? Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 20:28:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"1rNvx3.0.1V3.0PeIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18152 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex In order to exploit Frank Stenger's Kilojoule capacitor bank for making ball lightning, I propose a circular (vacuum)cavity resonator about 25 cm dia to get the TE(1,2,2) mode. The end will be terminated for impedance matching and sealed with a glass dome to keep the vauum in. :-) It will be excited with a current loop carrying the discharge current from Frank's "Ashtabula Leveler", which will now be a "Circularly Polarized Photon Torpederator or SEE PP TEA. :-) Are you ready to go for it, Frank? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 19:55:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17241; Fri, 1 May 1998 19:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 19:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:35:12 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: 39 MJ ...10 g carbon Resent-Message-ID: <"1i95L3.0.AD4.heeIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18153 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:53 PM 5/1/98, John Schnurer wrote: > Let me know what to put with 10 grams of carbon to get the >heat.... we can probably do good in better gas mileage! > >buncha cut.............. > >On Fri, 1 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >> The chemical side of things is obvious, due to 39 MJ from 10 g of carbon. >> Admitted, we still need to get a better handle from Gene or Jed on the true >> parameters. The above statement is out of context. The "obvious" referred to above is that you can't get 39 MJ of heat from 10 g of carbon chemically. That's a dead issue, unless Fred actually figures out how to get 10 kJ/atom! 8^) If there were a straight answer, it would have to be Pd powder. According to an article in IE#18 Li does wonders. Personally, I'm just eager to hear Scott's results before chasing another wild goose again. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 20:30:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA07489; Fri, 1 May 1998 20:27:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 20:27:53 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 21:50:00 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Omniscient Larry Wharton Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"RxUAf2.0.Uq1.tAfIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18154 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Larry Wharton deigns to inform us: The success of this test will indeed prove cf to be real. The certain failure of the test, on the other hand, will do nothing to disprove the issue to the believers. I can imagine in a week or two Jed giving the explanation as to why the self sustaining test did not work. Based on my previous behavior it seems more likely I would have no explanation, and I would offer none. I have never said why Ragland thought he got excess heat but we observed none. I do not know, and I will not guess or spin empty hypotheses. The only way to find out would be for us to perform more tests, and for me to visit Ragland and observe while he performs more tests. Without these steps it must remain an unsolved mystery. Sometimes I do learn why experiments failed, and why the scientist was wrong all along, but most results fade away inconclusively. That is the usual fate of most apparent scientific breakthroughs. It is nothing to get upset about. I do not understand why Wharton accuses me of "giving explanations" to explain failures when I have never done that in the past. I think that Wharton and the other "skeptics" are the ones who "give explanations" when experiments succeed. Why did Mitsubishi see heat, x-rays and transmutations in six out of their last six experiments? Why did the NHE see excess heat in their replication of the Italian thin wire experiments? Why does the French AEC continue to see massive excess in their boil off replications, with their improved instrumentation? The "skeptics" will always come up with a handwaving hypothesis. The point is that the self heater test will not work and so we might as well speculate on the explanation of the existing experimental results now. In that case why bother doing the experiment at all? Why do any experiment? >From now on, when mankind faces a mystery we have an easy way out. We will ask Larry Wharton. He can explain difficult and apparently contradictory evidence that has buffaloed the experts here. I think it is grotesque that a scientist claims he can predict the outcome of this experiment given the evidence presented so far. On one hand Case performed crude, lousy calorimetry -- no argument there. On the other hand Case got a high S/N ratio, he did many convincing blanks, and many other people have seen similar effects. You can make a strong case either way, so how can anyone know the outcome? There are legitimate open questions about the Case experiment. However, the proper response to these questions is not to speculate; not to build a shaky edifice of improbable hypotheses; and not to pretend you are God and you already know the answer. The correct scientific response is to devise and execute *experiments that will eliminate the doubts*. Many other systems should be used to observe the effect, to eliminate systematic error. The best experiment is the simple, direct and irrefutable stand-alone self regenerating heater. I can think of no reason why this test is inappropriate or why anyone would question the outcome, positive or negative. Wharton ignores years of blank runs with deuterium, and writes: Heat may be transported by molecular conduction, eddy conduction, or advection and different temperatures and different masses ( a factor of two here between D2 and H2 ) will cause a different mixture of the three effects and a different effective thermal conductivity. Yes, if you dismiss 99% of the evidence you can always come up with a facile answer. I and everyone attending ICCF-7 *immediately* suspected conduction, eddy currents, etc., etc., and we asked Case about these things in detail. It turns out he knows a lot about these subjects, he has considered them carefully for many years, and he can make a fairly convincing case they do not play a significant role. Primarily he cites the blank runs with deuterium, which are the only kind of runs he got for many years. I find it extremely difficult to imagine why a calorimeter which has functioned flawlessly for years with this catalyst material, showing no difference between hydrogen and deuterium, should suddenly one morning exhibit artifactual heat because of eddy conduction, advection or any other reason. Why did it change?!? Why didn't it exhibit these problems from the first day? Why does it only show these problems in a narrow range of temperature with one particular type of catalytic material, and no others? The "eddy current" hypothesis makes no sense to me. Before I buy it, Wharton will have to answer these questions convincingly. If the stand alone heat test fails I will not have to answer any questions to support any theory -- because I have no theory. I will say only that our observations are a mystery, the blank runs are a mystery, and I do not understand how this came about. A preliminary result from Scott Little using the wrong material has produced no real excess heat, and no artifact that looks like what Gene saw. When Scott examines results from the thermocouples in the cell, he does not see the kinds of temperature excursions Gene saw. That is inconclusive. If he continues to gets no real heat and no artifact, Little must not be replicating the experiment. A replication has to show the same results, real or artifactual. If it is a mistake, Scott has to reproduce the mistake (and demonstrate that it is a mistake). He might have to use a WWII steel vessel, blanket warmer, thermocouple at an angle, etc., etc. He might have to copy every last detail before he sees the effect/artifact. That would not be worth the effort, but it would be the only way to solve the mystery. Obviously, Scott must test the recommended catalyst before drawing any conclusions. Before it arrives I would try another charge of deuterium. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 22:25:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA05255; Fri, 1 May 1998 22:23:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 22:23:29 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003b01bd757a$9db533c0$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: 39 MJ ...10 g carbon Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 21:30:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"28dr32.0.yH1.DtgIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18155 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 8:53 PM Subject: Re: 39 MJ ...10 g carbon Horace wrote: > >The above statement is out of context. The "obvious" referred to above is >that you can't get 39 MJ of heat from 10 g of carbon chemically. That's a >dead issue, unless Fred actually figures out how to get 10 kJ/atom! 8^) A bit of a problem, even with matter-antimatter annihilation: 12 AMU antimatter against 12 AMU matter ----> 24*931E6*1.6E-19 = 3.6E-9 Joules/C-atom, but,I'm thinking that ZPE scavenging might just do it. :-) > >If there were a straight answer, it would have to be Pd powder. According >to an article in IE#18 Li does wonders. Personally, I'm just eager to hear >Scott's results before chasing another wild goose again. Again??? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 1 22:30:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA17060; Fri, 1 May 1998 22:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 22:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 01:20:14 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 39 MJ ...10 g carbon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cNL0Y1.0.UA4.qxgIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18156 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Joke! On Fri, 1 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 8:53 PM 5/1/98, John Schnurer wrote: > > Let me know what to put with 10 grams of carbon to get the > >heat.... we can probably do good in better gas mileage! > > > >buncha cut.............. > > > >On Fri, 1 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > [snip] > >> The chemical side of things is obvious, due to 39 MJ from 10 g of carbon. > >> Admitted, we still need to get a better handle from Gene or Jed on the true > >> parameters. > > > The above statement is out of context. The "obvious" referred to above is > that you can't get 39 MJ of heat from 10 g of carbon chemically. That's a > dead issue, unless Fred actually figures out how to get 10 kJ/atom! 8^) > > If there were a straight answer, it would have to be Pd powder. According > to an article in IE#18 Li does wonders. Personally, I'm just eager to hear > Scott's results before chasing another wild goose again. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 00:36:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA10497; Sat, 2 May 1998 00:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 00:25:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980502022358.009246e0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 02:23:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Run 1b results posted Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ffDeP2.0.qZ2.HfiIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18157 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Howdy, I just posted the graphical results from Run 1b along with a written description of the run. http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run1b.html Take a look at the graph...our calorimetry is working particularly well now...and it is astonishing how insensitive the system is to which isotope of hydrogen is used to fill the chamber... At least we have a pretty good control run to compare the real catalyst runs next week to. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 04:32:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA22480; Sat, 2 May 1998 04:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 04:23:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ca01bd750d$5508b2e0$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 08:27:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"4WUEV3.0.8V5.89mIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18158 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 8:14 AM Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Gosh Frank, You want it all. :-) The EM fields (Microwaves) that go through the gyrations that ionize the surrounding atmophere in a ball shape, readilly pass through an insulator (plastic or glass) and continue on the other side. This was done in a lab in Japan with a powerful microwave "oven" and has been seen on airliners where the EM fields come through the side windows re-estblishing the "ball" inside the aircraft. Should be able to do this with a few KW if you can get the field configuration right. :-) Regards, Frederick >Taylor J. Smith wrote: >> >(snip) > >> I no longer can resist telling of my own encounter >> with ball lightning. A number of years ago, during >> a summer electrical storm, a ball of lightning came >> through the glass of the outside door of my living >> room. It slowly, on a straight course, moved through >> the living room coming close to the face of one of my >> sons who was sitting on a couch. Finally, it disappeared >> into the thermostat, burning out the thermostat. > >Gosh, Jack, do you remember any more details? How about the door-glass >details? Did you find any effects on the glass" About how big was the >ball? Any sound with the ball? How bright? Was it smooth, fuzzy, >"sparky", etc. Any details of the thermostat damage? Did your son >smell anything - (nitrogen oxides, etc.)? >I realize that in the surprise of the moment, all but the general >overall impact of the encounter are often lost. > >This encounter is very typical - I have had letters from people >describing about the same experience. Glad no one was hurt by the >incident, Jack! > >Now, if someone can tell me how this little bugger (BL) can get around >its prohibition by the "virial theorem", I'll be a happy old dude! > >May I say that I don't intend to turn this list into a ball lightning >list - my interest in BL is from the anomalous energy standpoint - how >does it store energy? - Does it have a hot core that could be used for >fusion reactions? - Does it exhibit a magnetic dipole characteristic >such that it could be "captured" by an active EM suspension system? - >If captured and suspended, could its energy be replenished (laser, >electron beam, microwave?)? > >Thanks for the report, Jack! > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 05:07:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA18617; Sat, 2 May 1998 05:00:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 05:00:41 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <354AB485.23DBC973 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 05:52:05 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D@interlaced.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"FOyNB3.0.pY4.ehmIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18159 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank Stenger wrote: ... I realize that in the surprise of the moment, all but the general overall impact of the encounter are often lost. .... Hi Frank, Those of us in the room were paralyzed with astonishment. I don't recall anyone saying a word during the passage of the ball of lightning. It seemed to take a long time, but that was a very subjective impression. I did examine the glass afterwards ("thermopane" double glass), and there were no marks that could be attributed to the lightning. I think there was a faint smell of ozone in the air, but the windows were open (metal screens). The ball was smooth and bright, about the size of two fists together. There was a pop when it went into the thermostat but no evidence of burning, although the thermostat was destroyed. I gather from various posts that you live on the far east side of Cleveland. (I live on the far west side in Avon.) So you are familiar with a summer electrical storm in northern Ohio. No lightning was striking the ground, and there was no rain at that moment. The sky was covered with sheets of lightning. By coincidence, I spent an afternoon this week with a Frank Stenger from Bay Village, Ohio. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 06:32:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA29999; Sat, 2 May 1998 06:24:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 06:24:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354B100D.54D9 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 07:22:37 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com, drom@vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la utkux.utk.edu, orian001@maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti@aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani frascati.infn.it, opa@aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak nosc.mil, bossp@nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly mse.ogi.edu, dg@cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell lanl.gov, sphkoji@sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos juno.com, g-miley@uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti msn.com, design73@aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre qm.sri.com, tchubb@aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger eneco-usa.com, cincygrp@ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Jarmusch: patent for new beam-beam fusion device 04/27/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34DFC098.4EB3@ earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6 earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earthlink.net> < 34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6F8AA.1837@e arthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthlink.net> <35! 04077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350DAD0F.535F@ earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@earthlink.net> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <35173888.2F66@e arthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@earthlink.net> ! <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@earthlink.n et> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <352D3FA7.574 F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@earthlink.net > <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <3547586D.E74! eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7sGSv3.0.cK7.7wnIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18160 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Patent Granted For New Type of Beam-Beam Fusion Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 21:26:35 -1000 From: Darrel Jarmusch Organization: Hawaii OnLine - Honolulu, HI Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion On Saturday April 24, 1998 (despite some stupid things I said here about centrifugal force)I was notified by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that my patent for a new type of non-neutralized beam-beam nuclear fusion reactor will be granted. I am now looking for a computer simulation team to apply for a research grant from DOE. As team members I have in mind a computer simulation group from LANL as well as an accelerator engineer from Los Alamos. I am still looking for a nuclear physicist to act as Head Researcher for the program (even though I am the inventor and the Project Director, I am still only an ignorant philosopher, so I need a qualified nuclear physicist to head up the team) I am also interested in selling a partial interest in the patent in order to fund the project. Interested parties please contact me: D. Lloyd Jarmusch P.O. Box 677 Kilauea, Hawaii 96754 email organix aloha.net Phone (808) 828-0834 Fax (808) 828-0834 P.S. Arthur Carlson, if you are reading this I haven't forgotten that I owe you $200, even though you didn't formally enter my contest, or give me your mailing address, your responses were what I was looking for and I used them as ammunition for overcomming the objections from the patent office. Thank you again, and thanks to Jim Carr, Dr. Lewis, Dave Wark, John and James Logajan and everybody else who helped, there were so many of you I forget all the names of those who contributed directly to the success of my patent application. Thanks to all the contributors to this group for the lively and enlightening posts. Aloha, D. Lloyd Jarmusch From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 06:34:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA01342; Sat, 2 May 1998 06:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 06:32:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805021330.JAA08963 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Date: Sat, 2 May 98 09:32:56 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"95l6k2.0.uK.d1oIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18161 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace wrote: >At 12:37 PM 5/1/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: > >> >>1.6 liters at 50 psi = 0.24 moles D2 gas > >Is that psi or psig? That was measured at around 183 C, right? No, the pressure was 50 psi at 18 C at the start of the first H2 run. It built up to 82 psi at 183C. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 06:59:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA29040; Sat, 2 May 1998 06:56:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 06:56:31 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 06:04:00 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"BBffF2.0.b57.FOoIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18162 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:23 AM 5/2/98, Scott Little wrote: >Howdy, > >I just posted the graphical results from Run 1b along with a written >description of the run. > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run1b.html > >Take a look at the graph...our calorimetry is working particularly well >now...and it is astonishing how insensitive the system is to which isotope >of hydrogen is used to fill the chamber... It appears that is due to (1) thick walls and (2) side heating. > >At least we have a pretty good control run to compare the real catalyst >runs next week to. I see now that you have 3 operational thermocouples at the separate levels. (Don't know why that didn't sink into short term memory last go-round.) Note that when dropping pressure to purge and refill that the top thermocouple (red trace) *increases* in temperauture, in fact more than the mid (light blue) and bottom (dark blue) temperatures *drop.* This could be a sign of a liquid, accumulated at the base of the compartment, evaporating during the purge. Could be water, could be hydrocarbon, or a mixture. It would be nice to get some kind of visual, or better, a small tube through the bottom for liquid extraction. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:01:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA11056; Sat, 2 May 1998 07:55:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 07:55:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Geosas Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:52:59 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: Geosas aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.i for Windows sub 164 Resent-Message-ID: <"vC0Ym.0.di2.ZFpIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18163 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi - I understand that in Case's experiments thermal runaway can take place, and the catalyst destroys itself above 250 C. This could be prevented by immersing the apparatus in a bath of liquid which boils at a temperature slightly above the optimum temperature for the D2/Pd reaction. The liquid will boil and hold the temperature down. The vapour can be condensed and returned to the bath. Alternatively, the pressure (and temperature) can be allowed to rise, and the vapour used to drive a small steam engine or turbine, a convincing demonstration of output as mechanical energy. All the best, George. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:02:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA11179; Sat, 2 May 1998 07:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 07:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980502095515.00950100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 09:55:15 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bixR33.0.Vk2.HGpIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18164 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:04 AM 5/2/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >Note that when dropping pressure to purge and refill that the top >thermocouple (red trace) *increases* in temperauture, in fact more than the >mid (light blue) and bottom (dark blue) temperatures *drop.* This could be >a sign of a liquid... Note that Ttop goes up and Tmid goes down and they almost become equal during the reloading. My first guess would be that it's just the hot gas located in the middle section of the catalyst bed moving upwards past the top temp sensor that causes this effect. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:14:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA15291; Sat, 2 May 1998 08:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:06:36 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Pressure and temperature Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805021109_MC2-3BB4-FEA8 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"BLm3g.0.ok3.eVpIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18166 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Scott Little >INTERNET:little eden.com Scott, In a gas loading experiment the two critical control parameters are pressure and temperature. Dynamic changes in these parameters can promote loading. To load titanium I have heard people lower the temperature to cyrogenic levels, and then rapidly increase it. Gene says the pressure changed from 50 to 82 psi. What did yours do? I suppose this is partly a function of the vessel size, and yours is different. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:17:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA14378; Sat, 2 May 1998 08:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354B36D5.57D4 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 11:08:05 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Ball Lightning Generator? References: <000101bd7571$f9ca9780$2d8cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5-1zB1.0.UW3.nSpIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18165 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > To: Vortex > > In order to exploit Frank Stenger's Kilojoule > capacitor bank for making ball lightning, I propose a circular > (vacuum)cavity resonator about 25 cm dia to get the TE(1,2,2) mode. > > The end will be terminated for impedance matching and sealed with a glass > dome to keep the vauum in. :-) > > It will be excited with a current loop carrying the discharge current from > Frank's "Ashtabula Leveler", which will now be a "Circularly Polarized > Photon Torpederator or SEE PP TEA. :-) Fred, now how could poor old Mother Nature set this up in her lab? She uses the "kiss" principle and I like to emulate her when ever I can. I tried to emulate her yesterday and she slapped a restraining order on me! :-) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:36:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA19217; Sat, 2 May 1998 08:29:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:29:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354B3548.2E61 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 11:01:28 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D@interlaced.net> <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9@css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BWd072.0.2i4.alpIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18167 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Steck wrote: > > The "virial theorem"? My apologies to the list if this is something basic I > should know. What is it? > This is probably a question Mike Schaffer should answer, but.... As far as I know, John, the virial theorem is a very fundamental limitation on how much energy can be stored in a non-nuclear configuration of matter and/or fields. To put it another way, I think it means that no matter how "smart" you get with the design of an energy-storage mechanism, you will always be limited by the force containment strength of some material substance. As an example, for flywheel energy storage, the ratio of material strength to material density provides a fundamental limit on how much energy even the best flywheel design can store. The theorem also applies to energy stored in springs, rubber bands, charged capacitors, induction coils, and, sigh, ball lightning. BUT WAIT! BALL LIGHTNING EXISTS! YOU SAW IT! I guess the theorem applies to anything held together by the chemical bond (like all construction materials) and to electromagnetic fields, (which chemical bonds are, I think!). I don't know how it is applied to electrons and other particles, it may be that in the QM world it does not hold for atomic-sized structures (how about it, Mike Schaffer?). If you try to design an electric coil with the wires twisting around so that the B-field is everywhere parallel to the current (J X B = 0 everywhere), you find that the virial theorem won't let you do it - only if you hold the configuration together with some kind of structure can you get it to work. THEN, HOW DOES BALL LIGHTNING DO IT?? Does it contain some kind of QM structure that has a stability not found in clasical EM theory? For the energies estimated for ball lightning, things like ionized plasma, low-pressure bubbles in the atmosphere, etc. seem to fail to explain it. Thus my interest in the subject - new physics?? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:41:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA22081; Sat, 2 May 1998 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:39:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008b01bd75df$934d10a0$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Ball Lightning Generator? Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 09:32:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"m5slv2.0.wO5.dupIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18168 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 02, 1998 9:14 AM Subject: Re: Ball Lightning Generator? Frank east of Avon Stenger wrote: > >Fred, now how could poor old Mother Nature set this up in her lab? Ask her? >She uses the "kiss" principle and I like to emulate her when ever I >can. If you believe that Frank, I suggest that you go turn on the faucet and vary the water flow and watch it turn turbulent, then tell me how simple the "vortices-vortex streets" are. :-) A butterfly flaps it's wings in New Zealand and creates a "Chaos" tornado in Andover. >I tried to emulate her yesterday and she slapped a restraining >order on me! :-) You're starting to sound like Bill Clinton. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 08:54:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA25318; Sat, 2 May 1998 08:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:51:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00a201bd75e1$4eab9140$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 09:45:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"gcNG_.0.WB6.44qIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18169 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 02, 1998 9:29 AM Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth >John Steck wrote: >> > >> The "virial theorem"? My apologies to the list if this is something basic I >> should know. What is it? >> > >This is probably a question Mike Schaffer should answer, but.... >As far as I know, John, the virial theorem is a very fundamental >limitation on how much energy can be stored in a non-nuclear >configuration of matter and/or fields. To put it another way, I think >it means that no matter how "smart" you get with the design of an >energy-storage mechanism, you will always be limited by the force >containment strength of some material substance. As an example, for >flywheel energy storage, the ratio of material strength to material >density provides a fundamental limit on how much energy even the best >flywheel design can store. The theorem also applies to energy stored >in springs, rubber bands, charged capacitors, induction coils, and, >sigh, ball lightning. BUT WAIT! BALL LIGHTNING EXISTS! YOU SAW IT! YES! And particles exist and the SMALLER the RADIUS the more energy they contain. Same thing for Black Holes or microbubbles in cavitation phenomena! The visible atom-molecular spectra on the "surface" of the BL is no indicator of the energy (millijoules)contained in this EM "fuzz-ball" . >I guess the theorem applies to anything held together by the chemical >bond (like all construction materials) and to electromagnetic fields, >(which chemical bonds are, I think!). I don't know how it is applied >to electrons and other particles, it may be that in the QM world it >does not hold for atomic-sized structures (how about it, Mike >Schaffer?). >If you try to design an electric coil with the wires twisting around >so that the B-field is everywhere parallel to the current (J X B = 0 >everywhere), you find that the virial theorem won't let you do it - only >if you hold the configuration together with some kind of structure >can you get it to work. THEN, HOW DOES BALL LIGHTNING DO IT?? >Does it contain some kind of QM structure that has a stability not found >in clasical EM theory? For the energies estimated for ball lightning, >things like ionized plasma, low-pressure bubbles in the atmosphere, etc. >seem to fail to explain it. Thus my interest in the subject - new >physics?? Nope, just EM Chaos. Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 09:01:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA27123; Sat, 2 May 1998 08:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:56:42 -0700 (PDT) From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199805021525.KAA07271 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980502022358.009246e0 mail.eden.com> from Scott Little at "May 2, 98 02:23:58 am" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:25:51 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Od8oZ3.0.gd6.t8qIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18170 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run1b.html > Take a look at the graph...our calorimetry is working particularly well > now...and it is astonishing how insensitive the system is to which isotope > of hydrogen is used to fill the chamber... Beautiful as usual. You mention on that web page that the H2 temps don't quite match before and after. Just by eyeball, it seems that your temps all keep trending upward, and by the time constant curve apparent in the temps/powerout your time constant might be a little bit long in comparison to your experiment runtime. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-8928 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 09:34:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA04497; Sat, 2 May 1998 09:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 09:32:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 08:38:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Case - three week run data Resent-Message-ID: <"SsBW92.0.761.WgqIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18171 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The following are the best available data posted from the Case three week run that demonstrates "beyond chemical" energy output. This was placed in a spread sheet to make re-calculation easier, in order to update the calculations as better data becomes available. Any corrections or improvements in accuracy are appreciated. Experiment values: Initial Gas Pressure 50.00 PSI Initial Gas Temperature 18.00 C Initial Gas Volume 1.60 liters Run Duration 504.00 Hours Weight of Catalyst 100.00 grams Ratio of Pd to catalyst 0.03 Pd/total Helium content before run 6.00 ppm Helium content at end of run 96.00 ppm Heat output 7.50 watts Misc. Constants Used: Avogadro's Number 6.0221367E+23 atoms/mole Standard Temperature 273.00 deg. K Standard Pressure 14.69594 psi Density of helium at STP 0.1787 g/liter Density of D2 at STP 0.1798 g/liter AMU to MeV conversion factor 9.32E+02 AMU/MeV Atomic weight of deuterium 2.0104 Atomic weight of helium 4.0026 Atomic weight of carbon 12.0110 D + D fusion energy 23.3 MeV J/eV 1.6021773E-19 J/eV Calculated Values: D2 volume at std temperature 1.50 liters D2 volume at STP 5.11 liters D2 weight 0.9182 g Moles of D2 0.2284 moles STP helium volume created 4.5963E-04 liters Helium mass 8.2135E-05 g Helium moles 2.0520E-05 moles Helium atoms created 1.2358E+19 atoms Fusion energy based on He 4.6132E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.426 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules Energy per mole of carbon 23,360.03 J/mole Fusion energy per mole of helium 2.2481E+12 joules Fusion energy per mole of D2 2.2481E+12 joules Energy from total experiment D2 5.1340E+05 MJ Max run duration 2168.27 years Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 11:13:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24578; Sat, 2 May 1998 11:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980502130848.00927950 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 13:08:48 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted In-Reply-To: <199805021525.KAA07271 mirage.skypoint.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980502022358.009246e0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"JScMD1.0.x_5.n5sIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18172 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:25 AM 5/2/98 -0500, John Logajan wrote: >Just by eyeball, it seems that your >temps all keep trending upward, and by the time constant curve apparent >in the temps/powerout your time constant might be a little bit long >in comparison to your experiment runtime. Good point, John. The system certainly does have a long time constant due to the fact that the chamber is well insulated from the water-flow heat exchanger...an apparently unavoidable problem with a system like this where the chamber must operate at a much higher temperature than the cooling water. Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 11:13:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24883; Sat, 2 May 1998 11:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 11:10:38 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Omniscient Larry Wharton In-reply-to: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199805021808.LAA23412 smtp1.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NdeLL1.0.i46.r6sIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18173 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:50 PM 5/1/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex > >Larry Wharton deigns to inform us: > > The success of this test will indeed prove cf to be real. The certain > failure of the test, on the other hand, will do nothing to disprove the > issue to the believers. I can imagine in a week or two Jed giving the > explanation as to why the self sustaining test did not work. > >Based on my previous behavior it seems more likely I would have no >explanation, and I would offer none. Why not? Surely you could use some of these along the lines you have used before when "skeptics" were unable to replicate various cf experiments? 1. (My favorite.) The experiment is so very difficult and must be followed so precisely, and you just aren't replicating the experiment exactly enough. If you would have done it right it would have worked. 2. You are not an expert in the field, so of course you can't replicate it. Why are you even bothering to attempt to replicate this complicated experiment in your puny little lab? Do you think you could replicate a pentium in your lab? Just because you can't, does that mean pentiums are impossible? etc, etc. 3. The effect is obviously real, but you will never be able to replicate it because the principals are keeping vital details SECRET because they are protecting their future commercial rights....(I like this one because of its ironic twist. It is a reversal of the old conspiracy claim that the "establishment" is suppressing cf publication and funding to protect their hot fusion "gravy train". Here, we have the inventors themselves holding up progress.) I don't want to get carried away here, but just for the heck of it I will offer a $10 bet to the first taker to accept it here on vortex: I bet $10 that nobody will present a self running demo of the Case experiment by September 1, 1998. For me it would be a great bet. I would like to win it and I would also like to lose it. Any takers? --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 11:50:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02594; Sat, 2 May 1998 11:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 10:53:36 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"gf5TA2.0.Qe.XfsIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18174 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:55 AM 5/2/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 06:04 AM 5/2/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>Note that when dropping pressure to purge and refill that the top >>thermocouple (red trace) *increases* in temperauture, in fact more than the >>mid (light blue) and bottom (dark blue) temperatures *drop.* This could be >>a sign of a liquid... > >Note that Ttop goes up and Tmid goes down and they almost become equal >during the reloading. My first guess would be that it's just the hot gas >located in the middle section of the catalyst bed moving upwards past the >top temp sensor that causes this effect. The Tbtm trace goes down and then back up. If the above explanation were accurate, or at least complete, it should apply similarly to the bottom gas going past the midpoint, and eventually past the top as well. So, as the bottom gas cooled from expansion, you would see the Tmid and Ttop temperatures drop as the bottom gas went past the mid and the top thermocouples. This did not happen. There is a only a very small drop in Tmid, and Ttop reacts inversely, i.e. increases as Tbtm decreases, and then decreases while Tbtm increases back to normal range. Your heater coils appeared to me to be spaced symmetrically, thus they should heat fairly uniformly throughout the exterior, which is insulated. It is strange that Tbtm should dip severly, while Tmid has only a tiny downward blip. Both should dip due to gas expansion and cooling. It appears that possibly some mechanism is providing heat to the mid section during the gas expansion. That heat could possibly be the heat content of freshly evaporated vapor in the bottom of the chamber. It could be considered to be heat from the cigarette ligher effect, the heat released when H2 deadsorbs from Pd. However, that effect would apply to the bottom catalyst as well, which drops in temperature, contradicting the deadsorbtion explanation. The only explanation I can see is that there is a liquid in the bottom which evaporates on decompression. It could be water. Case noted water being expelled from his first couple purges, if I recall correctly. But his valving system was different. If you have water in your system it has no way out but evaporation, true? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 11:53:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03525; Sat, 2 May 1998 11:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 11:51:41 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 14:49:06 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"412ja1.0.zs.xisIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18175 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, I am into the construction of the variac controlled power supply. I breadboarded it last night, no ballast resistors and it worked fine. But the glow discharge is very unstable, much flickering and such. I am heading to Home Depot to buy a half dozen ceramic lamp sockets, some screw in fuses and standard light bulbs of various wattages to build up a ballast assembly. The output of the variac will be monitored with an AC voltmeter and ammeter. Monitoring V and I input to the high voltage transformer rectifier assembly. This way I will be able to measure total input power to the reactor tube and ballast. I don't have the meters yet but expect them in Monday or Tuesday. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 12:19:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA07393; Sat, 2 May 1998 12:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 12:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805021831.OAA14415 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Dr. Case's Issued PCT for Catalytic Fusion Date: Sat, 2 May 98 14:33:23 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id MAA07345 Resent-Message-ID: <"sgzvc3.0.Rp1.IzsIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18176 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians: I have scanned Dr. Leslie Case's issued PCT notice for Catalytic Fusion, having obtained this public document from Derwent in Virginia. Issue #19 of Infinite Energy Magazine will include this material, plus lots more concerning this new development by Dr. Case. This posting follows my earlier posting of a replication demonstration of the process by Dr. Case here at Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. on April 30, 1998. I hope this stimulates further productive scientific discussions and wider efforts at replication. Dr. Case has made many relevant checks, as witnessed by his detailed discussions. More checks are underway right now, including construction of a self-sustaining unit in a dewar. Incidentally, I looked up Leslie Case in my MIT Alumni register. He has these MIT degrees: SB Chemical Engineering (1952); SB Industrial Management; SM Chemical Engineering Practice; Sc.D. Chemical Engineering Best, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302 Phone: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com ***************************************************************************** COPRODUCTION OF ENERGY AND HELIUM FROM D2 PCT WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION International Bureau INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (51) International Patent Classification 6: G21B 1/100 (21) International Publication Number: WO 97/43768 (43) international Publication Date: 20 November 1997 (20.11.97) (21) International Application Number: PCT/US97/08033 (22) International Filing Date: 12 May 1997 (12.05.97) (71)(72) Applicant and inventor: CASE, Leslie, C. [US/US]; 14, Lockeland Road, Winchester, MA 01890 (US). (74) Agents: CESARI, Robert, A. et al.; Cesari and McKenna, LLP, 30 Rowes Wharf, Boston, MA 02110 (US). (81) Designated States: AL, AU, BB, BG, BR, BY, CA, CN, EE, GE, HU, IL, IS, JP, KP, KR, LK, LR, LS, LT, LV, MD, MG, MK, MX, NO, NZ, PL, RO, RU, SG, Sl, SK, TR, TT, UA, UZ, VN, ARIPO patent (GH, KE, LS, MW, SD, SZ, UG), Eurasian patent (AM, AZ, BY, KG, KZ, MD, RU, TJ, TM), European patent (AT, BE, CH, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, IE, IT, LU, MC, NL, PT, SE), OAPI patent (BF, Bl, CF, CG, Cl, CM, GA, GN, ML, MR, NE, SN, TD, TG;). Published With international search report. Before the expiration of the time limit for amending claims and to be republished in the event of the receipt of amendments. (54) Title: COPRODUCTION OF ENERGY AND HELIUM FROM D2 (57) Abstract It has been discovered that energy can be reliably produced by contacting deuterium, in the gaseous state, with a particularly active metallic catalyst, at an elevated temperature. The product of this process is helium of mass (4). Thus, the reaction a ppears to be D + D ÆHe-4 + 24 MeV. Only some fraction of metallic ³hydrogenation² catalysts are active in this process, and it has not been possible to predict in advance which candidate catalysts will be active, so a simple screening test has been devise d to identify the specifically active catalysts. The most promising catalysts for this process may be certain types of supported platinum-group metals. Palladium appears to be a favored metal, although platinum, and possibly other PGMs are also active. It is envisioned that the procedure can bc scaled up to produce commercial-scale energy by running steam tubes through the catalyst bed, and removing the heat produced in the form of steam. WO 97/43768 PCT/US97/08033 COPRODUCTION OF ENERGY AND HELIUM FROM D2 BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION It is now well recognized that various nuclear fusion reactions of D, or D + T, can yield quite large quantities of energy, and that such reactions are very promising for long-term energy production, because of the very substantial D content of natural wa ter, most particularly sea water. Very considerable sums of money have been expended in the study of the possibility of controlled plasma fusion of this type, and lesser sums on laser-initiated fusions. The results are positive, but it is clear that we are a long time away from, and vast sums of money short of, practical results here. In the last few years, a number of investigators have looked at the possibility of obtaining such a fusion under relatively mild laboratory conditions, achieving ³cold² or ³anomalous² fusion. Numerous indicative, or possibly positive, results have been ob tained, but have not been reproducible, or positive enough, so as to be generally recognized. I believe that the most clearly positive prior work is that of Yamaguchi (Jpn. J. Appl. Physics, 29 (1666, (1990)), but neither Yamaguchi himself, nor anyone els e, has yet reported reproducing this work. It is well known to chemists that metallic catalysts can strongly interact with the electrons of the hydrogen molecule, apparently leading in some cases to activated molecules or even atoms adsorbed on, or in, the metallic catalyst. For some time, I have focused on the possibility that certain catalysts might so activate deuterium (heavy hydrogen) as to cause the nuclei to self-react, or fuse, once the protecting electron clouds are highly disturbed, or removed. And I believe that such an effect might hav e been the actual cause of Yamaguchi's fleeting success, and possibly some of the other possibly ³cold fusion² indicative results. Many months ago, I started obtaining indications that D2 gas can be caused produce energy by contacting with various metals known to be active ³hydrogenation² catalysts. The procedures improved with experimentation, but remained erratic and unpredictable. I have now determined that energy may be produced on a continuous basis by contacting a specifically active catalyst with a gas comprising D2, at temperatures at least about 130 °C. Because only some proportion of hydrogenation catalysts are active in this process, I have devised a screening process whereby to identify those catalysts which are specifically active. That screening process consists of the side-by-side, or sequential, c ontacting of the reduced, and devolatilized, catalyst with H2 and D2 gases at about 1 to 3 atm. gauge pressure, and about 150 to 200 °C. Those catalysts which are specifically inactive show no incremental temperature differential between H2 and D2. The sp ecifically active catalysts show an increased temperature due to the D2 of at least about 2 °C., and preferably greater than 5 °C., compared to the H2.. I have found that the only product of this catalytic self-reaction is mass-4 helium. No appreciable quantity of neutrons, or tritium, or mass-3 helium are produced. This is highly unexpected, and contrary to published discussions of possible fusion reacti ons of H, D., and T. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION After much experimentation I have: 1) Discovered the general conditions under which energy may be conveniently obtained by apparent catalytic self-reaction of deuterium; 2) Established a screening procedure by which those catalysts which are specifically active in this procedure are identified; 3) Determined that the (exclusive) product of said catalytic fusion is mass-4 helium. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF AN ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENT This application is a continuation-in-part of my prior applications Serial No. [Note: There follows one line of blurred numbers in my copy of this PCT. ‹EFM.] 07/830,718, filed 2104/92; Serial No. 08/135,021, filed 10/13/93; Serial No. 08/188,948, filed 01/27/94, Serial No. 08/262,777, filed 6/20/94; Serial No. 08/459,763, filed 06/02/95, and all applications of which these applications are continuations-in-part, each and all of which applications are incorporated herein by reference. My first positive results were obtained by pressuring certain metallic catalysts with D2 gas, and then devolatilizing, thus following on, and confirming, the results of Yamaguchi. But this is necessarily a batch process, did not yield large amounts of ene rgy, and therefor had little promise for large-scale use. I have now found that it is possible to produce large amounts of energy (much greater than 1 watt), on a continuous basis, by contacting a gas comprising D2 with a specifically active hydrogenation catalyst at a temperature of at least about 130 °C. 1. General Procedure and Useful Materials The most important element of the instant invention is the discovery and identification of specifically active metallic hydrogenation catalysts. There are innumerable candidate such catalysts, and only some relatively small proportion thereof, is specific ally active in the instant process. Central to this invention was the determination that such specifically active catalysts do exist, and that identification thereof is an empirical process, wherein many negative results may be traversed before positive r esults occur. And so far, there is no reliable guide to make an a priori selection among the candidates. The most easily categorized specifically active catalysts are the supported platinum-group-metal (PGM) hydrogenation catalysts, already well known to be active catalysts, and widely used in the process industries. Those PGM's most widely used are Pt and Pd, of course, although Rh and Ru may be used, and even sometimes lr. Both Pt and Pd have been found to yield specifically active catalysts, with indications that Rh is also useful. Ru, when and as identified as a s pecifically active metal, may be preferred because of its very low cost, and potential durability in use. The platinum group metals may indeed be specifically active in other forms, such as Pt or Pd black, or as sponge, and so forth. Supported Ni catalysts are also widely used in the process industries, although generally not nearly so active as the PGM catalysts. Ni, when and as identified as specifically active in the instant invention, would be a preferred embodiment, because of th e very low cost and wide availability compared to the PGM's. The various supports may be those used for the PGM's. In general, however, the level of Ni loading is higher than for the PGM's, being usually greater than 10%. Raney Ni is also sometimes used i n the process industries, and would be similar in utility to the supported Ni catalysts, when and as identified as specifically active. Various other metals are known to be active hydrogenation catalysts, and might be found to be specifically active in some embodiments. Of possible utility are supported Re, Raney Co, and Ti, and the rare earths in various forms. It is well known that mixtures of various metals are sometimes specially active hydrogenation catalysts, and thus might be promising specifically active catalysts. Of particular interest would be mixtures of the PGM's with each other, and with Re. The supporting material may be any one of those known and commonly use. such as activated carbon, graphite, alumina, silica, kieselguhr, clay, zeolites, and so forth. It is known that about a 1/2% to 5% loading of metal on the support (preferably about 1%), and that an activated carbon support, is very useful in various hydrogenations, and so it is that both 1% Pd and 1% Pt on activated carbon have been found in some i nstances to be specifically active. Pd seems more active that Pt. The specifically active catalyst may either be in powdered or otherwise finely divided form, or may be in the form of porous aggregates, such as pellets or cylinders. It is critical that the catalyst must be able to absorb or adsorb a large quantity of th e fuel gas comprising D2. The fuel gas to be contacted with the specifically active catalyst comprises D2. The actual D2 content need not approach 100%, however. An atomic proportion of the dilution effect of H2 become large enough to slow down the reaction notably. Any content of O2 in the fuel is detrimental, because it catalytically reacts with D2 to form D20, which may be inactive. And H20, HDO, and D20 are undesirable, because they may preferentially occupy the specifically active sites, preventing the desired self-reaction o f D2. N2 seems to serve merely as a diluent in the fuel gas, and has almost no effect in any reasonable proportion. CO may also sometimes be only a diluent. CO2 may preferentially occupy active sites and may be undesirable. But both CO and CO2 are unlikely majo r constituents of any fuel gas. He being the product of the instantly desired reaction, might seem to be an important, and negative component of the fuel gas. But it appears that the extreme vigor of the desired reaction causes such localized disruption, on an atomic scale, that He is r eleased, rather than being trapped in the catalyst. Thus, He seems to serve merely as a diluent, as does N2. Only when the fuel gas reacts to such a degree that the He content rises to 5%, or 10%, or more, is it desirable to institute some sort of bleedin g of the contaminated fuel gas, and replenishment by fresh D2. Most (or all) of the commercially available deuterium gas seems quite satisfactory as fuel. Research and CP grades are perhaps unnecessarily pure, and more costly. The temperature under which the instant self-reaction is conducted is important. At a temperature level of 150-200 °C., the reaction proceeds at a reasonable rate, and the temperature level is high enough so that heat can be transferred to water, creating steam‹being that highly desirable vehicle whereby to power turbines, or to carry energy from place to place. At temperatures less than about 150 °C., the desired reaction is slower, and the temperature difference to create steam impractically low. But th e operational temperatures may desirably be quite higher than 200 °C., if desired. Surprisingly, the D2 fuel may remain in close association with the catalyst at temperatures even well in excess of 200 °C.; and even at temperatures favoring devolution of the D, from the catalyst, increased pressure may be employed to counter the trend. Thus, the upper limit on this reaction may be set by the strength of the materials used, and may extend to 300 °C., or 500 °C., or even higher. The pressure used in this process is not so important as the temperature. Especially at the lower operating temperatures of 150-200 °C., the fuel is highly absorbed in, or adsorbed on, the catalyst even at 1 atm. absolute. And some of the active catalysts so strongly attract the fuel that a partial vacuum may appear. Thus it is that a wide range of pressures may be usefully employed. Sometimes a partial vacuum may be present. Generally, 1-10 atm. absolute is easily obtained, easily contained, and useful. Under special conditions, pressures up to 100 atm. or higher may be desirable, and useful. The apparatus used is generally any leak-tight container capable of-temperature and pressure regulation, and fitted with tubes through which to circulate water, or other heat-transfer fluid. The specific configuration may vary widely. There are, however, three factors governing the design of apparatus. 1) As indicated, the catalyst must be in good thermal contact with the tubes carrying heat-transfer fluid (³steam tubes²), so as to facilitate removal of the energy generated. 2) The catalyst must be in good contact with the fuel gas, so as to replenish the fuel converted. This generally may mean that the catalyst lies only in a thin layer, with all same being near to a gas-catalyst interface. A layer about one inch thick is ap proximately the upper limit in this sense. 3) Insofar as it is difficult to design a reactor having a large, thin surface of catalyst contacting the fuel, it is preferred that the fuel be continuously fed through a bed of the catalyst. Thus, the preferred reactor design is either a stationary (or preferably a fluidized) bed of catalyst surrounding and in close contact with the heat transfer tubes, and through which the fuel gas is circulated under forced draft, to ensure continuous contact between catalyst, and fresh fuel. Because the instant self-reaction of D2 produces only He, and no neutrons, tritium, or other radioactivity, the materials of construction can be simple steel, even embrittlement). At most costly, 302 or 304 stainless steel may be advantageously employed. Exotic materials, such as 316 stainless, or zirconium, are quite unnecessary. And because the product is helium, a most inert and benign gas, the process produces no dangerous effluent, (being even much less damaging to the environment than CO2). Thus, af ter processing the bled material to recover useful D2 fuel, the product He can even be vented to the atmosphere, if desired, as it generally will be. Incidentally, the instant process, apparently by the reaction D + D Æ 4-mass helium, evolves almost 24 MeV, which is a huge, and extraordinarily favorable amount of energy. Indeed, this reaction appears certain to be the most energetic reaction ever condu cted by man on a macroscopic scale. (There are only few possibly more energetic reactions, such as matter-antimatter extinction, but these can never be run on a macroscopic scale on earth). 2. Screening Procedure for Specifically Active Catalysts Because there is an infinity of possible catalysts, and only a small proportion of the infinity proves specifically active, a simple, easily conducted, screening procedure is essential for the practical application of the instant invention. Even when one starts with those most promising candidates, the supported PGM hydrogenation catalysts, by no means are all specifically active, so the screening procedure is necessary, to avoid endless experimentation with uniformly negative results. Indeed, after 3, or 10, or 100, negative results, and that even after initial encouragement, most researchers would give up and try something else. And this factor may well already have been ³decisive² in many previous attempts at ³cold² or ³anomalous² fusion. The instant invention relies on such a screening test. That test need not be exact in detail, but must involve contacting the reduced, devolatilized candidate catalyst with gases, comprising H2 and then D2, at a temperature between about 150 °C. and 200 ° C. (higher temperatures can be used, but are unnecessary), and initially at 1-3 atm. absolute (the pressure will generally change as the test proceeds). The catalyst must be in the reduced state, so as not to react with H2, and give a false reference temp erature partially dependent on the reduction reaction. And the catalyst must be devolatilized so as to be able to absorb, or adsorb, the fuel gases. The experimental device is brought into a stable temperature state using the H2 reference gas, said stable temperature being the ³reference² temperature. Then the H2 gas is devolved by pulling a good vacuum for some minutes (some catalysts are quite relu ctant to devolve adsorbed or absorbed H2). Then the experiment is repeated, employing the same apparatus, heat input, and configuration, but with D2 instead of the H2. If the temperature eventually reached with D2 is about the same as reached with H2, or less than about 2 °C. greater, the catalyst candidate is deemed not specifically active (it is fairly difficult to be certain that anything much less than 2 °C. is a ge nuine result, and not merely some experimental artifact). If the temperature reached with D2 is at least 5 °C. greater than that with H2, the catalyst is clearly specifically active. And temperature differences greater than 10 °C. have been measured in pr actice. Although by no means the only suitable screening apparatus, I suggest the following apparatus and procedure which I have successfully used: I have modified a 1.7 liter WW II oxygen bottle with an inlet-outlet valve and pressure gauge fitted to the single standard pipe female outlet, a larger pipe female outlet for adding and removing solids, a thermocouple well reaching near the bottom of the vessel, and a flask heating mantle which neatly fits the bottom of the 300 series stainless gas bottle. Enough of the candidate catalyst is added so as to cover the end of the thermocouple well, and apparatus is sealed, and then a vacuum pulled with a good mechanical pump. H2 gas is added to about 2 atm. pressure, the temperature raised over about one hour to about 125 to 150 °C., and the vessel evacuated again. H2 gas is then added again, the temperature raised, and the cycle is repeated if necessary until it appears that the temperature reaches a steady state, indicating that the catalyst has been reduced (if necessary) and all water devolved. Then, the cooled vessel is filled with 2 atm. of H2, and the heating jacket is heated with a specific value of volts and amperes (in my case, about 50 V. and 1.5 A., and the temperature observed until it reaches a level which remains steady for at least a bout one hour, in the range of about 150-200 °C. The vessel is then carefully devolatilized by pumping off the H2, and cooled. Then 2 atm. of D2 gas is added, and the heating jacket heated with the same value of volts and amperes. The temperature is then carefully followed until it reaches a reasonably steady level, usually in one or 2 hours. If the observed temperature is well in excess of that reached with H2, then there is apparent reaction with D2 which does not occur with H2, and the catalyst is deemed specifically active. This procedure may seem too simple and unrefined, but it is reliable. I have sometimes switched back and forth between H2 and D2, confirming the initial result. And the test may discriminate between different lots of the same catalyst. The specifically active catalysts never reach a totally stable temperature with D2, said temperature always slowly increases over weeks of time. 3. The Instant Procedure Makes Only Mass-4 Helium Product I have made a large-scale test in an important facility well equipped and experienced to determine neutrons. When we finally reached a quiet time, with no interference, there were no neutrons above background for many minutes. Thus, the reaction D + D Æ n + helium-3 does not occur. And I have analyzed for tritium. The tritium content of a product from a weeks-long run was found to be about equivalent to that of distilled water, in fact, with no indication of tritium added in process. Thus, the reaction D + D Æ H + T does not occur t o any appreciable extent. Theory has it that this reaction should occur to an extent equal to that yielding n + helium-3, and the fact that both are zero cause no conflict with theory. After difficulty, I obtained access to a large magnetic sector mass spectrograph calibrated to carefully sort out low-mass atoms. The sample I sent was diluted with several parts of air to actual sample (during poor handling) so the resulting analysis sho wed much air. But about 100 ppm. of mass-4 helium was analytically found. The amount corrected for the leak roughly corresponded to the upper limit of helium calculated from a heat balance, based on temperature increase when replacing H2 with D2. lnsofar as the amount of helium found, about 100 ppm., is far higher than that found in air, the result seems conclusive, clearly demonstrating that mass-4 helium is produced, in important amounts, apparently being the only elemental product. So it seems. EXAMPLE 1 Into a 300-series stainless steel bottle of 1700 ml. volume, fitted with pressure gauge, thermowell reaching to near the bottom of the bottle, an inlet-outlet valve, and 3/4² plugged opening for addition and removal of solids, and heated on the lower outs ide and bottom by a hemispherical, electrically-heated heating mantle, was placed 28.0 g. of 1% Pt on activated carbon, of 62% H20 content, and being very fluffy and light weight. The vessel was then sealed, and alternatively heated to about 100 °C., and evacuated with a good mechanical vacuum pump, until the pressure in the vessel at 100 °C. was much less than 1 psia. Then the vessel was filled to 32 psia with high purity (grade 4 .7) hydrogen gas. After heating for several hours, at 60 V. on the heating mantle the vessel stabilized at 156 °C. and 18.5 psia. Then the vessel was evacuated well with the mechanical vacuum pump, and filled to 32.5 psia with grade 2.5 deuterium. The vessel was then heated again for several hours, and at 60 V. on the heating mantel, the vessel stabilized at a temperature of 166 °C. The current to the heating mantle was 1.79 A for the H2 run, and 1.78 A for the D2 run, thought to be indistinguishably different. The temperature difference for D2 over H2, at the same power input is 10 °C., corresponding to a few watts of power generati on. On maintaining the voltage at 60 V. for many days, the temperature vessel containing D2 increased another one or two °C. EXAMPLE II Example I was repeated using 21.9 g. of 1% Pd on activated carbon, of 55% H2O content, and the same procedure to remove the residual water from the catalyst. With hydrogen, the vessel stabilized at a temperature of 152 °C., and 31 psia, at 60 V. on the heating mantle. With deuterium, the vessel stabilized at 167.5 °C and 39.5 psia, at 60 V on the heating mantle. The incremental temperature difference between H2 and D2 was thus 15.5 °C. EXAMPLE III Example I was repeated, using 19.2 g. of 5% Pd on activated carbon, of 38% H2O content, and the same procedure to remove the residual water from the catalyst. With hydrogen, the vessel stabilized at a temperature of 165 °C., at 60 V. on the heating mantle. With deuterium the vessel stabilized at a temperature of 169.5 °C., at 60 V on the heating mantle. Thus, the incremental temperature differential between H2 and D2 was 4.5 °C., just on the borderline of demonstration of specific activity. There is some indication that 5% Pd loading is less effective than 1% Pd. EXAMPLE IV Example II was repeated using a very similar, but different, 1% Pd catalyst. The temperature reached with H2 and D2 was almost the same, thus showing no specific activity. CLAIMS 1. The process of producing energy which comprises contacting a fuel gas comprising D2, and a specifically active metallic hydrogenation catalyst at a temperature greater then about 130 °C. 2. The process of Claim I wherein the said fuel gas is commercial-grade D2.. 3. The process of Claim 1 wherein the said fuel gas is the D2 produced by electrolysis of reactor-grade heavy water. 4. The process of Claim I wherein the temperature is greater than 150 °C. 5. The process of Claim I wherein the metal of the said metallic catalyst is selected from the group consisting of Pd, Pt, Rh, Ru, Ir, Re, Ni, Ti, and the rare earths. 6. The process of Claim 5 wherein the said metal is selected from the group consisting of Pd, Pt, and Ru. 7. The process of Claim 5 wherein the said metal is Pd. 8. The process of Claim 5 wherein the said metal is Ni. 9. The process of Claim 5 wherein the said metallic catalyst contains a mixture of two or more metals selected from the group consisting of Pd, Pt, Rh, Ru, Ir, and Re. 10. The process of Claim 5 wherein the said metallic catalyst is on a support selected from the group consisting of activated carbon, graphite, silica, alumina, kieselguhy, zeolite, and clay. 11. The process of Claim 1 wherein the operating pressure is less than about 100 [Psia? -- This was cut off in my PCT copy. ‹EFM] 12. The process of Claim I wherein the said metallic catalyst is located in a fixed bed surrounding heat-transfer tubes, with the fuel gas being circulated through said bed. 13. The process of Claim 1 wherein the said metallic catalyst is located in a fluidized bed surrounding heat-transfer tubes, with the fuel gas being circulated through said bed. 14. The process of Claim 4 wherein helium of mass 4 is co-produced along with the energy. 15. The process of Claim 14 wherein the said fuel gas is commercial-grade D2. 16. The process of Claim 14 wherein the said fuel gas is D2 produced by electrolysis of reactor-grade heavy water. 17. The process of Claim 14 wherein the metal of the said metallic catalyst is selected from the group consisting of Pd, Pt, Rh, Ru, lr, Re, Ni, Ti, and the rare earths 18. The process of Claim 14 wherein the metal of the said metallic catalyst is selected from the group consisting of Pd, Pt, Ru, Rh, Re, and Ni. 19. The process of Claim 14 wherein the said metallic catalyst is on a support selected from the group consisting of activated carbon, graphite, silica, alumina, kieselguhr, zeolite, and clay. 20. The process of Claim 14 wherein the said metallic catalyst is located in a fluidized bed surrounding heat-transfer tubes, with the fuel gas being circulated through the said bed. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 13:01:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA17098; Sat, 2 May 1998 13:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 13:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354B762F.60D6 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 15:38:23 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mQjKt.0.3B4.3jtIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18177 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > The output of the variac will be monitored with an AC > voltmeter and ammeter. Monitoring V and I input to the high voltage > transformer rectifier assembly. This way I will be able to measure total > input power to the reactor tube and ballast. I don't have the meters yet > but expect them in Monday or Tuesday. Sounds good, Vince. I think the ballast will help a lot. If the results look interesting, Vince, I still think after a while it would be good to try well filtered DC so you could get an accurate power reading on the tube alone. I know this might mean some expense for filter capacitors, but if the results are tantalizing enough with the "ripple" supply, it might be worth the gamble that the effect would not be lost with smooth DC. Waiting to hear the latest results! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 13:05:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA17965; Sat, 2 May 1998 13:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 13:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980502141849.0095a9c0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 14:18:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Pressure and temperature In-Reply-To: <199805021109_MC2-3BB4-FEA8 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jklD73.0.bO4.CmtIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18178 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:06 AM 5/2/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >In a gas loading experiment the two critical control parameters are >pressure and temperature.... >Gene says the pressure changed from 50 to 82 psi. What did yours do? On the 1st cycle of the day, the chamber was at about 50C (due to a false start) and I filled it to 50 psi. At full operating temperature (ranging from 170-200C) the pressure rose to about 67 psi. My chamber volume is 120cc but there is also a relatively small unheated volume in the piping that connects the chamber to the gas/vacuum manifold valves. One notable difference between my setup and that of Dr. Case is as follows: According to Gene's description, Case turns off the heater AND removes the vessel from the heating nest during the refilling procedure. This allows the vessel to cool significantly. In my system, due to the insulation and the total enclosure of the water-flow calorimetry it is impossible to cool the chamber rapidly. Thus, for Run 1b, I elected to simply keep the heaters on at a steady input power during the refilling process. As a result, in all of the cycles except the first one, the chamber was filled to 50 psi at full operating temperature and the pressure remained quite constant for the duration of each cycle. I have already raised this issue with Dr. Case and I await his response. If the G75-E catalyst doesn't show excess heat under my present protocol, I will certainly consider provisions for rapid cooling of the chamber... Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 13:53:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA26937; Sat, 2 May 1998 13:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 13:46:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354B3548.2E61 interlaced.net> References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D interlaced.net> <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9@css.mot.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 13:45:26 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Resent-Message-ID: <"tRyJZ.0.na6.eOuIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18179 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank Stenger wrote, re virial theorem: >This is probably a question Mike Schaffer should answer, but.... >As far as I know, John, the virial theorem is a very fundamental >limitation on how much energy can be stored in a non-nuclear >configuration of matter and/or fields. To put it another way, I think >it means that no matter how "smart" you get with the design of an >energy-storage mechanism, you will always be limited by the force >containment strength of some material substance.... >I guess the theorem applies to anything held together by the chemical >bond (like all construction materials) and to electromagnetic fields, >(which chemical bonds are, I think!).... The virial theorem that I know deals with an arbitrary arrangement of electric current surrounded by a region of free space (vacuum) in which only electric and magnetic fields exist. Then, the virial theorem (using Maxwell's equations) arrives at a proof that the inner arrangement of currents can never confine itself. It will necessarily expand. Confinement is possible in principle if there are externally (ie. out beyond the free space region that surrounds the interior region of interest) generated currents that are somehow anchored in something solid. This theorem tells those of us doing magnetic confinement of thermonuclear plasmas that there is no possiblilty of us having overlooked a short cut that does not need either external generated magnetic fields and/or some other means of applying pressure to the plasmas we want to confine. Ball lightning, as far as I know, exists in atmospheric air. The version of the virial theorem I outlined does not rule out ball lightning so long as it can be confined by 1 bar air pressure or less. I would be interested in learning about any more general version of the virial theorem. I agree that interatomic bonds are all electric and inertial (kinetic energy) in nature, so there must be a more general form. (Here I am showing you all that I trained as an electrical engineer, not as a physicist!) 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 Sat May 2 13:55:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA28631; Sat, 2 May 1998 13:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 13:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805022051.QAA01114 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Date: Sat, 2 May 98 16:54:09 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"UlmUR1.0.E_6.HVuIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18180 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace wrote: >The only explanation I can see is that there is a liquid in the bottom >which evaporates on decompression. It could be water. Case noted water >being expelled from his first couple purges, if I recall correctly. But >his valving system was different. If you have water in your system it has >no way out but evaporation, true? This confirms the import of my parallel message to Scott. Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 13:55:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA28642; Sat, 2 May 1998 13:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 13:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805022051.QAA01120 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Pressure and temperature Date: Sat, 2 May 98 16:54:10 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"OU83N1.0.S_6.IVuIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18181 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >One notable difference between my setup and that of Dr. Case is as follows: > According to Gene's description, Case turns off the heater AND removes the >vessel from the heating nest during the refilling procedure. This allows >the vessel to cool significantly. This might be an especially important difference, because cooling might assist in steam condensate ejection. On our first cycle not only was there a visible cloud of condensed steam, but actual water droplets dripped out of the cell as it was tilted downward toward the floor. That is the advantage of being able to remove the cell from the heater nest -- apart from any physical effect caused on the catalyst itself. Another difference, which I note from the patent application just posted, is that he recommended *thin* layers of catalyst on metal surfaces. I think a deep-packed bed such as you have may be inherently not good, but of course that is just speculation based on what he says in the application. I think Dr. Case is preparing to put his entire cell in an 8-inch ID stainless steel dewar Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 16:21:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA00663; Sat, 2 May 1998 16:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 16:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 15:23:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"MyrQ2.0.CA.TcwIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18182 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Regarding the possible liquid situation, maybe a vapor trap would be of use. I haven't seen the top assembly of the Earthtech replication, but maybe a second flange or a T could be placed between the top of the chamber and the vacuum takeoff. Possibly a flexble pressure hose (for insulating purposes) could be used to route to a transparent cold trap to capture any liquids. Another option, just aimed at water, is to use a getterer. Either way, water or heavy hydrocarbon gas/liquid removal, it seems to be convenient to remove from the top of the compartment in order to avoid filters or other things which may trap liquids or cause catalyst to be lost upon liquid extraction. One thing of interest, is the fact the Earthtech experiment, for the catalyst used, does not show any signs of overuinty, either by the standard of the thermocouple reading for D2 vs H2, or by calorimeter Pin vs Pout, despite the possible presence of liquids indicated. If the presence of liquids caused the Case overuinty as a false signal then we might expect to see a false overunity with the Earthtech cell now. However, the fact that the thermocouple wells all go through the bottom of the Earthtech device may prevent a false overuinty indication from happening due to their high thermal conductivity.. If both D2 and H2 so far have provided a what in the Case device would be a high heat indication, due to water providing a thermal short, but the values for D2 and H2 are alike, then there is no indication of overunity by Case's standard. In other words, if the wells are always thermally shorted, then there can never be any difference shown between D2 and H2 if Case's overuinty is an artifact caused by thermal shorting. The hypothesized liquid which "shorts out" the thermal conductivity between the thermistor and bottom of the compartment in Case's cell, in the Earthtech cell may already provide a thermal short to all three thermisters through the conductivity of the metal well wells by shorting their bases. The water would have to be removed, and then a catalyst used which generates the heavy hydrocarbon gas/liquid from D2 but not H2, as hypothesized. It may be that the thermocouple wells must enter from the top, or at least the side to get the Case overuinty result - unless a means is used to remove the water carefully, but which will later not remove a heavy hydrocarbon gas/liquid catalysed from D2 but not H2 at the temperatures and pressures involved. This implies the need to use of a getterer or a trap with a cutoff valve. Another possibility is that it is actually D2O or DHO in the Case device that is providing a false overuinty signal. This seems to me unlikely in that the catalysts should combine H and O or D and O readily even at room temperature, thus can not meet the criteria. It is bothersome that the overuinty signal rises with time, however, because it could be due to oxygen slowly released from the catalyst and then recombined with hydrogen in the cell to form additional shorting liquid. One test for this would be to open a valve to a trap at the end of a long test and see what condenses. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 16:45:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05173; Sat, 2 May 1998 16:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 16:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354B94C3.5D55 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 16:48:51 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Ward: ideas for testing Case cell 05/02/98 Content-Type: message/news Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"-U0b81.0.lG1.otwIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18183 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Path: nntp.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!howland.erols.net!ix.netcom.com!news From: bward*remove_this* ix.netcom.com (Bill Ward) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Wharton, Heffner, Schaffer, Rothwell: more Case comments 05/01/98 Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 20:48:52 GMT Organization: Netcom Message-ID: <6ig0qc$hnv dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> References: <354B34EA.7017 earthlink.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: irv-ca28-14.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 02 3:48:12 PM CDT 1998 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 Rich Murray wrote: >Subject: Omniscient Larry Wharton > Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 20:27:54 -0700 >Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 21:50:00 -0400 > From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> > Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com >To: Vortex >A preliminary result from Scott Little using the wrong material has >produced no real excess heat, and no artifact that looks like what Gene >saw. When Scott examines results from the thermocouples in the cell, he >does not see the kinds of temperature excursions Gene saw. That is >inconclusive. If he continues to gets no real heat and no artifact, >Little must not be replicating the experiment. A replication has to show >the same results, real or artifactual. If it is a mistake, Scott has to >reproduce the mistake (and demonstrate that it is a mistake). He might >have to use a WWII steel vessel, blanket warmer, thermocouple at an >angle, etc., etc. He might have to copy every last detail before he sees >the effect/artifact. That would not be worth the effort, but it would be >the only way to solve the mystery. Since he apparently has the only working version, perhaps a complementary approach would be for Case to stepwise refine his calorimetry, taking careful data at each stage before proceeding to the next: 1. Duplicate the existing apparatus exactly. DON'T MODIFY THE WORKING DEVICE!! Test the new apparatus. 2. Add more thermocouples to read wall temperatures in several places in and on the existing O2 bottle. Test. 3. Add sufficient insulating blanket around the bottle to maintain the operating temp with say 10 watts of heater power. Test. 4. Add sufficient insulation to require heater power only for initial heating (less than the apparent produced power) and provide an instrumented cooling loop. At that point the unit would be a stand-alone source of heat. Test and celebrate if appropriate. 5. Reduce the size of the chamber for practical demo version. Test and retire. At the end, he will either have a working device, or he will know where and possibly why it fails. Either way, the experiment would be successful. I'm a hopeful skeptic, curious as to the thought process that led him to his current procedure. Regards, Bill Ward >- Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 17:28:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA13905; Sat, 2 May 1998 17:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 17:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354BB86C.A05 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 17:21:00 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D interlaced.net> <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9@css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hnlWV.0.8P3.vcxIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18184 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > I would be interested in learning about any more general version of the > virial theorem. I agree that interatomic bonds are all electric and > inertial (kinetic energy) in nature, so there must be a more general form. I second that---if you have a reference to a more general form, let us know. Sounds interesting. The standard virial them is indeed posed for charged particles in EM fields. However, I think its dangerous to think that the virial thereom rules out self-confining systems. Of course it does, technically, but all that really matters is that something be confined "long enough", and it doesn't necessarily rule out the ability to be "sufficiently self confining". -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 17:31:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14363; Sat, 2 May 1998 17:29:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 17:29:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:23:05 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Pressure and temperature Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805022025_MC2-3BAE-4FC8 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"kWzC7.0.LW3.KfxIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18185 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: At full operating temperature (ranging from 170-200C) the pressure rose to about 67 psi. 67 psi sounds a little low. One notable difference between my setup and that of Dr. Case is as follows: According to Gene's description, Case turns off the heater AND removes the vessel from the heating nest during the refilling procedure. This allows the vessel to cool significantly. In my system, due to the insulation and the total enclosure of the water-flow calorimetry it is impossible to cool the chamber rapidly. That's bad. It could be significant. In the gas loading experiments I have read about, temperature and pressure are cycled sharply and repeatedly. People say this "softens up" the metal to increase loading. Maybe you could run cold water through the cooling loop? Maybe ice water? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 17:34:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14547; Sat, 2 May 1998 17:29:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 17:29:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:22:50 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Comment by Lynn Kurtz Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805022025_MC2-3BAE-4FC7 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"oDGVw1.0.9Z3.ofxIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18186 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Lynn Kurtz >INTERNET:kurtz imap2.asu.edu Lynn Kurtz says that when skeptics fail to replicate CF experiments, I make excuses. First, I am not aware of any "skeptics" who attempted to replicate CF experiments after 1989. Second, anyone who has read the literature will see that the reasons I give (and she cites) are legitimate and they are often cited in other areas of science when people have difficulty replicating experiments. She lists: 1. . . . The experiment is so very difficult and must be followed so precisely, and you just aren't replicating the experiment exactly enough. If you would have done it right it would have worked. Surely we have heard this countless times in other fields of science and technology! Incorrect replication is a major cause of controversy. Any working scientist knows of countless examples. They are as common as incompatible computer software or "plug and play" hardware that doesn't (doesn't play, that is). When you read major CF papers by people like McKubre, you realize it is amazing that anyone manages to do the experiments, even the experts. The skills, patience and time required to do CF are no less demanding than the skills need to build Tokamak reactors, robot explorers on Mars and other cutting-edge science. 2. You are not an expert in the field, so of course you can't replicate it. Why are you even bothering to attempt to replicate this complicated experiment in your puny little lab? The CF experiments at Osaka University require a $75 million dollar accelerator. The U. Illinois thin film cathodes are produced on a unique experimental sputtering machine. Mitsubishi's experiment is performed in a clean room with millions of dollars of custom built equipment. SRI's calorimeter alone must cost hundreds of thousands. Mizuno has two spectrometers, SIMS, SEM. He spent eight months testing and modifying a cell that was fabricated for him by an outside company. He has spent tens of thousands of dollars out of his own pocket in addition to University funds and the pre-existing equipment. To verify the transmutations, the university sends his samples in blind tests to four leading industrial research labs, which have an array of spectrometers with higher resolution than the university. Case has received hundreds of samples of catalytic material which, as we have seen here, costs $300 each. Fortunately the chemical companies contributed the material for free because Case is an expert chemical engineer with a track record and credibility. Pope spent hundreds of thousands. General Electric donated 50+ electric motors to his effort, and major labs tested his device in labs for weeks. (In every test they measured massive excess heat, from 150 to 600%.) In a proposed experiment I am participating in, the first step will be to acquire and process a $20,000 Johnson Matthey palladium ingot. The on-line Los Alamos tritium paper shows the schematic of a highly sophisticated, one-of-a-kind experimental apparatus that has gone through repeated major redesigns and improvements. Does Kurtz think that ordinary middle class scientists working at home can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for equipment? Does she think progress in this field can be made without SIMS machines, sputtering machines to make custom cathodes, gamma ray detectors, microgram scales, etc. etc.? She could not have read the literature if she imagines this is the case. The only two scientists I know who work in their homes are Cravens and Storms. They have thousands of dollars worth of sophisticated equipment from corporate sponsors. There are no effective "puny little labs" in cold fusion, and there never have been. Non-experts who are not equipped to do serious electrochemistry or engineering have never contributed significantly to the field. The mistakes they have made and the confusion they have sowed are illustrated in the work of Tom Droege. Two examples: 1. Droege invented a Seebeck style calorimeter using a Peltier device. It turns out this is an inappropriate and unworkable choice of materials, according to serious scientists who have attempted to build similar calorimeters at the University of Texas. It isn't Droege's fault that he guessed wrong about materials. My point is that it took the U. Texas people a great deal of serious, full-time research testing various materials to make this evaluation. It takes an expert to design, build and evaluate a milliwatt level calorimeter. 2. Droege attempted to electrochemistry in his basement. Electrochemical cell preparation requires specialized techniques to ensure extremely high purity and low contamination, because cathodes act as "getters" concentrating contamination in the electrolyte and leaching more contamination out of the anode. That is why, for example, Mitsubishi makes a thorough inventory of elements in all cell components before claiming transmutation. Ultrapure water and other chemicals are produced using electrochemical techniques, with a "getter" cathode. Bockris says that in the old days when people smoked in laboratories, a person would exhale a cloud of smoke at one end of the lab and the contamination would instantly show up in an electrochemical experiment at the other end. Old fashioned vacuum tube radar equipment, modern IC chips and many other areas also require fanatical standards of cleanliness. Contamination at ppm levels is known to prevent the CF effect in some cases. Mizuno spent several weeks purifying one cathode, one anode, and 200 ml of electrolyte. Droege does not appreciate the need for purity. He prepared and ran a series of cells and shipped them to a collaborator at another location for analysis. His collaborator told me that the cells contained cat hairs, dirt, and dead insect galvanized onto the cathodes. A photograph of Droege's workspace shows why. Do you think you could replicate a Pentium in your lab? Just because you can't, does that mean Pentiums are impossible? etc, etc. Well, Lynn . . . *could* you replicate a Pentium?!? Could you replicate Claytor's experiment, or Mizuno's proton conductors? It took him more than a year to learn how to make them, and even now few of them work. Could you make an industry-spec 0.4% Pd activated carbon hydrogenation catalyst from scratch? Are you willing to put aside 5 years to test a few hundred samples of catalyst the way Case did, or ~100 palladium cathodes the way Storms has done? Cold fusion is done with small objects. Cathode are small foils or rods of nondescript looking metal. You cannot tell by looking at these objects they require enormous skill to fabricate, test, and evaluate in post-experiment research. Thousand of people have devoted their careers to understanding conventional electrochemical and catalysis problems with equally humble looking, nondescript materials, like the catalytic converter in your car. Small devices take as much genius and hard work to perfect as large devices. Anyone who thinks that cold fusion ought to be "easy" should read Bockris's textbooks on electrochemistry, or the textbook on calorimetry which I have been trying to buy for years which Scott Little said he copy for me. (YO! Scott. Remember that?) 3. The effect is obviously real, but you will never be able to replicate it because the principals are keeping vital details SECRET because they are protecting their future commercial rights.... Anyone can see that the NHE, CETI, Toshiba, Canon Blacklight, and many other corporations active in this field *are* keeping secrets! It is common knowledge. If you don't believe me, call them up and ask for copies of their most recent research papers. When Scott Little tried to replicate CETI, they threatened to sue him. When he tried to replicate Blacklight they refused to lift a finger to assist him. If this is not "keeping vital details SECRET" I do not know what is. (I like this one because of its ironic twist. It is a reversal of the old conspiracy claim that the "establishment" is suppressing cf publication and funding to protect their hot fusion "gravy train". Here, we have the inventors themselves holding up progress.) I have not blamed the establishment. I have consistently written here and in I.E. that the CF scientists themselves are to blame for most of their troubles. Nobody knows the situation better than I do. I have gone on record consistently, repeatedly and bluntly, although it makes my work difficult because so many CF scientists are upset with me. I don't want to get carried away here, but just for the heck of it I will offer a $10 bet to the first taker to accept it here on vortex: . . . I bet $10 that nobody will present a self running demo of the Case experiment by September 1, 1998. . . . For me it would be a great bet. I would like to win it and I would also like to lose it. Any takers? I never make bets or wagers. It seems to me this particular kind of bet, the likes of which I have often heard from skeptics, is a form of taunting, as if to say "if you were serious about your beliefs you would put your money where your mouth is." Since Gene is actually doing the experiment and I have contributed a great deal of money towards it, I think we have already demonstrated our sincerity. We do not need to accept $10 bets; we have already staked nearly 10 years of our lives. (We are emotionally committed, but so are hot fusion scientists, oil company scientists, biomedical researchers, and everyone else who does serious work.) We have reported our failures in detail, with scrupulous honesty. Kurtz will learn the outcome of these next experiments from us, and I trust she will believe it even if we report success. We have credibility. We do not need to prove to anyone that we are serious and we will tell the truth. Kurtz, on the other hand, does not appear to have studied the CF literature carefully, so I do not think she is in a position to contribute to the discussion. If she believes that CF experiments are easy to replicate and the devices are not sophisticated, she has no idea what actually goes on during a CF experiment, and why, for example, five scientists at Mitsubishi performed only six experiment runs in the last two years. CF experiments go at a snail's pace, like hot fusion. Every experimental run generates a mountain of work. Instead of offering bets I think it would be more helpful and constructive if Kurtz would demonstrate commitment to her point of view by reading the literature and offering serious critiques and concrete examples to illustrate her points. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 17:42:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA16710; Sat, 2 May 1998 17:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 17:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354BBBA9.39CA math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 17:34:49 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Omniscient Larry Wharton References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"CVvYN1.0.z44.tpxIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18187 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > Larry Wharton deigns to inform us: > > The success of this test will indeed prove cf to be real. > The certain failure of the test, on the other hand... While I don't go so far as to assert that the device "must" fail, I will certainly be doubly amazed if Cases device really works. The reason is that it is so obvious, many others should have tried this route. The first thing I did the day after the original P&F 1989 press conference was go read up on Palladium, and the first thing I learned was there were all kinds of commercial Pd catalysts and carriers (stuff like hydrostore, if I recall) that were optimized to absorb H and to catalyze H related reactioins, and these were obviously good candidates for inducing cold fusion effects, assuming the effect existed at all. Thus, it seems odd that it took til this late date for someone to properly pursue this route, when it is such an obvious direction to go in from the P&F work. Much more likely that this route is a dead end, and Case simply optimized for some systematic error. Now, before Jed jumps on me, let me say of coure the above carries no rigorous weight---its just the basis for a guess, assuming the scientific analog of market efficiency (i.e. the scienific world does a good job of exploiting obvious possibilities, and therefore only the non-obvious twists need be considered). By all means the tests will tell the tale, but, for example, I thought CETI had a much more promising angle of attack as far a novelty of approaches goes---f course, look where that led, so who knows :-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 17:51:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA01606; Sat, 2 May 1998 17:50:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 17:50:15 -0700 Message-ID: <354BBF14.78F6 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 20:49:24 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted References: <199805022051.QAA01114 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yNXlv3.0.xO.6zxIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18188 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > > Horace wrote: > > >The only explanation I can see is that there is a liquid in the bottom > >which evaporates on decompression. It could be water. Case noted water > >being expelled from his first couple purges, if I recall correctly. But > >his valving system was different. If you have water in your system it has > >no way out but evaporation, true? > > This confirms the import of my parallel message to Scott. > > Best, Gene Mallove Gene and Horace, if you have water in a material bed in a tank at 150 deg C, when you vent to atmosphere, the free volume (ignoring any adsorbed water) in the tank will contain about 0.525 gram of superheated water vapor per liter of volume. Now, if you want to get rid of this water you should: 1. Pump it out with a vacuum pump or, 2. Purge it out with multiple fills and dumps of fresh gas. The last thing you would want to do is cool the tank to condense the water to liquid so that you also now have to fight surface tension forces to remove the water (i.e., pouring water out of a sponge!). If Case wants liquid water in the catalyst, then fine - forget what I said. If not, then I can't see why it's so critical that Scott cools the reactor after each dump. I thought Case said this was a "robust" effect! Of course, I wouldn't want to get in the way of a long list of preemptive strikes on any negative results Scott might come up with in these tests. But, gee, is such a list so important right now - before Scott even runs the correct catalyst? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 18:04:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA06531; Sat, 2 May 1998 18:03:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 18:03:08 -0700 Message-ID: <354BB63D.7D92 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 20:11:41 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D interlaced.net> <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9@css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aB7qA2.0.pb1.A9yIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18189 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > Frank Stenger wrote, re virial theorem: (snip my attempt) > This theorem tells those of us doing magnetic confinement of thermonuclear > plasmas that there is no possiblilty of us having overlooked a short cut > that does not need either external generated magnetic fields and/or some > other means of applying pressure to the plasmas we want to confine. > > Ball lightning, as far as I know, exists in atmospheric air. The version of > the virial theorem I outlined does not rule out ball lightning so long as > it can be confined by 1 bar air pressure or less. Yes, Michael, I think that's the case. However, I recall seeing the idea of atmospheric confinement rejected because it can't explain the energy content believed to be characteristic of many ball lightning effects. I think there would also be stability problems unless the "thing" happened to be able to exert uniform pressure on the inside of the bubble. Then, there is the observed penetration of glass windows such as Jack Smith described - hard to see a "bubble" doing this. I think highly ionized balls of plasma have also been ruled out because of an energy deficiency. As to a more general form of the virial theorem, Mike, my old force-free coil reference by Bahr refers to a paper that may well be "the" initial paper on this theorem - by S. Chandrasekhar and E. Fermi in "Astrophys. J., 118, (1953). Maybe these to unknowns had some smart words to say on the subject. :-) I think Chandrasekhar was interested in astrophysical plasma current stabilities and Fermi probably needed something to do after Chicago. My only familiarity with it (if you can call it that!) was with the electromagnetic version also. What's interesting is where its generality stops - obviously, an electron doesn't blow up without help from the outside. So, just what does the virial theorem mean down on the QM level? Now, tell the truth, Mike, wouldn't you fusion guys go nuts if you had a plasma ball a meter in diameter containing megajoules of energy and a stability that kept it around for several minutes - even without energy addition - all at atmospheric pressure? :-) Frank Stenger........ Again, questions and no answers! > > I would be interested in learning about any more general version of the > virial theorem. I agree that interatomic bonds are all electric and > inertial (kinetic energy) in nature, so there must be a more general form. > (Here I am showing you all that I trained as an electrical engineer, not as > a physicist!) > > 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 Sat May 2 19:02:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA01798; Sat, 2 May 1998 18:58:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 18:58:20 -0700 Message-ID: <354BC7F1.5A1E skylink.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 18:27:13 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Omniscience References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1hwam2.0.lR.wyyIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18190 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hey. I'm the only omniscient one around here, and don't anyone ever forget it. How much money was it that Joe deposited into his forbidden bank account, which he was busted for violating his parole? Did he ever really sell any of his fools gold? It's not like no one ever tried to warn him that serious trouble was bound to come. Does anyone have the courage to follow up this story? Not me, that's for sure. I have enough problems already just trying to maintain my own omniscience. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 19:20:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00198; Sat, 2 May 1998 19:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354BD39A.1331 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 19:16:58 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Omniscience References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA@math.ucla.edu> <354BC7F1.5A1E@skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JDEks1.0.-2.9GzIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18191 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > > How much money was it that Joe deposited into his forbidden > bank account, which he was busted for violating his parole? Did > he ever really sell any of his fools gold? It's not like no one ever > tried to warn him that serious trouble was bound to come. Does anyone > have the courage to follow up this story? I plan to get all the details straight for my final report on my investigations, but I'm not rushing that out the door...I'd like to wrap things up---or discover the philosopher's stone---by the end of summer :-). I have no direct knowledge of Joe's finances, nor did I ever care to, since I was there to investigate the processes, not the man...but I can say that based on casual observation, an Alchemist earns 2--3 times what a college professor does :-) ** ** But not by selling gold! -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 19:30:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA01103; Sat, 2 May 1998 19:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 22:23:15 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Omniscient Larry Wharton Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805022225_MC2-3BBF-2848 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"WGs-J1.0.0H.oOzIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18192 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman writes: While I don't go so far as to assert that the device "must" fail, I will certainly be doubly amazed if Cases device really works. The reason is that it is so obvious, many others should have tried this route. Perhaps others *should* have tried this route, but they didn't. I have read every major CF conference proceedings and most issues of Hal Fox's bulletins, and I have never seen tests of commercial catalyst materials. Certainly I know of no systematic screening tests of many types, such as Case has done. Most people try to test pure palladium -- as pure as they can get. They select pure Pd to isolate the physics of the reaction and to avoid impurities which might poison the reaction. The first thing I did the day after the original P&F 1989 press conference was go read up on Palladium, and the first thing I learned was there were all kinds of commercial Pd catalysts and carriers (stuff like hydrostore, if I recall) that were optimized to absorb H and to catalyze H related reactions, and these were obviously good candidates for inducing cold fusion effects, assuming the effect existed at all. Thus, it seems odd that it took til this late date for someone to properly pursue this route, when it is such an obvious direction to go in from the P&F work. Much more likely that this route is a dead end, and Case simply optimized for some systematic error. This hypothesis makes no sense. It goes: 1. Catalysts are good candidates. 2. Therefore it would be a good idea to test them. 3. Therefore they must have been tested. (This is illogical. Many good ideas are not tested.) 4. They must have failed too, or we would have heard about the success. (Experience in the real world shows that many successes and failures are never made public.) 5. Therefore Case made a mistake. (Complete illogical nonsequitor.) The assertion "Much more likely this route is a dead end" can only be proved by showing that many actual tests of the route were made competent people. You must cite specific examples in the literature. You cannot make a chain of assumptions, conjure up imaginary people who had a good idea and followed through on it, and then make these imaginary people the basis of an assertion about the real world. To the best of my knowledge the people do not exist. For that matter, if you can conjure up people who tested and found nothing, I can conjure up another group of 500 Japanese scientists who are frantically working in a hollowed out mountain for the nefarious Dr. No, who plans to launch a fleet of palladium catalyst megawatt reactor powered rocket ships to take over the world next week. *My* imaginary people tested this approach and found it works splendidly, *your* imaginary people blew it. So there! I might add that you, Barry Merriman, have had perfectly good calorimetric equipment lying around for a couple of years, that could easily be adapted to this task, and you have devoted considerable time to testing other CF approaches. If you had this idea in March 1989, and it has been obvious to you ever since, why didn't *you* test it? You are a case in point -- by your actions you proved that scientists do not always follow up on good ideas. Since you did not test this, what makes you think other people must have tested it? You know that in the whole world only a few hundred people are working on CF -- you met a significant fraction of them in Texas. You know they are all swamped with work. The assertion "Case simply optimized for some systematic error" can only be proved by listing specific systematic errors that Case made. "Some" systematic error does not exist. Unlisted, invisible, undetected, secret or imaginary errors do not count. Now, before Jed jumps on me . . . Sigh . . . Barry, you are lucky Chris Tinsley is not here to scold you. The ancient Greeks who invented logic, which led to science, must be spinning in their graves. . . . of course the above carries no rigorous weight--- No rigor, no logic, no referents in the real world (that is, actual people who tested catalysts.) . . . its just the basis for a guess, assuming the scientific analog of market efficiency (i.e. the scientific world does a good job of exploiting obvious possibilities, and therefore only the non-obvious twists need be considered). Perhaps in theory the scientific world often does a good job, but unless you can point to proof *that in this particular instance* it has actually done a good job of exploiting *this particular option*, your statement is irrelevant. Market efficiency does not work when nobody has thought to market a product. The technology to produce cheap personal computers existed for 5 or 10 years before anyone thought to sell them. IBM and H.P. built prototypes and put them on the back burner, because they thought they could only sell ~50,000 units over the life of the product. (I saw the IBM prototype in 1976.) The inventor Hiram Maxim wrote that the automobile could have been invented 20 years before it was, but he and the other high tech leaders never imagined there would be a significant market for it. They thought railroad and trolley cars covered the transportation market, leaving no niche. When bicycles took off, they realized that a market for a personal transportation device to replace the horse might be viable, if roads could be improved. By all means the tests will tell the tale, but, for example, I thought CETI had a much more promising angle of attack as far a novelty of approaches goes of course, look where that led, so who knows :-) We do not know where that led to. CETI reportedly continues to make good technical progress. They have not told me the details because I do not want to hear them. I will not sign a non-disclosure agreement. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 19:30:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA01249; Sat, 2 May 1998 19:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:29:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000601bd763a$67a21c60$1a8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Self-Cleaning Wet Fission Reactor? Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:21:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"qoB_72.0.QJ.jPzIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18193 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The dancing, around the use of wet chemistry to "clean" nuclear wastes poses the question of how the radiowaste products from a 1950's "wet" fission reactor, compare to the radiowastes from fuel-rods delivering the same amount of thermal energy over the same time span. The HRE-1 (Homogeneous Reactor Experiment No.1) operated from 1952 to 1954, used Enriched (>90%) Uranyl Sulfate,in concentration of 35 g/Kg H2O. The solution was pressurized to 1,000 psi,with a maximum fuel-solution temperature of 482 deg F. Apparently D2O was never used. The point is,the Cherenkov radiation ranging from the EUV to x-ray along with all of the other energetic beta's, gamma's, neutrinos, and fission fragments in the presence of the hydrogen in the water could be creating Quasi-Neutrons (or with D2O Quasi-DiNeutrons) and acting somewhat as a Radwaste "self-cleaning" system. Lithium Hydride or Deuteride, or other hydrogenous materials in place of water for higher temperatures? DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME! :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 19:29:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07803; Sat, 2 May 1998 19:27:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:27:59 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Omniscient Larry Wharton Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:25:35 +0000 Message-ID: <19980502192533.AAA3073 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"HbDSc.0.hv1.kOzIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18194 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:10 AM 5/2/98 -0700, you wrote: >At 09:50 PM 5/1/98 -0400, you wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>Larry Wharton deigns to inform us: >> >> The success of this test will indeed prove cf to be real. The certain >> failure of the test, on the other hand, will do nothing to disprove the >> issue to the believers. I can imagine in a week or two Jed giving the >> explanation as to why the self sustaining test did not work. >> >>Based on my previous behavior it seems more likely I would have no >>explanation, and I would offer none. Lynn Kurtz wrote: > >Why not? Surely you could use some of these along the lines you have used >before when "skeptics" were unable to replicate various cf experiments? > >1. (My favorite.) The experiment is so very difficult and must be followed >so precisely, and you just aren't replicating the experiment exactly >enough. If you would have done it right it would have worked. In defense of the venture to keep forging ahead in the face of a rather dismal track record for consistently proven claims, I wish to point out something we encounter in working with other people. When someone has been working on any class of systems for a long period, they will develop an expertise, complete with special vocabulary and set of concepts that serves to clarify (to them) and obscure (to those not directly involved). The phenomena of EV's technology that Ken Shoulders has patented, for instance, really amazes me, but when I read about it, a barrier to real understanding forms because I am not sure how he arrives at the observations and measurements he makes, so I am not sure exactly what they mean. I feel reasonably confident that if I were to attempt replication without lots of direct consultation that my efforts would be futile, simply because things that are obvious to Ken Shoulders are obscure to me, though I may think I understand. I am not a scientist, but I do electronics troubleshooting. Like most people, I get tripped up by my assumptions and preconceptions that I do not see as such, but as knowledge. So, it is very good that people like Dr. Case are willing to help. If he is wrong, perhaps he will have an opportunity to learn that. But we are not as likely to gain such assistance from future others if we do not respect the man. One is not likely to find positive results where one does not believe that they can be found. Attitude is important. I venture to say that it is counterproductive to wager even trivial sums on failure. It is a bit like life insurance, betting you will die soon, but life insurance is not for the dead gambler. Vortex is a lot like public-domain software development. There was a report on NPR yesterday about the decision made a few weeks ago by the developer of Netscape to release the source code for public consumption. Already, bugs have been fixed that the original programmers did not find, even though the source code is enormous and the hackers aren't getting a dime for their efforts. Their motivation is simple: this is better than school because it is real, so any skills developed working on it do not need to be transferred to the workplace. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 20:01:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA11130; Sat, 2 May 1998 19:59:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:59:27 -0700 Message-ID: <354BDBC4.BE0 skylink.net> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 19:51:48 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Omniscience References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA@math.ucla.edu> <354BC7F1.5A1E@skylink.net> <354BD39A.1331@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lHoFT1.0.qj2.EszIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18195 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > I plan to get all the details straight for my final report on > my investigations, but I'm not rushing that out the door...I'd > like to wrap things up---or discover the philosopher's stone---by > the end of summer :-). When the eruption of Mount St Helens was imminent, the US Park Service passed out flyers to local residents about what to do if the volcano erupts. It had fifteen or twenty good tips like... put a rag soaked in vinegar over your mouth and try not to breathe noxious fumes. At the end of the flyer in all caps it said, IN CASE OF ERUPTION MOVE AWAY FROM THE VOLCANO NOT TOWARDS IT. Common sense. Most people have a good bit of it. But, quite a few people seem to have none at all. Got to run now. Just got some email which I must follow up on. It seems I've won a lot of money. No need for any philosopher's stone. Get rich quick and easy, that's the ticket to a good life. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 20:06:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA11735; Sat, 2 May 1998 20:03:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:03:12 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354BDE75.6708 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 20:03:17 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Omniscient Larry Wharton References: <199805022225_MC2-3BBF-2848 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aZ5EY2.0.Gt2.lvzIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18196 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > Perhaps others *should* have tried this route, but they didn't. > I might add that you, Barry Merriman, have had perfectly > good calorimetric equipment lying around for a couple of years, > that could easily be adapted to > this task, and you have devoted considerable time to testing other CF > approaches. If you had this idea in March 1989, > and it has been obvious to you > ever since, why didn't *you* test it? If I had had a little more time and money in 1989, right when the P&F idea came out, I undoubtedly would have tested it. Now, I have greater access to time and money, but, I can't get enthused about unilaterally embarking on any CF research program, no matter how "natural", because I have serious doubts about the reality of the effect. As a compromise, I've resigned myself to investigating other peoples claims of rather large effects, in my spare time, with the primary goal of figuring out whats going on, whatever that might be (i.e. something of an applied physics intellectual challenge, versus a true search for a working CF reactor, which is what you and Gene are after....in other words, I'm happy if I can figure out whatever is going on, whereas you will only be happy if a particular thing is going on, i.e. CF.). As such, the Case device is right up my alley of interest, but I'm happy to observe you and Gene's investigation at this point. If you think you find something, then I'd like to replicate it. Same with the Pope device. More power to you, and if you think it works I'd love to check it out. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 20:12:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA05265; Sat, 2 May 1998 20:08:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:08:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001601bd7640$02373940$1a8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:59:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"K3bV73.0.BI1.5_zIr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18197 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 02, 1998 7:03 PM Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Frank Stenger wrote: Snip a lot of goodies. > However, I recall seeing the >idea of atmospheric confinement rejected because it can't explain the >energy content believed to be characteristic of many ball lightning >effects. I think there would also be stability problems unless the >"thing" happened to be able to exert uniform pressure on the inside of >the bubble. Then, there is the observed penetration of glass windows >such as Jack Smith described - hard to see a "bubble" doing this. No,but if you have millimeter-centimeter microwaves, (probably circularly polarized) penetrating the glass, the ball of ionized air quits on one side and re-establishes on the other until the thing "peters out" or hits something that dumps it. Like the wiring in a thermostat. I think the plasma physics types call these phenomena, "instabilities". :-) >I think highly ionized balls of plasma have also been ruled out because >of an energy deficiency. Probably. How many millijoules does it take to excite atomic-molecular spectra in the visible range of 1.75 ev to 3.5 ev with microwaves? Almost there with the electrodeless discharge of a gas tube near powerful transmitters,ie., fluorescent light bulbs. > >Now, tell the truth, Mike, wouldn't you fusion guys go nuts if you had >a plasma ball a meter in diameter containing megajoules of energy and >a stability that kept it around for several minutes - even without >energy addition - all at atmospheric pressure? :-) Shades of Robert Golka, "The Wizard of Wendover", Frank. Robert got all frustrated with the DOE turning down his ideas along these lines and started a media blitz in the late 1970's. He ended up as my house guest for several days as he beat the bushes at Los Alamos and Sandia Labs trying to drum up support. The films he had of his experiments at the hangar at Wendover, Utah that was used to outfit the Enola Gay etc., showed a few "Lightning Balls" made out of from hundreds of Megajoules of energy input from a 250 KW truck-mounted gen-set. Last I heard, Robert was running these experiments a navy submarine near Connecticut. He had replicated Tesla's "coil" setup in the hangar ($1.00/year rent from the Air Force).He had a piano up on a platform that he "played while he was thinking". While he was here, our Wurlitzer was busy most of the time. :-) Do YOU have a piano, Frank? Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger........ Again, questions and no answers! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 20:30:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA06887; Sat, 2 May 1998 20:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 20:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354BE3EE.2EB6 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 20:26:38 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Omniscient Larry Wharton References: <199805022225_MC2-3BBF-2848 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"G3tL-.0.Th1.WH-Ir" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18198 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > This hypothesis makes no sense. It goes: > > 1. Catalysts are good candidates. > 2. Therefore it would be a good idea to test them. > 3. Therefore they must have been tested. > 4. They must have failed too, > or we would have heard about the success. > 5. Therefore Case made a mistake. > > Sigh . . . Barry, you are lucky Chris Tinsley is not > here to scold you. The ancient Greeks who invented logic, > which led to science, must be spinning in their graves. I hate to speak ill of the dead, but I have heard that once upon a time Chris Tinsley became fairly convinced that a certain magnetic motor was O/U, until the errors of his evaluation procedures were corrected by a certain third party who tend to share my ersatz logic. Perhaps if Chris had taken a few logic lessons from me instead of the ancient greeks, he would have had the proper perspective to deduce his own mistakes before they had to be pointed out to him. ---- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 21:58:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA12466; Sat, 2 May 1998 21:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 21:57:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980502234630.00954cb0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 23:46:30 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gWefs.0.i23.Ra_Ir" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18199 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:53 AM 5/2/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >The only explanation I can see is that there is a liquid in the bottom >which evaporates on decompression. It could be water. Water's not a liquid at 190C and 50psi. I think we're looking at an ordinary heat xfer effect. Removing the hydrogen essentially uncouples the temp probes from the heaters...the catalyst is rather insulating, thermally. The bottom probe is the shortest and would thus cool the fastest and mostest due to stem conduction (assuming the bottom bulkhead is relatively cool). The top probe runs so much cooler than the others that I still think its positive excursion is due to the hot gas moving past it as the chamber is vented. You mentioned the cooling effect of gas expansion. Here I go treading where I don't belong (in thermodynamics) but I believe that a gas undergoing "free expansion"...i.e. in which the gas does not do work as it expands...does not cool off significantly. At 16:54:10 -0400 Gene wrote (regarding my inability to cool the chamber during refilling): >This might be an especially important difference, because cooling might >assist in steam condensate ejection. I believe cooling could only retard the ejection of water. The best way to dry the chamber is to heat it as hot as possible under vacuum. Still, cooling could be important for other reasons presently unknown. >I think Dr. Case is preparing to put his entire cell in an 8-inch ID >stainless steel dewar. Hmmmm....my quick and dirty calculations show that only the finest silvered Dewar of that size will have a chance of sustaining 180C inside with only a 7 watt input power (what Gene estimated from the Thursday demo). I used the surface area of a 8in dia x 10in long cylinder in the Stefan-Boltzman radiation law. I set Th to 180C (453K) and Tc to 27C (300K). Only if the emissivity is 0.016 (polished silver is .02) does the radiated power get down to 7 watts. With an emissivity of 0.1, it would take 44 watts to maintain 180C inside the Dewar. Does anybody know what emissivity is typically achieved in the all-stainless Dewars? Frank S wrote: >Of course, I wouldn't want to get in the way of a long list >of preemptive strikes on any negative results Scott might come up with >in these tests. But, gee, is such a list so important right now - >before Scott even runs the correct catalyst? Thanks, Frank. My favorite hypothesis is that Dr. Case's effect occurs simply when the correct catalyst is combined with D2 gas at the correct temperature and pressure. Next week I will test that hypothesis. If THAT doesn't work, THEN we can start flailing around in parameter space. Thanks for all the suggestions and comments. This is fun. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 22:41:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA28343; Sat, 2 May 1998 22:33:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 22:33:35 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001001bd7654$754f3ea0$368cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Helium Accumulation In Activated Charcoal? Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 23:29:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Nmsrk3.0.lw6.j60Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18200 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex If air is used to create the 12 to 200 angstrom molecular sieve-like pores with a surface area of 500 to 1500 meter^2/gram in the coconut shells used to make the activated carbon, there could be many smaller pores that could trap helium from the atmosphere. Actually to belabor the point, any biomass during growth could be trapping helium in the cells or particularly with the woody ligno-cellulisic materials used for making Activated Carbon this would show up in a "post-mortem" analysis or release the helium with bond-shuffling under heat and pressure with deuterium or hydrogen. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 22:42:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA30294; Sat, 2 May 1998 22:40:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 22:40:30 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980503013617.0161825c world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 01:36:17 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Case expt, flow calorimetry, ICCF7 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"OOZxE.0.GP7.ED0Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18201 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vorts: Have been busy wrapping up, and getting out papers, but would make the following comments. On the Case expts. - Having one reaction does NOT mutually exclude a second. Careful experiments should separate and quantify both (or more). BTW we keep some of these materials under water because of their reactivity which can include decomposition reactions of the substrata. On flow calorimetry - Still only believe any purported calorimetric system to the degree that it can generate an accurate thermal waveform reconstruction. And IMO the vertical flow modification of these systems ise just asking for further avoidable difficulties. Good luck on the expts. On the meeting - In the next issue of the Cold Fusion Times (issue 6-3) http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html we are preparing what we liked best in ICCF7. It is amazing what parallax views exist. Therefore, if anyone here has alternate, supplementary, or other comments about the meeting, papers from the meeting, or a pic, they want to share, please share it either here, or by email to me at mica world.std.com With pics, it probably better be by priv. email because of the bandwidth issues. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 22:46:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA16811; Sat, 2 May 1998 22:44:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 22:44:21 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <4fef2422.354c0394 aol.com> Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 01:41:39 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"I47IC3.0.V64.oG0Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18203 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-02 16:01:25 EDT, you write: > Vince, I still think after a while it would be good to try well filtered DC so > you could get an accurate power reading on the tube alone. I know this > might mean some expense for filter capacitors, but if the results are > tantalizing enough with the "ripple" supply, it might be worth the gamble > that the effect would not be lost with smooth DC. > Frank Stenger Agreed Frank, and thanks for the idea of using lamps as ballast. I neglected to mention in my last post that when I tried the breadboard test the tube WAS putting out some really serious UV. I have done a lot of arc welding so I know what I saw for less than 5 seconds was deadly dangerious. I will pick up some UV shielding at the local welders supply. I will wire the 6 lamps in series with some fuses to bypass if adjustment is needed. I have no idea what wattage lamps to use, I want minium current in the tube at first to avoid a meltdown. Any ideas on this? This power supply is capable of AMPS, and the little 1/4 inch id tube just wont take big time power. My old high frequency power supply was putting out less than 5 milliamps. I could hold onto the HV lead at full power and barely a tingle, and according to the IBM electrical safety course which I have to take every year, thats about 5 ma. (I knew that course would come in handy someday) Thanks to all for all the help. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 2 22:51:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA16782; Sat, 2 May 1998 22:44:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 22:44:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 21:49:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"ugbaO.0.564.jG0Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18202 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:49 PM 5/2/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Gene and Horace, if you have water in a material bed in a tank at 150 >deg C, when you vent to atmosphere, the free volume (ignoring any >adsorbed water) in the tank will contain about 0.525 gram of superheated >water vapor per liter of volume. Now, if you want to get rid of this >water you should: > 1. Pump it out with a vacuum pump or, > 2. Purge it out with multiple fills and dumps of fresh gas. >The last thing you would want to do is cool the tank to condense the >water to liquid so that you also now have to fight surface tension >forces to remove the water (i.e., pouring water out of a sponge!). I couldn't agree more - the last thing you want to do is cool the tank between fillings and trap the water. This is why I suggested an external trap - to condense the vapor outside the cell on a continual basis. This would eliminate the "liquid thermal short" hypothesis. It also should not necessarily cool the cell appreciably - assuming the trap is located outside the insulation, and the connection is not metal. The trap need not be at below freezing temperatures, just room temperature. The use of non-metal connections may complicate things though, admittedly. Also, a star wheel pump or some form of gas circulation may be necessary to get the gas cycled through the trap. This mechanism of gas circulation, if triggered on temperature, could also be used with a highly insulated cell to provide cooling that prevents runaways. > >If Case wants liquid water in the catalyst, then fine - forget what I >said. If not, then I can't see why it's so critical that Scott cools >the reactor after each dump. I thought Case said this was a "robust" >effect! Of course, I wouldn't want to get in the way of a long list >of preemptive strikes on any negative results Scott might come up with >in these tests. But, gee, is such a list so important right now - >before Scott even runs the correct catalyst? > >Frank Stenger The replication presently falls short on the grounds (1) the water which is known to initially be produced is not eliminated and (2) the probe wells enter from the bottom. Further, the gradual incease in baseline temperatures between fillings seem to indicate that a minor amount of water or oxygen gets into the Earthtech cell with each filling. I don't see attempting to identify these differences as a preemptive strike. It is an attempt to discuss what might be happening, and possibly open the shortest route to getting the facts, be they one way or another. If the Case effect is due to an artifact, it would be good to reproduce that artifact quickly. If there is a candidate alternative explanation, it is good to eliminate it as soon as possible. However, a run with no heat supplied would do that trick very well. If the effect is bogus and can not be replicated due to key differences in cell design, a negative test with or without heat supplied can only be repeated indefinitely in different ways until the artifact is discovered, and that gruelling exercise happens concurrent with unending debate. It also seems to me that it is always best to experiment with as prepared a mind as possible, as serendipty sometimes knocks. We also have the matter of the helium to deal with. Based on my reading of sci.physics.fusion, it appears to me that line of discussion or investigation is difficult, lengthy, and circular. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 00:00:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA05329; Sat, 2 May 1998 23:59:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 23:59:49 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980503015758.01b564cc mail.airmail.net> X-Sender: danyork mail.airmail.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 01:57:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Dan York Subject: Re: Omniscience In-Reply-To: <354BC7F1.5A1E skylink.net> References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA math.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"yp9ed3.0.6J1.aN1Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18204 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:27 PM 5/2/98 -0700, you wrote: >Hey. I'm the only omniscient one around here, and don't anyone ever >forget it. How much money was it that Joe deposited into his forbidden >bank account, which he was busted for violating his parole? $50,000 - but it was not the amount that was important. It was that he was a party to a new bank account and a contract he did not report. >Did he ever really sell any of his fools gold? Yes - more or less - some PGE's were sold by someone else for him. I think that Joe always believed in what he was doing and that in the end he would be proved correct. But the problem was that other people have been unable to replicate his reported results reliably. >It's not like no one ever >tried to warn him that serious trouble was bound to come. Does anyone >have the courage to follow up this story? Barry will be following up on this story. Joe was and is a brilliant and likeable man but he has a serious character flaw. I expect that Barry's report that he plans to publish by the end of the summer will be reasonably comprehensive. Dan From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 04:39:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA00664; Sun, 3 May 1998 04:36:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 04:36:40 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003001bd7687$0e8c9a40$368cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "Vortex-L" Subject: Neuron Exercise Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 05:31:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"IyOr_2.0.IA.7R5Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18205 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: For your cogitation, Frank. Take a length of 2" to 3" copper "pipe" and insert a current loop made in the following manner: Take a 1.25" length of copper sawed off the pipe and slit it length-wise to make a loop and solder 0000 copper wire to it on each side of the slit. Wrap a Teflon sheet over this and slip it into one end of the copper pipe, and seal the end of the pipe with a metal cap with holes to accommodate the bus wires with one or both of them insulated from the cap. Dump your capacitor bank through this loop. The B field should be axial and the E field should be circular about the axis of the pipe and come out the other end at near c with some very high strength if B = uo*I/2*R and V = -dB/dT? If you get ionization of the air in the pipe, you will have to evacuate it, and flare the end and seal it with Lucite-Plexiglass or such. Then when these Ball Lightning photon torpedoes are triggered by the emitted microwaves they should interact with the Earth's 1/2 gauss magnetic field and tend to head North or South acting as a Compass? :-) If this doesn't pan out, let me know so I can try to come with something less ludicrous. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 05:02:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA01770; Sun, 3 May 1998 05:00:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 05:00:44 -0700 Message-Id: <199805031201.IAA04120 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Date: Sun, 3 May 98 08:03:20 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"cqRJq.0.aR.in5Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18206 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace wrote: > It is bothersome that the >overuinty signal rises with time, however, because it could be due to >oxygen slowly released from the catalyst and then recombined with hydrogen >in the cell to form additional shorting liquid. One test for this would be >to open a valve to a trap at the end of a long test and see what condenses. > Highly unlikely that there is additinal liquid produced. The VISIBLE evidence of radically reduced condensed steam at the end of both H2 discharges rules that out. THE main problem with Scott's present set up is that he has a catalyst for which there is no a priori expectation for it to work. Case notes very clearly in his PCT that even some ostensibly idnetical catalysts (by % Pd or other PGM metal) he has checked do not necessarily provide the same results. These catalysts are made by propiretary deposition processes that vary from company to company and process to process. Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 05:18:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA14981; Sun, 3 May 1998 05:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 05:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980503121446.0068b09c 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, 03 May 1998 08:14:46 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"ucewc3.0._f3.o06Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18207 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:46 PM 5/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >You mentioned the cooling effect of gas expansion. Here I go treading >where I don't belong (in thermodynamics) but I believe that a gas >undergoing "free expansion"...i.e. in which the gas does not do work as it >expands...does not cool off significantly. > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > Hydrogen, unlike other gases, becomes warmer on expansion. Fires have resulted when a hydrogen cylinder gauge ruptured and the sudden expansion of highly compressed hydrogen heated to the ignition temperature. Some gases, witness CO2, cool very rapidly on expanding. I sometimes have problems with burning propane torches in cold weather. Frost forms on the cylinder, reducing the pressure and slowing the nozzle flow significantly. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 06:24:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA01629; Sun, 3 May 1998 06:23:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 06:23:25 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 05:31:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"rZVJd3.0.IP.D_6Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18208 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:14 AM 5/3/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: [snip] >Hydrogen, unlike other gases, becomes warmer on expansion. [snip] Gee, now that you mention it, I recall that's right - it's the basis of the Pd cirgarette lighter effect. At one time there was a cigarette lighter made that used H2 evolution from Pd to heat to glowing heat. There was much discussion of this in the sci.physics.fusion archives. This just seems so counterintuitive, like it *must* be the basis for an ou device. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 06:45:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA03974; Sun, 3 May 1998 06:45:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 06:45:10 -0700 Message-ID: <354C7505.7340 interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 09:45:41 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: <4fef2422.354c0394 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qs-yh.0.0-.bJ7Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18209 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > (snip) > when I tried the breadboard test > the tube WAS putting out some really serious UV. I have done a lot of > arc welding so I know what I saw for less than 5 seconds was deadly > dangerious. I will pick up some UV shielding at the local welders supply. Glad to see you're being cautious about this! > > I will wire the 6 lamps in series with some fuses to bypass if adjustment > is needed. > I have no idea what wattage lamps to use, I want minium current in > the tube at first to avoid a meltdown. Any ideas on this? Vince, the lowest wattage bulbs I have seen are about 7 watt "night lights" that fit a standard lamp socket. So, at rated 120 volts, the bulbs should pull about 7/120 = 0.058 amp = 58 Ma. Then, six of these in series would run at rated conditions at a total 720 volts. Since the W filament works over such a wide temperature range, you'll need to use your variac to find a good operating point. Let's see, 120 volts/0.058 amp = 2069 ohms for a single bulb at rated conditions. These 7-watters are about the size of ping-pong balls - also common are 25, 40, 60, 100, 150, 200, 300... etc. watts. A light bulb's resistance is a strong function of current, so this makes them fairly good ballast resistors - and remember, Vince, they make your rig look really "Hollywood" and it's better to look good than to be good! :-) > This power supply is capable of AMPS, and the little 1/4 inch id tube just > wont take big time power. > My old high frequency power supply was putting out less than 5 milliamps. > I could hold onto the HV lead at full power and barely a tingle, and > according to the IBM electrical safety course which I have to take every > year, thats about 5 ma. (I knew that course would come in handy someday) > Thanks to all for all the help. Good stuff, Vince! (Hey, if 6 bulbs don't work - use 12!) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 07:30:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA23632; Sun, 3 May 1998 07:28:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 07:28:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 06:34:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"gmek63.0.An5.ay7Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18210 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:46 PM 5/2/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 10:53 AM 5/2/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>The only explanation I can see is that there is a liquid in the bottom >>which evaporates on decompression. It could be water. > >Water's not a liquid at 190C and 50psi. I think we're looking at an >ordinary heat xfer effect. Removing the hydrogen essentially uncouples the >temp probes from the heaters...the catalyst is rather insulating, >thermally. The bottom probe is the shortest and would thus cool the >fastest and mostest due to stem conduction (assuming the bottom bulkhead is >relatively cool). The bottom bulkhead, at least Tbtm, is hotter than the Ttop in inital conditions prior to the gas exchange isn't it? Why would you think the bottom is cooler? The photo shows a heater coil wrapped around the bottom. It has a greater diameter, thus more length, thus should provide more heat? The same current I goes through all coils, if they are in series, but P=I^2*R, so the longer coil gets more heat when in series. Maybe your coils are in parallel? > The top probe runs so much cooler than the others that I >still think its positive excursion is due to the hot gas moving past it as >the chamber is vented. This *is* curious, the fact the top probe is cool during the *run*. However, your cell is filled above the top probe, so the majority of the actual boiling/evaporation during running may take place there. If you reduce the catalyst level and the top probe suddenly starts running hot, that should be a sign of evaporation effects. [snip] >>I think Dr. Case is preparing to put his entire cell in an 8-inch ID >>stainless steel dewar. > >Hmmmm....my quick and dirty calculations show that only the finest silvered >Dewar of that size will have a chance of sustaining 180C inside with only a >7 watt input power (what Gene estimated from the Thursday demo). I used >the surface area of a 8in dia x 10in long cylinder in the Stefan-Boltzman >radiation law. I set Th to 180C (453K) and Tc to 27C (300K). Only if the >emissivity is 0.016 (polished silver is .02) does the radiated power get >down to 7 watts. With an emissivity of 0.1, it would take 44 watts to >maintain 180C inside the Dewar. Does anybody know what emissivity is >typically achieved in the all-stainless Dewars? It seems like there must be something wrong with your calculation, if you are presently maintaining 180 C in your cotton wrapped device with only 50 W. Case could wrap his device in your insulation and then put that into a dewar, if your calculations are correct, and your insulation is much better at avoiding IR radiation. [snip] > My favorite hypothesis is that Dr. Case's effect occurs >simply when the correct catalyst is combined with D2 gas at the correct >temperature and pressure. Next week I will test that hypothesis. If THAT >doesn't work, THEN we can start flailing around in parameter space. I would suggest one good place to start flailing around may be to insert a thermocouple well in from the top of your device, if that is possible. This could possibly show Case's ou indication while all other indicators do not, and thus demonstrate the source of the indication. I think you need to get the initial liquids out of the system for that to happen, though, if that hypothesis is correct. When you exchange gasses you evacuate, right? So, maybe simply leaving the system under vacuum a bit longer would take care of any liquids. The temperature traces would be interesting during that period of holding vacuum. This is a test you can do with yor device as-is. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 07:44:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA10957; Sun, 3 May 1998 07:43:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 07:43:31 -0700 Message-ID: <354C82B3.92C interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 10:44:03 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RUNGW3.0.5h2.IA8Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18211 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > (snip) > The replication presently falls short on the grounds (1) the water which is > known to initially be produced is not eliminated But how is it eliminated in Case's own runs - blowing down and cooling the reactor until liquid water forms can't be the best way to do this. I thought Scott could pump on his reactor - at temperature - with a good vacuum pump. This will remove the initial water very well - your cold trap sounds fine if it's compatible with later gas analysis. I'm probably confused about the protocol - I thought Case sealed up the tank after the clean-up operation and ran in the batch mode for the excess heat checks. and (2) the probe wells > enter from the bottom. Further, the gradual incease in baseline > temperatures between fillings seem to indicate that a minor amount of water > or oxygen gets into the Earthtech cell with each filling. OK, I assumed Scott had a "fluid management" manifold on the tank port for vacuum pumping, gas addition, etc. Am I wrong again? > > I don't see attempting to identify these differences as a preemptive > strike. It is an attempt to discuss what might be happening, and possibly > open the shortest route to getting the facts, be they one way or another. > If the Case effect is due to an artifact, it would be good to reproduce > that artifact quickly. Well, sure, Horace, but since Gene actually worked with Case, I would think that he is in a better position to reproduce these artifacts than Scott. Scott is working with a piece of equipment that was almost ready to go - so like any experimenter, working with a well disclosed theory, it's reasonable to try to fit the hardware to the apparatus. This is assuming that information from Case has been complete - if it is not, then it would seem to be his loss if widespred replication is his goal. This was a QUICK setup by Scott - I'm sure he will try to modify the hardware details with more test experience and information. If there is a candidate alternative explanation, it > is good to eliminate it as soon as possible. However, a run with no heat > supplied would do that trick very well. If the effect is bogus and can not > be replicated due to key differences in cell design, a negative test with > or without heat supplied can only be repeated indefinitely in different > ways until the artifact is discovered, and that gruelling exercise happens > concurrent with unending debate. OK, Horace, I give up - it almost seems the unending debate has already started. :-) I think I'll wait until Scott runs the real test. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 07:49:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA12477; Sun, 3 May 1998 07:48:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 07:48:38 -0700 Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:42:25 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: "Frederick J. Sparber" cc: fstenger interlaced.net, Vortex-L Subject: 0000 wire is 0.454 " dia Re: Neuron Exercise In-Reply-To: <003001bd7687$0e8c9a40$368cbfa8 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"UCW4-.0.o23.5F8Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18212 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The header said 'er. On Sun, 3 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > For your cogitation, Frank. > > Take a length of 2" to 3" copper "pipe" and insert a current loop made in > the following manner: > > Take a 1.25" length of copper sawed off the pipe and slit it length-wise to > make a loop and solder 0000 copper wire to it on each side of the slit. Wrap I was IBEW line for about 4 years.... Any of you ever bend any '4 ought' copper? It is 0.454 inch in diameter! Why so huge? J > a Teflon sheet over this and slip it into one end of the copper pipe, and > seal the end of the pipe with a metal cap with > holes to accommodate the bus wires with one or both of them insulated from > the cap. > > Dump your capacitor bank through this loop. > > The B field should be axial and the E field should be circular about the > axis of the pipe > and come out the other end at near c with some very high strength if B = > uo*I/2*R and V = -dB/dT? > > If you get ionization of the air in the pipe, you will have to evacuate it, > and flare > the end and seal it with Lucite-Plexiglass or such. Then when these Ball > Lightning photon torpedoes are triggered by the emitted microwaves they > should interact with the Earth's 1/2 gauss magnetic field and tend to head > North or South acting as a Compass? :-) > > If this doesn't pan out, let me know so I can try to come with something > less ludicrous. :-) > > Regards, Frederick > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 08:00:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA14288; Sun, 3 May 1998 07:59:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 07:59:56 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 07:07:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: hydrogen cycle Resent-Message-ID: <"m57312.0.AV3.iP8Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18213 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:14 AM 5/3/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: [snip] >Hydrogen, unlike other gases, becomes warmer on expansion. [snip] It seems like a 6 step process could gain energy: 1. Compressed H2 at environment temperture runs expansion motor to drive a refrigeration gas compressor that compresses a gas input at environment temperatures. The H2 is heated in this step, as is the refrigerant gas. 2. The refrigerant gas is heat exchanged with the environment to release useful heat energy, thus cooling the refrigerent gas. It would be useful if the refrigerant gas liquifies at this stage. 3. The hot H2 is heat exchanged with the normal gas, generating a refrigerant vapor under pressure. The H2 is cooled, the refrigerant is warmed in this step. 4. The refrigerant gas drives an expansion motor which drives an H2 compressor. The H2 gas further cools, the refrigerant cools also. 5. If the temperature difference of either gas is significantly different from the environment, a heat exchange is made with either or both gases and the environment to gain useful energy. 6. The cycle is repeated. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 08:21:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA28631; Sun, 3 May 1998 08:20:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:20:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 07:26:20 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Resent-Message-ID: <"bXNqx.0.D_6.0j8Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18214 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:44 AM 5/3/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: [snip] >OK, Horace, I give up - it almost seems the unending debate has already >started. :-) >I think I'll wait until Scott runs the real test. > >Frank Stenger I actually agree with much of what you said. See prior post of mine which "crossed" yours in time. However, I would point out, in any case, it is not my primary intention to debate, but to provide ideas. It is my feeling that ideas contributed can not harm, only help. The main penalty for providing ideas is that some people take ideas/suggestions as criticism, which instigates emotion based debate. I'm used to that penalty. Ideas need to be documented when conceived, so that's what I do, and let the chips fall where they may. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 08:38:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA00103; Sun, 3 May 1998 08:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 08:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354C8D3F.CFE interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 11:29:03 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neuron Exercise References: <003001bd7687$0e8c9a40$368cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mW4hR1.0.jK7.Ss8Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18215 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > Dump your capacitor bank through this loop. > Then when these Ball > Lightning photon torpedoes are triggered by the emitted microwaves they > should interact with the Earth's 1/2 gauss magnetic field and tend to head > North or South acting as a Compass? :-) Fred, the discharge frequency of these electrolytics is about 1 kHz. So, I guess this means a wavelength of about 300,000 meters. I think I'm a little out of the microwave region with just a "driver coil" discharge. How about a nice long "plasma focus" device - I might be able to bounce plasma smoke rings off the ionosphere and reach you where you live. You're a good calculator, Fred, - what's the repelling force between the conductors of a two-wire bus with the conductors separated by 3 cm, center to center, carrying a current of 200,000 amp? Assume the conductors are 3/8" dia solid aluminum rod. (force per meter) And John Schnurer said: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I was IBEW line for about 4 years.... Any of you ever bend any '4 ought' copper? It is 0.454 inch in diameter! Why so huge? ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger on the "grunt", John, I have found that 4-gage grounding copper from the local building supply works well for short pulses. But, then, Fred likes to see me sweat. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 08:38:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA06120; Fri, 1 May 1998 17:12:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:12:31 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Gas cell calorimetry - addendum Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 00:12:02 +0000 Message-ID: <19980502001201.AAA4962 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"KOHCH.0.YV1.kJcIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18143 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In the null experiments, was the D2 tested for 4He? >To: Vortex > >I hasten to add another good reason to believe Case has done his calorimetry >correctly. For many years, he got no excess heat. Deuterium would produce the >same temperature as hydrogen. He changes only one parameter, the catalyst, and >boom -- the heat appears. He goes back to a non-working catalyst and the heat >goes away. Other parameters are unchanged as far as he knows. This is a good >indication that the catalyst is the controlling factor as well as being the >actual source of the heat. I suppose a gas conduction artifact or some other >calorimetry problem would show up at random, with any catalyst. > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 09:11:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA04486; Sun, 3 May 1998 09:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354C955D.51F7 interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 12:03:41 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: hydrogen cycle References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2pTYa1.0.061.nM9Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18217 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 8:14 AM 5/3/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: > [snip] > >Hydrogen, unlike other gases, becomes warmer on expansion. > [snip] > > It seems like a 6 step process could gain energy: Wait a minute, here, Horace! I think what we are talking about is the "Joule-Thomson" effect wherein hydrogen will get warmer if expanded thru a POROUS PLUG from a higher pressure to a lower one. This is a "constant enthalpy" expansion and is the process used in the "throttling calorimeter" to determine the "quality" of "wet" steam in a water boiler. The porous plug keeps changing the expansion work back to thermal energy as the fluid moves thru the plug. If you expand H2 in an expansion motor, and extract a reasonable work, the H2 will cool. There you guys go again - making me dig up my dusty old thermo from the dark reaches of my brain! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 09:11:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA04428; Sun, 3 May 1998 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980503110324.00958b90 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 11:03:24 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IOBxc1.0.651.EM9Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18216 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:34 AM 5/3/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >Why would you think the bottom is cooler? The 4 heaters are identical. They are wired in a series-parallel combination that puts the same voltage on each one. The bottom flange has a large surface area for loosing heat and, despite having one of the 4 heaters directly on it, I'm pretty sure it's cooler than the small dia cylindrical portion of the chamber that has the other 3 heaters on it. >This *is* curious, the fact the top probe is cool during the *run*. Not really. The heaters are definitely located towards the bottom of the chamber. >It seems like there must be something wrong with your calculation, if you >are presently maintaining 180 C in your cotton wrapped device with only 50 >W. Actually it only takes 25 watts and I'm using fiberglas insulation around the hot chamber. My surface area is less than 1/4 of Case's. That makes all the difference. But, by all means, please check out my calculations. I'm using: P = s*A*e*(Th^4-Tc^4) where s is the Stefan-Boltzman constant e is the emissivity A is the surface area Th is the hot temp in Kelvin (180C) Tc is the cold temp in Kelvin (room temp) P is the radiated power in watts When calculating the heat loss from a fiberglas insulated chamber, I use P = k*A*dT/t where k is the insulation's conductivity (.036 watt/(m*K) A is the surface area dT is the delta T (i.e. 180-25) t is the insulation thickness P is the conducted power in watts and I ignore radiative losses. Hmmm, I wonder if that is correct? >I would suggest one good place to start flailing around may be to insert a >thermocouple well in from the top of your device, if that is possible. It's certainly possible but I can't see why it matters at all which direction the thermal well comes in from. When the system is filled with hydrogen, I believe that stem errors are negligible. My Tbtm thermocouple is in the right place to mimic Case's apparatus. >When you exchange gasses you evacuate, right? So, maybe simply leaving the >system under vacuum a bit longer would take care of any liquids. I'm doing the same thing (same venting, evacuation, and refilling with similar timing) that Case does to remove liquids except that my procedure should remove liquids better since I'm not cooling off the chamber during the refilling process. If I've got liquids, Case has to have more liquids. BTW, I don't think either of us has liquids. >The temperature traces would be interesting during that period of holding >vacuum. This is a test you can do with yor device as-is. Yes, I can do that...but it will be a departure from Case's protocol. If you read Gene's account of the Thursday demo, you will see that they completed the entire vent, evac, refill process typically within 5 minutes. Jed suggested that I run cool water thru the heat exchanger to cool the chamber during refilling. Unfortunately, due to the fiberglas insulation that separates the catalyst chamber and the heat exchanger, I can't make any rapid changes in the chamber temperature no matter what I run thru the heat exchanger. If it becomes necessary to rapidly cool the chamber, I'll have to fit an auxilliary heat exchanger directly to the outside of the chamber. I could probably blow compressed air through it and get a satisfactory effect. However, right I am only looking forward to next week when I get to run the real catalyst! Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 09:27:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA09047; Fri, 1 May 1998 14:35:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:35:40 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:43:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"MFcfl.0.FD2.h0aIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18133 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:11 PM 5/1/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >While you're dancing around the Maypole Horace, consider this: > > H H > | | >H-C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C=C-H > >Then add H2 or D2 to this Activated Carbon lattice structure that is about >1/2 gram/cm^3 with a surface area of 500 to 1500 Meter^2/gram. > >This gives you the chance of hydroginating-deuterating ten carbon atoms at >about 10 Kilojoule/carbon atom. Uh... per atom? > If the thermal preprocessing set up those >sites, how many Kj of "free energy" could you get from 120 grams of catalyst >neglecting the 0.5% Pd wt.,assuming that the Pd is breaking the H-H or D-D >bonds for you? > >Regards, Frederick (100 g)(6.02x10^23 atoms/mole)/(12.011 g/mole)= 5.01x10^24 atoms Since in 3 weeks there is 39 MJ generated in Case's device, that is 7.78x10^-19 J/atom for which to account. I think you have overkill there Fred. Well, back to the Maypoll. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 09:31:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA31557; Sun, 3 May 1998 09:30:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 09:30:08 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006901bd76b0$25508ec0$368cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Neuron Exercise Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:25:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"P8RRO3.0.ui7.Fk9Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18218 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 03, 1998 9:34 AM Subject: Re: Neuron Exercise >Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >> > >> Dump your capacitor bank through this loop. >> > Then when these Ball >> Lightning photon torpedoes are triggered by the emitted microwaves they >> should interact with the Earth's 1/2 gauss magnetic field and tend to head >> North or South acting as a Compass? :-) > >Fred, the discharge frequency of these electrolytics is about 1 kHz. >So, I guess this means a wavelength of about 300,000 meters. I think >I'm a little out of the microwave region with just a "driver coil" >discharge. I don't think (Hmmm good word)the low frequency matters, Frank. The waveguide-cavity resonator will pick a high frequency component above it's cutoff frequency. Any microwave mode above cutoff for a given diameter pipe is possible,especially since the inductance of the system will make it "ring". >How about a nice long "plasma focus" device - I might be >able to bounce plasma smoke rings off the ionosphere and reach you >where you live. Might end up at that experiment at the south pole where they are picking up pulses from lightning strikes following the Earth's magnetic field lines too. :-) >You're a good calculator, Fred, - what's the repelling force between >the conductors of a two-wire bus with the conductors separated by >3 cm, center to center, carrying a current of 200,000 amp? Should be zero since the currents are flowing in opposite directions and the magnetic fields cancel? If not: Force/unit length = uo*I^2/(2(pi)* separation) ~= 60,000 lbs/meter x .1 meter = 6,000 lbs? > Assume >the conductors are 3/8" dia solid aluminum rod. (force per meter) 60,000 lbs/meter wrap'em in duct tape. :-) > >And John Schnurer said: >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > I was IBEW line for about 4 years.... Any of you ever bend any >'4 >ought' copper? It is 0.454 inch in diameter! Why so huge? >-----------------------------------------------------------------------I had no intention of bending those, they come straight into the current loop. A better (easier) way to make the loop is to drill a small hole in a copper disc about 1/2" thick with an O.D. such that with the insulating teflon over it, it will fit into the I.D. of the pipe. Then saw a radial slit to the hole and drill two 1/2" holes to accommadate the 0000 (.454 inch diameter, thanks John) by 2" long,copper grounding rods sweat-soldered in. Then sweat some heavy copper braid from ye olde battery cable, perpendicular to the axis of the rods. Then hit it with a 1/4 charge? on the capacitor bank. >Roger on the "grunt", John, I have found that 4-gage grounding copper >from the local building supply works well for short pulses. But, then, >Fred likes to see me sweat. Literally? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 10:23:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05289; Sun, 3 May 1998 10:14:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:14:22 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4fef2422.354c0394 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:15:20 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"Te7Bq2.0.YI1.jNAJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18219 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, If you use common incadescent lamps for ballast, I suggest that you put them on the PRIMARY side of your Variac and connect them in parallel. The parallel connection lets you increase or decrease current while running, if you wish to. You can't do that with a series connection, where removing one lamp oopens the whole circuit. Putting the lamps on the primary side lets you use common 110 V lamps in parallel. For low current use just one low wattage lamp. For high current add more lamps in parallel. For still higher current add wigh wattage lamps in parallel. Also, on the primary side you have only 110 VAC, not hundreds of V to 1 kV, so is much safer for you if you decide to screw and unscrew lamps. 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 Sun May 3 10:50:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11000; Sun, 3 May 1998 10:49:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:49:30 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:50:27 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"KPySC2.0.oh2.fuAJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18220 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some more thoughts on Case's experiment: 1. Scott Little's method of hot venting of the H2 during the cleaning cycles certainly should remove water more effectively than Case's method of cooling before venting. However, we need to know whether this part of Case's protocol is essential to his success or not. Gene, can you ask Case to do a run with hot venting while using his catalyst and the rest of his protocol? A positive result would contribute to the robustness of the effect, and it would facilitate doing Case's experiment in calorimeters. 2. Someone said Case is getting a Dewar. I wonder why. A Dewar will make it hard for him to do calorimetry. He needs a calorimeter, not a Dewar. 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 Sun May 3 10:55:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA16628; Sun, 3 May 1998 10:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 10:54:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Run 1b results posted Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 17:52:04 +0000 Message-ID: <19980503175202.AAA28177 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"oaIwN1.0.k34.JzAJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18221 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >At 8:14 AM 5/3/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: >[snip] >>Hydrogen, unlike other gases, becomes warmer on expansion. >[snip] > >Gee, now that you mention it, I recall that's right - it's the basis of the >Pd cirgarette lighter effect. At one time there was a cigarette lighter >made that used H2 evolution from Pd to heat to glowing heat. There was >much discussion of this in the sci.physics.fusion archives. > >This just seems so counterintuitive, like it *must* be the basis for an ou >device. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > Not just counterintuitive, but counter Ideal Gas Law. Does the cigarette lighter effect have to do with the Pd-H and atmosphere gas system thermodynamics, or just expansion of H? They never taught us about this in basic chemistry! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 11:18:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA18822; Sun, 3 May 1998 11:07:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 11:07:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980503180517.006916b0 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, 03 May 1998 14:05:17 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"DUzA5.0.xb4.79BJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18222 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: We must be careful in making assumptions about the source of the excess heat. It is nice to have a working hypothesis but we must always be thinking of other explanations. One possible source is an impurity in the carbon support (coconut charcoal) is the reactant. At ICCF-7 Dr. Drexler of Drexler Technology felt that the excess energy in the cold fusion reactions was coming from the fusion readtion: Li^6 + D -----> Be^8 -----> 2He^4 + energy He even filed for patents on this idea without doing any experimental work (I didn't think you could get patents without a working model). He felt that the extra energy from the lithium greases discovered by Dr. Berenyi is coming from the reaction: Li^7 + H ------> Be^8 ------> 2He^4 + energy BTW, how much energy can one expect from the above reactions? How about spiking a working catalyst with a trace amount of Li and see if there is enhancement of the phenomenon? Ed Strojny P.S. This is the area I am looking into now, without Pd but at much higher temperatures than what Dr. Case uses. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 12:43:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA28092; Sun, 3 May 1998 12:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 12:42:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19980503180517.006916b0 freeway.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 12:41:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"Kaz2G1.0.ss6.SYCJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18223 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re: >Li^6 + D -----> Be^8 -----> 2He^4 + energy energy = 22.35 MeV >Li^7 + H ------> Be^8 ------> 2He^4 + energy I don't have energy on this one handy, but probably about 20 MeV, too. Both these reactions have a three times larger Coulomb barrier than D + D, so one needs a bigger-than-usual CF miracle to make it go at chemically achievable temperatures. 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 Sun May 3 12:46:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA27592; Sun, 3 May 1998 12:45:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 12:45:23 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08DB xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 12:44:59 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"7jKZG1.0.zk6.IbCJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18224 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mike Could you post a reference to the proof of the theorem? Hank > ---------- > From: Schaffer gav.gat.com[SMTP:Schaffer@gav.gat.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Saturday, May 02, 1998 2:45 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the > Earth > > Frank Stenger wrote, re virial theorem: > >This is probably a question Mike Schaffer should answer, but.... > >As far as I know, John, the virial theorem is a very fundamental > >limitation on how much energy can be stored in a non-nuclear > >configuration of matter and/or fields. To put it another way, I > think > >it means that no matter how "smart" you get with the design of an > >energy-storage mechanism, you will always be limited by the force > >containment strength of some material substance.... > >I guess the theorem applies to anything held together by the chemical > >bond (like all construction materials) and to electromagnetic fields, > >(which chemical bonds are, I think!).... > > The virial theorem that I know deals with an arbitrary arrangement of > electric current surrounded by a region of free space (vacuum) in > which > only electric and magnetic fields exist. Then, the virial theorem > (using > Maxwell's equations) arrives at a proof that the inner arrangement of > currents can never confine itself. It will necessarily expand. > Confinement > is possible in principle if there are externally (ie. out beyond the > free > space region that surrounds the interior region of interest) generated > currents that are somehow anchored in something solid. > > This theorem tells those of us doing magnetic confinement of > thermonuclear > plasmas that there is no possiblilty of us having overlooked a short > cut > that does not need either external generated magnetic fields and/or > some > other means of applying pressure to the plasmas we want to confine. > > Ball lightning, as far as I know, exists in atmospheric air. The > version of > the virial theorem I outlined does not rule out ball lightning so long > as > it can be confined by 1 bar air pressure or less. > > I would be interested in learning about any more general version of > the > virial theorem. I agree that interatomic bonds are all electric and > inertial (kinetic energy) in nature, so there must be a more general > form. > (Here I am showing you all that I trained as an electrical engineer, > not as > a physicist!) > > 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 Sun May 3 13:09:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA09388; Fri, 1 May 1998 12:35:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:35:09 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354A23E7.68BE math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 01 May 1998 12:35:03 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion References: <199805011702.NAA12594 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5iIl3.0.XI2.iFYIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18124 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > > -- the first "Tb skeptic" to cry > "Uncle" will be allowed out. The rest will be left to bake alive -- a > fitting fate. I suggest that before everyone gets all self-congratulatory, we should quit presuming the outcome and focus on figuring how the device works. The results reported by Gene are fantastic---but only in so much as they promise that we can get to the bottom of this, becuase it is reproducible. Its a long way for verification of "cold fusion", though. Speculation is not of much import when there is a working device to be studied, but just to quell the euphoria, I would note that the mere fact that D2 behaves different than H2 is not necessarily so surprising....if the device works by ordinary means, we are presumably talking about a surface catalyzed chemical reaction. D2 is much less mobile than H2 on a surface due to its greater mass, and thus it will "sit in place" longer, and be more likely to engage in whatever reactions are possible. This could easily explain a significant enhancement of D2 reactivity. Or, perhaps the heavier D2, not being able to achieve the necessary "escape velocity", tends to leave more of the reaction energy in the catalytic substrate, which, being close to the thermocouple, tends to give a higher T reading. Etc. Some form of calorimetric study, run long enough to definitely exceed the possible energy output of the chemical ingredients, is required for meaningful demonstration. Any attempt to build the case (no pun intended) based on piecing together circumstantial evidence such as isotope dependent temperature readings, is asking to be fooled. Obviously, Case has optimized the system to perform in a way that appears anomalous, or we wouldn't be here discussing this....but that could just as easily mean that he discovered an effect such as the above, rather than "cold fusion". -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 13:10:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA31699; Sun, 3 May 1998 13:09:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 13:09:39 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08DB xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 13:10:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Resent-Message-ID: <"6lj-o1.0.Dl7.2yCJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18225 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Mike > Could you post a reference to the proof of the theorem? >Hank Shoichi Yoshikawa, "Application of the Virial Theorem to Equilibria of Toroidal Plasmas," Physics of Fluids, vol 7 (feb 1964) pp 278-283. Upon glancing at this I see that it is less general than I remembered. 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 Sun May 3 13:26:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02843; Sun, 3 May 1998 13:23:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 13:23:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:19:52 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Merriman on Tinsley Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805031620_MC2-3BBE-51DF compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"ieICE3.0.Ii.89DJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18226 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman writes: I hate to speak ill of the dead, but I have heard that once upon a time Chris Tinsley became fairly convinced that a certain magnetic motor was O/U, until the errors of his evaluation procedures were corrected by a certain third party who tend to share my ersatz logic. You heard incorrectly. That is not what happened. First, Chris was never convinced enough to publish. That is the standard which matters. He was intrigued enough to pursue the work for a while. The only thing which would have convinced him would be a reliable, replicated machine. Tinsley was also intrigued by the SMOT device, which exhibits baffling behavior. When two or more SMOT are linked up, the ball will sometimes fall to the bottom of the first one, stop, and then start up again. It looks like it has stopped; perhaps a high speed camera would show otherwise. That is peculiar and interesting, and Tinsley talked about it, but he was never "convinced" it is anomalous. Second, when Tinsley visited Scott Little, he was never able to demonstrate the effect he thought had seen. Little was never able to point out errors because no error and no anomaly was seen. If Little had shown "errors of his evaluation" you may be sure we would have published that in I.E. Perhaps if Chris had taken a few logic lessons from me instead of the ancient Greeks, he would have had the proper perspective to deduce his own mistakes before they had to be pointed out to him. All basic logic originates with the ancient Greeks (and others before them, and the Chinese independently). They perfected it. There is nothing new to be learned from you or anyone else. Nobody ever "pointed out" Tinsley's "mistake." We do not know for sure whether it *was* a mistake -- although Tinsley agreed it probably was. We never will know. The research ended in an inconclusive muddle, as often happens. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 13:29:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA03334; Sun, 3 May 1998 13:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 13:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:20:06 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Differences between Little and Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805031623_MC2-3BBF-3F72 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"QUYMj2.0.wp.3BDJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18227 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I am concerned about the differences between Scott Little's experiment and Case's. Little's upcoming test run with the recommended catalyst has three possible outcomes: 1. It produces real excess heat as measured by the flow. In this case the differences between the two experiments make no difference. 2. It produces the same apparent excess in the cell that Mallove saw in the Case cell, but no real excess in the flow. This will be strong evidence that Case is making a mistake. The next step would be to show how and why this artifactual heat appears, and why Case is making a mistake. That would wrap up the discussion. 3. It demonstrates no excess of any kind. This will prove that Little is not replicating the experiment, and we can draw no conclusions. Little should then work to reduce the differences between his experiment and the original one. There are many outstanding differences. Too many for my taste -- I think the first replication of an experiment should be a close as humanly possible, "down to the scratches on the face plate" as Mike Carrell says. Let me reiterate some of the differences I think may be critical. These have been noted here earlier. Pressure and temperature, and the dynamic changes in both that may affect loading. The shape of the container. This may be crucial. Case says to keep the layer of catalyst shallow. I expect this is to prevent hot spots in the catalyst from heating the surroundings above the critical temperature. I do not suppose the piled up catalyst might prevent exposure to H2 and D2 and interfere with loading, but it is conceivable. Little may have to reduce the mass of catalyst to keep the pile shallow. That would be a shame because it would reduce the heat and it might even prevent the reaction. A critical mass of cathode material may be needed to cause enough self-heating feedback. This is apparently the case with solid, pure Pd eletrolysis cathodes. In other words, you may need those hot spots, but not too hot. (Maybe) the composition of the container. Is Little using a steel container with the catalyst in direct contact with the metal? The position of the external heating coils, as noted by Little. Methods of removing water. Gene says Case turned the bottle upside down and dumped out recombined water. That means he let in air. Normally I would consider air and CO2 a contaminant to be avoided, but who knows, perhaps it is necessary. In stage one of a replication you don't wonder about things like that and you do not ask. You do it *exactly* the way the original researcher did. If he says "turn it upside down and shake it" I would do so even if I thought there is not one chance in a million this will affect the outcome. I would replicate everything short of incantations. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 14:02:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA08696; Sun, 3 May 1998 13:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 13:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:56:23 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Merriman on Tinsley Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805031656_MC2-3BCC-816C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id NAA08634 Resent-Message-ID: <"VZ8k83.0.k72.egDJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18228 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mr Merriman said.... < I hate to speak ill of the dead....> Why? It's the easiest way to avoid a libel damage suit. If Chris Tinsley ever felt sufficiently pretentious enough to write an auto-bio I'm sure he would have prefaced it in an appropriately tongue in cheek manner. Perhaps utilising Henri Philippe Petain's quip that "To write one's memoirs is to speak ill of everybody except oneself." -Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 14:38:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA13708; Sun, 3 May 1998 14:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 14:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354CE31E.5F84 interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 17:35:26 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2Jyz03.0.3M3.tDEJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18229 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > >Mike > > Could you post a reference to the proof of the theorem? > >Hank > > Shoichi Yoshikawa, "Application of the Virial Theorem to Equilibria of > Toroidal Plasmas," Physics of Fluids, vol 7 (feb 1964) pp 278-283. > > Upon glancing at this I see that it is less general than I remembered. > Mike and Hank, I guess my post on this got lost in never-never land. I have an early reference as follows: (I have not seen it - probably could not understand if I had!) S. Chandrasekhar and E. Fermi, Astrophys. J., 118, (1953) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 15:29:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18737; Sun, 3 May 1998 15:22:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 15:22:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980503172123.00960810 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 17:21:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Differences between Little and Case In-Reply-To: <199805031623_MC2-3BBF-3F72 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9p05l2.0.ha4.auEJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18230 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:20 PM 5/3/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell listed among the possible outcomes of my upcoming Case-like experiment with the real G75-E catalyst: >3. It demonstrates no excess of any kind. This will prove that Little is not >replicating the experiment, and we can draw no conclusions. Little should then >work to reduce the differences between his experiment and the original one. Agreed. >There are many outstanding differences. Too many for my taste -- I think the >first replication of an experiment should be a close as humanly possible... Sure, if you're building from scratch. However, I decided to use an existing apparatus, mainly to see if Dr. Case's effect is as robust as he thinks it is. >(Maybe) the composition of the container. Is Little using a steel container >with the catalyst in direct contact with the metal? Mine is stainless steel. Isn't that what Case uses? >Methods of removing water. Gene says Case turned the bottle upside down and >dumped out recombined water. That means he let in air. Not necessarily. He could just invert the chamber and let the pressure inside expel the liquid water. Air would not be drawn in. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 15:27:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA07797; Sun, 3 May 1998 15:26:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 15:26:35 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 14:34:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Raining on the parade Resent-Message-ID: <"TLK6b.0.kv1.QyEJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18231 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 11:46 PM 5/2/98, Scott Little wrote: >>Water's not a liquid at 190C and 50psi. On further reflection, I see this is a really important point you made Scott. At 50 lbs water boils at about 138 C. At 85 lbs, where Case runs, water boils at about 158 C, which is not totally out of the ballpark, especially considering the thermal gradient he uses. It could be raining inside his cell. Raining what, I don't know what to hypotheisze for sure. It has to be something catlyzed from D2 but not H2 at his operating parameters. Or maybe D2O boils at a different temperature? Five degrees C is a lot of difference. I still like liquid vs no liquid for a negative hypothesis. however, the positive hypothesis you are going on is certainly the most desirable outcome. I'd hate to rain on the parade. 8^) The above issues, of course, don't address the helium. There is also the matter of thermal runaway, which could simply be reaching some critical carbon-hydrogen reaction temperature for the catayst involved. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 15:38:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA09114; Sun, 3 May 1998 15:35:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 15:35:03 -0700 Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 18:32:25 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Why a Dewar Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805031834_MC2-3BC1-FBA0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"9z1fN3.0.FE2.M4FJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18232 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:Schaffer gav.gat.com Michael J. Schaffer asks: 2. Someone said Case is getting a Dewar. I wonder why. A Dewar will make it hard for him to do calorimetry. He needs a calorimeter, not a Dewar. The idea is to make a self-heating cell with zero input power. If this cell remains significantly hotter than the surroundings for 2 to 4 weeks, it will prove there is excess heat beyond the limits of chemistry. I think you mean he needs a *better* calorimeter. His present device is a calorimeter, albeit a crude one. The self heating device would also be crude but utterly convincing, and it would obviate the need for more precise instruments to prove the point, since by first principles we know that a 50 gram substance in a Dewar cannot remain at 200 deg C for weeks from a chemical reaction. Other precise calorimeters will be needed to investigate the excess heat and characterize it. The self-heating test is only intended to prove the reaction exists. According to Scott Little's computations, the Dewar Case selected will lose too much heat. It will not remain at the critical high temperature with only 7 watts of self heating. I hope that: 1. Scott is wrong, or; 2. The catalytic material is producing more heat than we think, or; 3. There is room enough in the Dewar for 100 mg of catalyst. If it turns out the auxiliary outside heater cannot be turned off with the Dewar, because the temperature falls too far, this experiment will still be fruitful if it shows the auxiliary heater can be turned way down, close to zero. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 16:13:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA25431; Sun, 3 May 1998 16:06:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:06:11 -0700 (PDT) From: rtomes kcbbs.gen.nz (Ray Tomes) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Omniscience Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 22:57:48 GMT Message-ID: <355ef5ea.18347895 kcbbs.gen.nz> References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA@math.ucla.edu> <354BC7F1.5A1E@skylink.net> <354BD39A.1331@math.ucla.edu> <354BDBC4.BE0@skylink.net> In-Reply-To: <354BDBC4.BE0 skylink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.0/32.390 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rQfyL1.0.HD6.XXFJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18233 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 02 May 1998 19:51:48 -0700, Robert Stirniman wrote: >... No need for any philosopher's stone. Get rich quick >and easy, that's the ticket to a good life. Not wanting or needing to be rich is the real answer. -- Ray Tomes -- http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/rtomes/rt-home.htm -- Cycles email list -- http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/af/cyc.htm Boundaries of Science http://www.kcbbs.gen.nz/users/af/scienceb.htm From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 16:35:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA17860; Sun, 3 May 1998 16:33:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:33:39 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354CE31E.5F84 interlaced.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:34:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Resent-Message-ID: <"_wZEb3.0.vM4.JxFJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18234 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Virial theorem references: S. Chandrasekhar and E. Fermi, Astrophys. J., 118, (1953) S. Chandrasekhar, "Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic Stability," Oxford University Press (1961) pp 577-583. Shoichi Yoshikawa, "Application of the Virial Theorem to Equilibria of Toroidal Plasmas," Physics of Fluids, vol 7 (1964) pp 278-283. Chandrasekhar's book develops its virial theorem with electromagnetic, pressure (kinetic) and gravitational forces. I don't have time to study it now. It looks like the usual vector calculus stuff. The theorem applies for an isolated system, ie ALL the fields die off sufficiently fast at some large distance away in vacuum that certain integrals converge. However, this requirement is consistent with the usual idea of "self contained." Without reading all the intermediate material, I quote his words on p 583: "Therefore, for the existence of a stable equilibrium, it is necessary that the total magnetic eneregy of a system does not exceed its negative gravitational potential energy." I take this to mean that without gravity, a self-contained system containing magnetic energy will not last long. 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 Sun May 3 16:40:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA18950; Sun, 3 May 1998 16:38:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:38:47 -0700 Message-ID: <354D1DB1.61B8 fc.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 18:45:21 -0700 From: John Fields Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; U; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: jfields fc.net Subject: Re: Omniscience References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA@math.ucla.edu> <354BC7F1.5A1E@skylink.net> <354BD39A.1331@math.ucla.edu> <354BDBC4.BE0@skylink.net> <355ef5ea.18347895@kcbbs.gen.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"08mXH1.0._d4.60GJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18235 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ray Tomes wrote: > > On Sat, 02 May 1998 19:51:48 -0700, Robert Stirniman > wrote: > > >... No need for any philosopher's stone. Get rich quick > >and easy, that's the ticket to a good life. > > Not wanting or needing to be rich is the real answer. > Not wanting or needing to tell anyone what the real answer is is the real answer. John Fields From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 17:20:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA07489; Fri, 1 May 1998 20:27:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 20:27:53 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 21:50:00 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Omniscient Larry Wharton Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"RxUAf2.0.Uq1.tAfIr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18154 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Larry Wharton deigns to inform us: The success of this test will indeed prove cf to be real. The certain failure of the test, on the other hand, will do nothing to disprove the issue to the believers. I can imagine in a week or two Jed giving the explanation as to why the self sustaining test did not work. Based on my previous behavior it seems more likely I would have no explanation, and I would offer none. I have never said why Ragland thought he got excess heat but we observed none. I do not know, and I will not guess or spin empty hypotheses. The only way to find out would be for us to perform more tests, and for me to visit Ragland and observe while he performs more tests. Without these steps it must remain an unsolved mystery. Sometimes I do learn why experiments failed, and why the scientist was wrong all along, but most results fade away inconclusively. That is the usual fate of most apparent scientific breakthroughs. It is nothing to get upset about. I do not understand why Wharton accuses me of "giving explanations" to explain failures when I have never done that in the past. I think that Wharton and the other "skeptics" are the ones who "give explanations" when experiments succeed. Why did Mitsubishi see heat, x-rays and transmutations in six out of their last six experiments? Why did the NHE see excess heat in their replication of the Italian thin wire experiments? Why does the French AEC continue to see massive excess in their boil off replications, with their improved instrumentation? The "skeptics" will always come up with a handwaving hypothesis. The point is that the self heater test will not work and so we might as well speculate on the explanation of the existing experimental results now. In that case why bother doing the experiment at all? Why do any experiment? >From now on, when mankind faces a mystery we have an easy way out. We will ask Larry Wharton. He can explain difficult and apparently contradictory evidence that has buffaloed the experts here. I think it is grotesque that a scientist claims he can predict the outcome of this experiment given the evidence presented so far. On one hand Case performed crude, lousy calorimetry -- no argument there. On the other hand Case got a high S/N ratio, he did many convincing blanks, and many other people have seen similar effects. You can make a strong case either way, so how can anyone know the outcome? There are legitimate open questions about the Case experiment. However, the proper response to these questions is not to speculate; not to build a shaky edifice of improbable hypotheses; and not to pretend you are God and you already know the answer. The correct scientific response is to devise and execute *experiments that will eliminate the doubts*. Many other systems should be used to observe the effect, to eliminate systematic error. The best experiment is the simple, direct and irrefutable stand-alone self regenerating heater. I can think of no reason why this test is inappropriate or why anyone would question the outcome, positive or negative. Wharton ignores years of blank runs with deuterium, and writes: Heat may be transported by molecular conduction, eddy conduction, or advection and different temperatures and different masses ( a factor of two here between D2 and H2 ) will cause a different mixture of the three effects and a different effective thermal conductivity. Yes, if you dismiss 99% of the evidence you can always come up with a facile answer. I and everyone attending ICCF-7 *immediately* suspected conduction, eddy currents, etc., etc., and we asked Case about these things in detail. It turns out he knows a lot about these subjects, he has considered them carefully for many years, and he can make a fairly convincing case they do not play a significant role. Primarily he cites the blank runs with deuterium, which are the only kind of runs he got for many years. I find it extremely difficult to imagine why a calorimeter which has functioned flawlessly for years with this catalyst material, showing no difference between hydrogen and deuterium, should suddenly one morning exhibit artifactual heat because of eddy conduction, advection or any other reason. Why did it change?!? Why didn't it exhibit these problems from the first day? Why does it only show these problems in a narrow range of temperature with one particular type of catalytic material, and no others? The "eddy current" hypothesis makes no sense to me. Before I buy it, Wharton will have to answer these questions convincingly. If the stand alone heat test fails I will not have to answer any questions to support any theory -- because I have no theory. I will say only that our observations are a mystery, the blank runs are a mystery, and I do not understand how this came about. A preliminary result from Scott Little using the wrong material has produced no real excess heat, and no artifact that looks like what Gene saw. When Scott examines results from the thermocouples in the cell, he does not see the kinds of temperature excursions Gene saw. That is inconclusive. If he continues to gets no real heat and no artifact, Little must not be replicating the experiment. A replication has to show the same results, real or artifactual. If it is a mistake, Scott has to reproduce the mistake (and demonstrate that it is a mistake). He might have to use a WWII steel vessel, blanket warmer, thermocouple at an angle, etc., etc. He might have to copy every last detail before he sees the effect/artifact. That would not be worth the effort, but it would be the only way to solve the mystery. Obviously, Scott must test the recommended catalyst before drawing any conclusions. Before it arrives I would try another charge of deuterium. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 18:55:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA11977; Sun, 3 May 1998 18:53:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 18:53:18 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 15:52:44 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? Resent-Message-ID: <"s4Pdz2.0.-w2.C-HJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18236 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vorts - I love it when you're clicking through an AltaVista list on some mundane search like casserole recipes or something, and you somehow land on one of these sites. In case you haven't had your daily dose of weird, check out: http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/orbit/april/armageddon2.html ...for some astonishing weather radar graphics and even some pretty mindblowing web graphics in general. Love that irridescent translucent being floating over the landscape in the main background image. But what about all those circular radar bogeys? I imagine that some cumulus buildups are surrounded by concentric rings of alternately up and down welling air (so called "gravity waves" - air masses simply bouncing over hundreds of miles, often seen around hurricanes), and this could account for some of the bullseye patterns. Is that what this is? Or, as the bizarre website suggests, is it HAARP whacking the atmosphere? Or is someone out there shooting at the earth with giant balls of energy? They really do look like "impacts". Check it out. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:02:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17196; Sun, 3 May 1998 18:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 18:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980504015749.0069c154 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, 03 May 1998 21:57:49 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Case run 1 "results" Resent-Message-ID: <"6YqkA2.0.bC4.54IJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18237 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:30 PM 5/1/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >Thus this run has served only to confirm my calorimetry again and to >identify one type of Pd-on-carbon catalyst that does not show the Case >effect. (Aldrich #205672 1% Pd on activated carbon - fine powder). > > >Comments? > > > >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) > > Do you think Aldrich would reveal their source of catalyst so that one could find out what kind of carbon support was used? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:04:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA14196; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:02:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:02:40 -0700 Message-ID: <354D21E0.17E interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 22:03:12 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7g1p3.0.fT3._6IJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18238 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > (snip) > Chandrasekhar's book develops its virial theorem with electromagnetic, > pressure (kinetic) and gravitational forces. I don't have time to study it > now. It looks like the usual vector calculus stuff. The theorem applies for > an isolated system, ie ALL the fields die off sufficiently fast at some > large distance away in vacuum that certain integrals converge. However, > this requirement is consistent with the usual idea of "self contained." > Without reading all the intermediate material, I quote his words on p 583: > > "Therefore, for the existence of a stable equilibrium, it is necessary that > the total magnetic eneregy of a system does not exceed its negative > gravitational potential energy." > > I take this to mean that without gravity, a self-contained system > containing magnetic energy will not last long. This would seem to be the case on the "big" side of the picture, i.e., we can have electromagnetic energy storage on a stellar level limited only by the available gravitational field for its containment. On the small side of things, we have the stable energy storage systems of atoms where the stability is facilitated by the "magic" of the fundamental particles. I suppose the EM energy of the chemical bond could be thought of as a surrogate for the mechanical strength of materials we engineers are so fond of. So, to the extent that atoms and compounds represent stable EM configurations, so also do things like flywheels, pressure tanks, springs - as long as we stay within the limits of the containment strength of the materials involved. Again, it seems that at the small end we have the quantum-mechanical particles to thank for stable EM energy storage and gravity on the big end. Now, for ball lightning, it's too small for gravity to do us any good, and the virial theorem says it can't just be magnetic and/or electric fields, so, maybe we must assume that we again are counting on QM-level effects to give us stability - as we do for atoms. This is what is so fascinating to me - in BL are we seeing a composite structure - part macroscopic EM fields, part QM governed atomic-sized elements such as EM vortex filaments with huge current densities and field strengths providing the QM confinement analogous to that seen in the relationship between an atom's nucleus and its electrons. If it extends from the QM world into the macroscopic world of ball lightning, we could understand the need for "loss mechanisms" not present in atoms - thus the fleeting existance of BL, inspite of its large energy content. Thus spoke Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:10:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA15916; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:09:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:09:04 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <354CE31E.5F84 interlaced.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:08:18 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Resent-Message-ID: <"V0wt_1.0.au3.-CIJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18239 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael - > I take this to mean that without gravity, a > self-contained system containing magnetic > energy will not last long. So ball lightning is producing it's own internal electromagnetically induced gravitational field. Any TT Brown fan could have told you that. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:17:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA19698; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354D2465.6D6A interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 22:13:57 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vOgIr3.0.gp4.vIIJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18240 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > In case you haven't had your daily dose of weird, check out: > > http://www.eagle-net.org/phikent/orbit/april/armageddon2.html > > ...for some astonishing weather radar graphics and even some pretty > mindblowing web graphics in general. Yes! A true daily dose of weirdness, Rick! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:19:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA19906; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:16:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:16:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 22:06:46 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Differences between Little and Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805032208_MC2-3BBF-4B94 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"xJgDa.0.ws4.NKIJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18241 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little agrees it is a good idea to make a replication as close as possible: Sure, if you're building from scratch. However, I decided to use an existing apparatus, mainly to see if Dr. Case's effect is as robust as he thinks it is. It may be both robust *and* exacting, like a nuclear bomb. You are doing the experiment quickly, using the materials in hand. That's fine, as long people do not get the idea this is the ultimate make-or-break confirmation test. Mine is stainless steel. Isn't that what Case uses? Yup. Good. You have no Teflon lining and the catalyst is in direct contact with the metal. Right? I mentioned that Case must let in air when he dumps water out. Scott points out: Not necessarily. He could just invert the chamber and let the pressure inside expel the liquid water. Air would not be drawn in. Oh! Right, of course. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:21:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA18346; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:15:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:15:42 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354D1DB1.61B8 fc.net> References: <199805012151_MC2-3BA8-EB1F compuserve.com> <354BBBA9.39CA math.ucla.edu> <354BC7F1.5A1E@skylink.net> <354BD39A.1331 math.ucla.edu> <354BDBC4.BE0@skylink.net> <355ef5ea.18347895 kcbbs.gen.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:15:09 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Omniscience Resent-Message-ID: <"uNcnl2.0.PU4.DJIJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18242 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John - > Not wanting or needing to tell anyone what the > real answer is is the real answer. Close. Not wanting an answer is the real answer. But I didn't need to tell you that. :) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 19:39:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA22500; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:32:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:32:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002601bd7704$7557ba20$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 20:28:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"NSIDP1.0.UV5.DZIJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18243 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 03, 1998 8:03 PM Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Frank Stenger wrote: > >On the small side of things, we have the stable energy storage systems >of atoms where the stability is facilitated by the "magic" of the >fundamental particles. I suppose the EM energy of the chemical bond >could be thought of as a surrogate for the mechanical strength of >materials we engineers are so fond of. So, to the extent that atoms >and compounds represent stable EM configurations, so also do things >like flywheels, pressure tanks, springs - as long as we stay within the >limits of the containment strength of the materials involved. >Again, it seems that at the small end we have the quantum-mechanical >particles to thank for stable EM energy storage and gravity on the big >end. >Now, for ball lightning, it's too small for gravity to do us any good, >and the virial theorem says it can't just be magnetic and/or electric >fields, so, maybe we must assume that we again are counting on QM-level >effects to give us stability - as we do for atoms. This is what is >so fascinating to me - in BL are we seeing a composite structure - >part macroscopic EM fields, part QM governed atomic-sized elements >such as EM vortex filaments with huge current Now you're talking,Frank. The Speed of Light Electromagnetic "Aether Propeller" *SLAP* that is needed to create the "vortex filament" is possible as I suggested to Ross Tessian, by using a circular waveguide with the TE(1,1) or TE(1,2) (or higher) modes. And primed with a healthy EM pulse. Apparently Mother Nature can get there stochastically with instabilities in lightning strokes. That's emulation in my book. :-) >densities and field >strengths providing the QM confinement analogous to that seen in the >relationship between an atom's nucleus and its electrons. If it extends >from the QM world into the macroscopic world of ball lightning, we >could understand the need for "loss mechanisms" not present in atoms - >thus the fleeting existance of BL, inspite of its large energy content. >Thus spoke Well spoken, and more Power to you! Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 20:01:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA25549; Sun, 3 May 1998 19:58:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 19:58:49 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354D2465.6D6A interlaced.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 16:58:21 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? Resent-Message-ID: <"eYi9N1.0.0F6.exIJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18244 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank - > Yes! A true daily dose of weirdness, Rick! So what do you think those 'impact craters' in the atmosphere are? Giant low density fat-toroid shaped charge clusters hitting the upper atmosphere, Frank comets hitting the upper atmosphere and fisting down into the weather layers, radar data glitches, gravity waves, HAARP experiments, somebody's imagination...? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 20:09:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26249; Sun, 3 May 1998 20:04:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 20:04:11 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980503220424.00962cb0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 22:04:24 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Differences between Little and Case In-Reply-To: <199805032208_MC2-3BBF-4B94 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qVw_e1.0.3Q6.g0JJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18245 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:06 PM 5/3/98 -0400, Jed wrote: >Yup. Good. You have no Teflon lining and the catalyst is in direct contact >with the metal. Right? Correct. My chamber is a standard section of vacuum plumbing known as a "2.75" CONFLAT nipple". These parts are always made from 304 or 316 stainless. The seals are soft Cu gaskets that are crushed between special sharp edges in the stainless flanges. There's no plastic or organic material involved at all. Ed Strojny wrote: >Do you think Aldrich would reveal their source of catalyst so that one could >find out what kind of carbon support was used? I'm pretty sure we could find out. Doug Perkins at United Catalyst hinted that he knew the original source of the Aldrich catalyst but I didn't think it was important to ask him at the time. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 20:25:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA30514; Sun, 3 May 1998 20:22:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 20:22:33 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354D347C.32A8 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 20:22:36 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Differences between Little and Case References: <199805031623_MC2-3BBF-3F72 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"27v19.0.gS7.uHJJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18246 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > There are many outstanding differences. Too many for my taste -- > I think the first replication of an experiment should be as close > as humanly possible, I agree with Jed, here.... in fact, I'd take it further: I think that it is foolish to attempt any replication at all at the start---simply have Dr. Case provide you with a working model as a starting point. I.e., the way Jed and Gene proceeded is ideal: first get a live demo by the inventor, and then proceed in small steps from that toward independent replication....and be prepared to compare back to the "original" as necessary. My ideal recipe is: (1) Live demo from inventor in person, at inventors site. (2) Borrow inventors device for a period of testing at my site. (3) Attempt to construct replica of inventors device. (4) Go back to (1), (2) as necessary, until independent replication is achieved (5) Given independent replication, undertake a series of controled parameter variations to deduce mechanisms. (6) Once local resources are exhausted in testing, seek out other experts to assisit in understanding. Now, one can insert a step (0) of attempting a quick independent replication as Scott has done, just to get oneself familiar with the general issues, but I would't waste any extra time on this step (0) if it doesn't "work" immediatley. So, I guess the question is why Scott is not attempting to follow this type of model, as he knows much better than I the inherent problems in doing fully independent replication studies. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 20:28:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA32289; Sun, 3 May 1998 20:27:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 20:27:09 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 14:25:04 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"WZJmc3.0.Pu7.CMJJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18247 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 3 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > So what do you think those 'impact craters' in the atmosphere are? Giant > low density fat-toroid shaped charge clusters hitting the upper atmosphere, > Frank comets hitting the upper atmosphere and fisting down into the weather > layers, radar data glitches, gravity waves, HAARP experiments, somebody's > imagination...? What about low mass comets? Martin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 21:26:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA06284; Sun, 3 May 1998 21:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 21:19:22 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 00:16:46 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"hqHFW2.0.2Y1.57KJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18248 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-03 13:22:57 EDT, you write: > Also, on the primary side you have only 110 VAC, not hundreds of V to 1 > kV, so is much safer for you if you decide to screw and unscrew lamps. > Michael J. Schaffer Mike, I have, around here somewhere, a 50 Kv rated rotary switch that I will use if I can find it. This way I wont have to use a bunch of high wattage lamps. The new power supply is almost done, just waiting for delivery of the volt and ammeter. The voltmeter is connected direcly across the primary and the ammeter in the primary feed line from the variac output. The losses in the HV transformer and the ballast lamps will give me a conserative measurment of how much power is going to the reactor tube. Should be ready for a first run with the new power around mid-week. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 21:32:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA11484; Sun, 3 May 1998 21:30:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 21:30:23 -0700 Message-ID: <354D4482.374 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 00:30:58 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DM8gZ.0.Mp2.UHKJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18249 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > So what do you think those 'impact craters' in the atmosphere are? Giant > low density fat-toroid shaped charge clusters hitting the upper atmosphere, > Frank comets hitting the upper atmosphere and fisting down into the weather > layers, radar data glitches, gravity waves, HAARP experiments, somebody's > imagination...? I don't know, Rick, - but it made me think of an idea! I wonder if anyone has considered placing a ionosphere-worthy balloon in place not from the ground up, but from low orbit down? It sounds like a tricky retro-rocket and drogue-chute operation, but I wonder if it still wouldn't be easier than launching a fragile, low-density balloon from the ground? Anyway, wouldn't it be neat to have a floating camera platform, say, 160,000 ft (30.3 miles) where the pressure is 1/100 of sealevel? Higher, if need be to see all these new things being discovered in the "fringe" of our atmosphere. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 21:49:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA10087; Sun, 3 May 1998 21:46:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 21:46:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354D46AD.12CB worldnet.att.net> Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 18:40:13 -1000 From: bill perry Reply-To: wperry3092 worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Hi again Jerry Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KVfbq3.0.XT2.GWKJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18251 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello All! : I have been following the posts about the monopolar spherical magnets and was wondering what would happen if a huge magnet were glued to another huge magnet such that the N poles were to each other. This was on some web page about building a scalar transmitter. But what if the magnet structure had a hole in the middle like a donut? Inside you place a blob of molten metal (iron or steel or something magnetizable) and let it slow cool the magnetic force inside would be all N polar I think and would thus polarize the whole piece of metal in that fashion. except maybe the very middle would be S polarized. I believe that if this would work you would have a flat near-monopolar magnet! This could open up a whole new strain of applications! BillP From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 21:51:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA09769; Sun, 3 May 1998 21:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 21:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354D477C.6B0E interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 00:43:40 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zfcGF1.0.ZO2.EVKJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18250 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > The voltmeter is connected direcly across the primary > and the ammeter in the primary feed line from the variac output. The > losses in the HV transformer and the ballast lamps will give me a conserative > measurment of how much power is going to the reactor tube. Vince, if you're using a half-wave rectifier, the transformer CURRENT may have a very lopsided waveform. Can your AC ammeter handle such a non-sinusoidal wave form? I think a full wave rectifier would give a better primary sine wave, but 120 "bumps" per sec. into your tube. Just some points to consider - they're off the top and it's getting late! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 22:07:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA25353; Sun, 3 May 1998 22:05:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 22:05:44 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980504000617.00960100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 00:06:17 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Differences between Little and Case In-Reply-To: <354D347C.32A8 math.ucla.edu> References: <199805031623_MC2-3BBF-3F72 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"rCXdC1.0.-B6.doKJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18252 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:22 PM 5/3/98 -0700, Barry Merriman wrote: >(2) Borrow inventors device for a period of testing at my site. >Now, one can insert a step (0) of attempting a quick >independent replication as Scott has done, just to >get oneself familiar with the general issues, but I would't >waste any extra time on this step (0) if it doesn't "work" >immediatley. Good point, Barry. If I don't see real excess heat next week with something reasonably close to Case's apparatus, I will offer to entertain him at EarthTech for a few days where I can quickly and easily construct a new heat exchanger that will enable me to put his entire experiment inside the calorimeter. Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 22:14:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA13687; Sun, 3 May 1998 22:07:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 22:07:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980504000502.0095f350 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 00:05:02 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"eKhbL.0.nL3.cqKJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18253 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:16 AM 5/4/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >Should be ready for a first run with the new power around mid-week. How are you going to measure the input power, Vince? Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 3 23:43:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA21104; Sun, 3 May 1998 23:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 23:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 22:47:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"UhpyY3.0.f95.kCMJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18254 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:05 PM 5/3/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: >We must be careful in making assumptions about the source of the excess >heat. It is nice to have a working hypothesis but we must always be >thinking of other explanations. One possible source is an impurity in the >carbon support (coconut charcoal) is the reactant. At ICCF-7 Dr. Drexler of >Drexler Technology felt that the excess energy in the cold fusion reactions >was coming from the fusion readtion: > >Li^6 + D -----> Be^8 -----> 2He^4 + energy Li 6.015121 D 2.0140 + He4 4.00260 - He4 4.00260 - ======= 0.023921 AMU x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 22.28 MeV > >He even filed for patents on this idea without doing any experimental work >(I didn't think you could get patents without a working model). > >He felt that the extra energy from the lithium greases discovered by Dr. >Berenyi is coming from the reaction: > >Li^7 + H ------> Be^8 ------> 2He^4 + energy 7Li 7.016003 1H 1.007825 + He4 4.00260 - He4 4.00260 - ======= 0.018628 AMU x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 17.35 MeV Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 00:41:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA08384; Mon, 4 May 1998 00:40:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 00:40:33 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 23:47:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Brief test of dewar concept at 7 watts Resent-Message-ID: <"ZhJRl1.0.t22.m3NJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18255 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:03 AM 5/3/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 06:34 AM 5/3/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >>It seems like there must be something wrong with your calculation, if you >>are presently maintaining 180 C in your cotton wrapped device with only 50 >>W. > >Actually it only takes 25 watts and I'm using fiberglas insulation around >the hot chamber. My surface area is less than 1/4 of Case's. That makes >all the difference. But, by all means, please check out my calculations. OK, I missed that fact, you have two different sizes. I was thinking Case was working towards a small version to fit inside a Dewar, but apparently he is planning to *use* the dewar for his cell? I also missed the implication of trying to run at 7 watts vs your 25 (or 50) watts. Doh! It seemed to me you would have to account for material between the device and the thermos inner wall before applying P = s*A*e*(Th^4-Tc^4). For that reason a small insulated cell inserted in to a silvered glass dewar should work better. You then get to apply P = k*A*dT/t followed by P = s*A*e*(Th^4-Tc^4) at a lower temperature. Just to quickly check out a large silvered glass dewar, I inserted a meat thermometer and twisted pair wire through the bottom of a 2" think piece of polypropylene foam, connected a 10.0 ohm 25 W resistor to the wire, and covered the resistor and thermometer tip with a glass jar supported by the screw on lid on top of a ring of crumpled aluminum foil to prevent direct contact with the foam. The assembly was covered with a large 3 liter glass dewar. A precision thermistor probe was fed through a groove under the lid of the dewar. A regulated DC voltage of 6.99 V was applied to the 10 ohm resistor to give about 7 watts heating. After several hours the thermistor probe near the bottom of the inside of the dewar read about 50 C. The meat thermometer, read from underneath the dewar, had not even approached 100 C. I think much of the heat loss was due to the thermometer, but a similar loss would be experienced in a Case cell due to thermocouple wells, and gas connections. Though the setup could easily act as a calorimeter for small fractions of a watt, it could not easily attain a high temperature without auxiliary heating. It looks like you are right Scott, it is going to be difficult to build a large cell that can run at 180 C with only 7 watts. I think it will require *both* a silvered glass dewar and inside insulation. It would be best if the gas connection could be broken after filling. It would be best to use *two* dewars, one upside down, with a central ring seal, to seal off the opening to the dewar. Very thin wire leads to the thermocouple should be used through the seal into the dewars. It would be best to make the steal container of the cell separate from the dewars for safety, convenience, and mostly, so a silvered glass dewar can be used and insulation can be wrapped around the device within the dewars. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 01:45:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA11915; Mon, 4 May 1998 01:40:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 01:40:42 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008d01bd7738$202dfa80$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Kinematic Viscosity of The Aether? Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 02:39:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"nDnvc3.0.5w2.9yNJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18256 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Going by the mechanics of fluid flow, the viscosity (n): Force/Area is proportional to v/L: F = n'*A*v/L where n' = n/(1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2? The Aether is at rest at the surface of a moving object such as the rotating Earth etc., thus the failure of the M&M Experiment to measure "Aether Drag". Would the Vacuum be 10W-30 or 10W-40, at 0.99c, Frank? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 06:42:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA01471; Mon, 4 May 1998 06:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 06:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <354DC47E.7E6E7FBF css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 08:37:02 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D@interlaced.net> <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9@css.mot.com> <354B3548.2E61@interlaced.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tn2XD3.0.vM._JSJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18257 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Francis J. Stenger wrote: > As an example, for > flywheel energy storage, the ratio of material strength to material > density provides a fundamental limit on how much energy even the best > flywheel design can store. The theorem also applies to energy stored > in springs, rubber bands, charged capacitors, induction coils, and, > sigh, ball lightning. Thanks! Never knew it had a name. Somewhat supprised I have no recollection of ever hearing of it before ( perhaps a wee bit hung over that day in class.... ) > THEN, HOW DOES BALL LIGHTNING DO IT?? I'm guessing it's an energy resonance structure. More pure energy than electrical energy though. A density pocket in a charged field? Sorry, rambling again..... 8^) John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 09:05:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA01249; Mon, 4 May 1998 09:01:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:01:07 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504105838.00bb13b0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 10:58:38 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: From Dr. Case Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uSDSS1.0.1J.-OUJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18258 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I contacted Dr. Case about the modification I have made in his protocol...not turning off the heater during the vent, evac. & refill process. He replied: "Your modification should be quite OK. I turned off the heat when venting etc, only to prevent possible damage to an empty heating mantle." ...at least he _thinks_ it's OK to do it the way I'm doing it. 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 Mon May 4 09:22:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA08514; Mon, 4 May 1998 09:20:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:20:58 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 12:22:05 -0400 To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Cc: , "George" In-Reply-To: <00a201bd75e1$4eab9140$2d8cbfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fa6He1.0.t42.fhUJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18259 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The barn-door sized exception to the virial theorem is that it does not hold in the presence of net electrical charge. Before reaching for your keyboard, ready to flame, read on... Non-linear electrical fields can create second order effects. A practical example are the electrostatic devices used to clean the air. A charge on a point or a wire creates a non-linear field that attracts neutral dust particles. What has this got to do with tokomaks and ball lightning? Simple, if you can create and maintain a net charge on a plasma, you get second order terms, and can have a stable containment with no external pressure. But it takes very high voltages to create the initial conditions. 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 Mon May 4 09:29:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA11640; Mon, 4 May 1998 09:27:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:27:26 -0700 Message-ID: <354DB37F.97F interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 08:24:31 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kinematic Viscosity of The Aether? References: <008d01bd7738$202dfa80$3e8cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VBaum2.0.nr2.inUJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18260 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > (S) > Would the Vacuum be 10W-30 or 10W-40, at 0.99c, Frank? :-) I don't know, Fred, but if the universe comes into my garage for an oil change, I think I'll tell her to try one of the new "synthetic vacuums" so plentiful on Vortex. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 09:49:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA05718; Mon, 4 May 1998 09:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354DE458.4045 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 11:52:56 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3548D8DD.2C05885D css.mot.com> <35494FDE.7257@interlaced.net> <35494D4E.1F67FFAA@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> <3549D850.5C2D@interlaced.net> <3549E86D.DF7D4BB9@css.mot.com> <354B3548.2E61@interlaced.net> <3 54DC47E.7E6E7FBF css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KgfhH.0.BP1.A2VJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18262 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Steck wrote: > > Francis J. Stenger wrote: > > > As an example, for > > flywheel energy storage, the ratio of material strength to material > > density provides a fundamental limit on how much energy even the best > > flywheel design can store. The above statement of mine is OK, I think - unless the flywheel is of planetary size and we can use gravity for containment! (see related posts by Mike Schaffer) The theorem also applies to energy stored > > in springs, rubber bands, charged capacitors, induction coils, and, > > sigh, ball lightning. I'm on shaky ground here, John, - I assumed the virial theorem was somehow tied in with the EM nature of the chemical bond and thus the "strength of materials". I know it has been applied to ball lightning to show that the effect cannot be "just" magnetic and/or electric fields or, I think, something like standing microwaves. I have not seen the paper myself, but: Finkelstein, D., and J. Rubinstein: Ball Lightning, Phys. Rev., 135 :A390-A396 (1964) is the paper I had in mind above about BL and the virial theorem. I'm not sure they actually use the virial theorem but I think their analysis is related to it. > > Thanks! Never knew it had a name. Somewhat supprised I have no recollection > of ever hearing of it before ( perhaps a wee bit hung over that day in > class.... ) I hadn't heard about it either, John, until I became interested in energy storage in electric induction coils. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 09:52:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA05164; Mon, 4 May 1998 09:42:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 09:42:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504113012.00bf8990 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 11:30:12 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xJPW_1.0.VG1.Y_UJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18261 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:20 AM 5/1/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >Assuming 21 days for the experiment, the 4.6 MJ created is spread over >21*24*60*60 = 1.81x10^6 seconds. The power output accounted for by fusion >would thus be (4.6 J)/(1.81 s)= 2.5 J/s = 2.5 watts, so we are very roughly >in the ballpark. > >If 90 ppm helium accounts for 2.5 W output over 3 weeks, then 360 ppm would >be expected to account for the 10 W output. Still, assuming the caculation >is correct, this seems very encouraging, when we consider that helium may >be trapped in the catalyst or tank walls, that there may be sampling >errors, that the exact run time and power are not accurately known, nor is >the error known on the helium measurements at 90 ppm. Actually, I would expect the Helium to diffuse through the tank walls. It is pretty mobile. 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 Mon May 4 10:08:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28433; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:06:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:06:25 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504111416.00c02b60 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 11:14:16 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Case Run 1 underway In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980430235832.00950100 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19980430181013.00bc6de8 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2BFYN1.0.ox6.EMVJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18263 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:58 PM 4/30/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >Robert Eachus wrote: > >>It always amazed me how much O2 could remain adsorbed on >>surfaces in a vacuum unless you did some sort of a boilout. > >we did NOT bakeout the catalyst under vacuum. I normally would have done >so but Case doesn't.... Actually, reading Gene's description, he does do just that. A boilout is running the apparatus at operating temperature or higher with an inert or carrier gas to drive the adsorbed gases off the walls. The mention of vacuum was to point out that just pulling a vacuum won't get rid of adsorbed gasses. On the other hand Case uses H2. I'd prefer to see argon as well, which does a much better job on N2. H2 is decent for most adsorbed gases, and works very well for removing CO2, O2, and H2O. (Another problem with H2 is hydrogen embrittlement of metals, but that is going to be a long term problem anyway with the deuterium. (Translation, check the specs on the steel you intend to use when choosing a container.) 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 Mon May 4 10:11:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29625; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:08:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:08:24 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00b101bd777f$18828200$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Kinematic Viscosity of The Aether? Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:07:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"2SDsc2.0.2E7._NVJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18264 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 10:28 AM Subject: Re: Kinematic Viscosity of The Aether? >Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >> >(S) > >> Would the Vacuum be 10W-30 or 10W-40, at 0.99c, Frank? :-) > >I don't know, Fred, but if the universe comes into my garage for an >oil change, I think I'll tell her to try one of the new "synthetic >vacuums" so plentiful on Vortex. Hey! The Universe is already in your garage Frank, all you need to do is to move in a piano. :-) While taking time-out as sidewalk superintendent to the foundation pouring of the 10,000 Ft^2 four-plex 60 ft from what was my remote country home, I looked up U.S. Patent 3,751,869 (McDonald-Sparber)on the IBM web site, to see why we were 35 years ahead of time with a steel construction system for residential housing. The four-plex will be all steel framing, rolled at McDonalds "House-Factory" here in Belen, NM and delivered roof trusses and all on a trailer pulled by a 1/2 ton pick-up. About a days work to turn out all the framing top-to-bottom for a 1,200 square foot house. McDonald also has *House-Factories* in the Dallas area, and Taiwan, Vietnam, and Points East. He went to rolling channel out of ton rolls of sheet metal and we left the wire panel patent expire. But, there are several builders using our wire support structure concept for framing. The wire panels are filled with styrofoam about 3/4 inches in from each surface. The panels are hog-ringed or spot-welded together at the site then surfaced with stucco-mortar. Makes a great house with lots of design flexibility. Nice to see an idea go to fruition, even if had to wait 35 years. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 10:16:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA32718; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:13:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:13:20 -0700 Message-ID: <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:13:54 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iDPs2.0.8_7.lSVJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18265 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > The barn-door sized exception to the virial theorem is that it does not > hold in the presence of net electrical charge. Before reaching for your > keyboard, ready to flame, read on... > > Non-linear electrical fields can create second order effects. A > practical example are the electrostatic devices used to clean the air. A > charge on a point or a wire creates a non-linear field that attracts > neutral dust particles. I don't see the point here, Robert. It's easy to understand that an insulator in an electric field becomes polarized and can, as a result, become an electric dipole. If the source of the electric field is a pointed wire, then the dipole can be attracted to the point by the "tidal" effect of the diverging E field - right? The big limit here is the onset of high-field-emission from the metal point - even in hard vacuum - which limits the E field we can generate in this manner. Isn't this similar to storing energy in a capacitor made of a dielectric and two metal plates? Here again we are limited by the dielectric strength of the material. > > What has this got to do with tokomaks and ball lightning? Simple, if > you can create and maintain a net charge on a plasma, you get second order > terms, and can have a stable containment with no external pressure. I don't understand, Robert - a charge metalized balloon will tend to explode from the electric pressure. A spherical capacitor is again limited by the strength of its dielectric - right? I guess I'm asking how a plasma ball can have a net electrical charge and last for minutes in some cases. This while often running along conductors like wires, rain gutters, etc. as BL is often reported to do. > > But it takes very high voltages to create the initial conditions. Tell me what it takes, Robert and old Stenger is dumb enough to try to do it. :-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 10:23:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA12955; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:10:56 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Inventor (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zJro_2.0.JA3.LYVJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18266 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: History records many inventors who worked toward an end, an idea, a dream. Most "failed" in the terms of making a living at it. Dr. Leland Clark said "I have made others rich", meaning the devices such as the Clark Oxygen electrode made a business profiting others more than he. He said this to me with a genuine smile. Clark's is not the only oxygen electrode, but his is fairly well known. Following, in no particular order, are some inventors and part of their paths. I am a scholar of the history and ethics of science. Much of what I write comes from memory, any errors, omissions or incomplete information are solely my fault. I welcome any corrections. Reference will be provided from texts paraphrased. Edwin Howard Armstrong invented primary art regarding radio. The use of some types of regenerative feedback and the Superhetrodyne method still form much of the basis of radio communication today. FM radio is the legacy most know. At one point Armstrong had FM radio well in hand and invited David Sarnoff to his facility at Columbia University in December 1933. Sarnoff liked what he heard and invited Armstrong to use the RCA facilities. In March of 1934 Sarnoff canceled all television transmission from the top of the Empier State Building and on June 16 1934 Armstrong made the first FM broadcast from that site. Shortly after David Sarnoff asked Armstrong to vacate the property. FM worked too well. "Tube" by Fisher and Fisher 1996, Counterpoint, Washington DC Samuel Morse boarded the sailing packet Sully scheduled to leave Le Havre, France October 1, 1832. For five days weather prevented sailing and six days later they were at sea. During this trip Morse became convinced such a thing as what would come to be the telegraph could be devised. Morse was an artist, a painter, and had no scientific training but his favorite topic this voyage was electricity. The Sully arrived in New York harbor on November 16, 1832. In 1835 Morse was giving regular lectureson Art at New York University and the income was small. He spent his money on the materials for telegraph and little for food was left. "The Telegraph" A History of Morse's Invention and Its Predecessors in the United States, Lewsi Coe, 1993 McFarland & Co. Inc. Charles Kettering, James Cox, Arthur Morgan, John H. Patterson and the Wright brothers all were born, but not necessarily raised, in Ohio. They shared the belief that one may ignore a problem as inherited. The Wright brothers obtained flight less by building on what had been learned by those before than by casting it aside. The brothers kept and airplane at South Field, outside Dayton, Ohio, around the First World War. The hangar was in a pasture and one night the caretaker neglected to secure the hangar doors. Cows wandered in and found they liked the taste of the dope used to seal the fabric, and they tugged the fabric off, chewing and swallowing the cloth by section. They spent the night in this endeavor. About the men above. They were eccentrics. John Patterson wore underwear made from the felt of pool tables and slept with his head hanging off the side of the bed to avoid rebreathing exhaled air. Orville Wright numbered the eggs laid by thier chickens so that they could be eaten in the order they were laid. Kettering often assigned research tasks to people with no backgrounds in the problems involved. "Grand Eccentrics" Turning the Century abd the Inventing of America 1996, Mark Burnstein To use the words of the author, Mark Bernstein, who sits, at present about 20 feet from me, across the hall; "They were eccentrics, but they were grand eccentrics, individuals or reach and daring, fortunate to live at a time when the world was small and fluid and there and theirs for the shaping" Quote from "Grand Eccentrics" on page 3 of the Introduction. I personally feel there are many roads forward in areas of science at this time. Many areas of work still have what I consider broad vistas of open land to explore. Pioneers often live to die of thirst in the desert but pave the way for others. Pioneers often made it through and often made it through with the aid of others. Those others included friends and family as well as complete strangers. The very brief period often called the time of the "Wild West" has spawned more writing, film and other work than very few other comparable periods. The time offered us many concepts of adventure and of human interaction and commerce. There was "grub staking" a prospector, who may be lost for all time, but may instead return to the samaritan a reward. There also came the term Maverick, from a fellow who, instead of marking his horses, did NOT mark them, all all such horses, within limits, were deemed to be his. I come before you with my hat in hand and mule along side. I have run to the end of my resources and beyond. I am sending this letter to all of those who might listen. I ask for 'grub stake' no matter how small. I can offer no guarantee in return, only my work and a 'handshake' that I can and will repay any such stake. It is not legal for me to offer you a potential part in any science or invention I come up with. I would not ask if my situation were not rough. There is no shame in being un wealthy, nor is there any in asking for help. Please write to me if you can. Some of you know me, some do not. For some you may wish to use what I have to offer in the way of science. I will describe some of the work I have been involved in below. It is only a partial listing. I also offer a little about me. My father was born in 1899 in Bacau, a ghetto in "Roumania", as it is written on my birth certificate. His family emmigrated here to the US when he was three, the youngest of eight children. So I am the son of an emmigrant. He died when I was 21 and we had many talks often about the sweeping changes he saw, the 'horseless' vehicles, radio, televion and so on. He instilled in me the love of language and history and taught language at Antioch College for decades. Some 53 years later I was born in Ohio. He came from near a 'cusp in history', the turn of the century. I started in the sciences near a 'cusp in scientific history'. My first electronics kit was French made and had one transistor and one tube. The first radio reception was from Paris. I have no degree, but many published papers, all but one is in the field of signals from "the human system". I designed and built the USAF system which analyses one narrow aspect of the human EEG and allows the user to control machinery with the resultant. I have my name on a patent, an already soled many years ago medical patent. It measures the flow of blood in the living human. It employs a property which is considered noise or artifact in other metrics. One person's noise can be another's signal. One of my main loves is that of the magic of magnetic fields and one paper submitted and accepted, but never published, describes an ambient temperature biomagnetometer capable of acquiring the human magneto cardiogram. "The pure cussedness of dielectrics" is another area of owrk with me. I have applied for several patents in the area. One success involves work with a platic film, 1.1 mils thick. I have been able to impress a durable field within the plastic that has been, for the 10 months or so, supporting the weight of a can of tuna fish, 6 ounces, on a vertical sheetrock wall. Electronic signal processing and sensors occupys a large part of my time. Some successes include the passive or non emitting detection of the moving automobile, non linear filters of several types and sensitive detection of fields and small effects. I have core magnetometer experience which allows me to realize a small low power analog matnetometer with a noise floor of about 30 to 50 micro gauss. I have build electrometers and gradiometeric electrometers. One success in this area is a differential battery operated electrometer capable of acquiring the heart rate as expressed by micromotion of the chest from a non contact stand off distance of 3 inches. I have done a lot of primary work in instrumenting the human, and this has use for the handicapped. I have a non invasive method for optically sensing the postion of the tongue withing the mouth. I have done quite a lot of work with materials sciences and also the NDE or Non Destructive Evaluation of materials. My main success in NDE is the sensing of NM, or Non Metallic Land Mines. Maybe I have something you can use. Give me a target and I may well have been in the area of work, or if I have not, then may well know where to go. It is with great relief I finally write this, I should have asked for help at least a week ago, and even a day's delay at this juncture is critical. The funds go to keep my loved ones and shop on even keel. I will keep careful record of all contributions and will repay as I can, if I can. It is with great pride I hold my friends and associates in an open enough standing to be able to ask for aid. Please write to me via E mail if you can or wish to help. Thank you for your ear, not with with From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 10:26:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05865; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:24:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:24:26 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:23:45 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? In-Reply-To: <354D4482.374 interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aXVm93.0.IQ1.ycVJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18267 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ice balls.... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 10:31:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08145; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:29:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:29:18 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:25:43 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Neuron Exercise In-Reply-To: <354C8D3F.CFE interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"tIa0I1.0.B-1.fhVJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18268 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: About the grunt: # 4 awg is not too bad, but 4 'oh', or 0000 is kinda stiff! On Sun, 3 May 1998, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > > > > Dump your capacitor bank through this loop. > > > Then when these Ball > > Lightning photon torpedoes are triggered by the emitted microwaves they > > should interact with the Earth's 1/2 gauss magnetic field and tend to head > > North or South acting as a Compass? :-) > > Fred, the discharge frequency of these electrolytics is about 1 kHz. > So, I guess this means a wavelength of about 300,000 meters. I think > I'm a little out of the microwave region with just a "driver coil" > discharge. How about a nice long "plasma focus" device - I might be > able to bounce plasma smoke rings off the ionosphere and reach you > where you live. > You're a good calculator, Fred, - what's the repelling force between > the conductors of a two-wire bus with the conductors separated by > 3 cm, center to center, carrying a current of 200,000 amp? Assume > the conductors are 3/8" dia solid aluminum rod. (force per meter) > > And John Schnurer said: > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > I was IBEW line for about 4 years.... Any of you ever bend any > '4 > ought' copper? It is 0.454 inch in diameter! Why so huge? > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Roger on the "grunt", John, I have found that 4-gage grounding copper > from the local building supply works well for short pulses. But, then, > Fred likes to see me sweat. > > Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 10:33:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08935; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:30:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:30:15 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <354DD05C.68A619FA css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 09:27:40 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sNyIT1.0.YA2.YiVJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18269 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > But what about all those circular radar bogeys? I imagine that some cumulus > buildups are surrounded by concentric rings of alternately up and down > welling air (so called "gravity waves" - air masses simply bouncing over > hundreds of miles, often seen around hurricanes), and this could account > for some of the bullseye patterns. Is that what this is? Or, as the bizarre > website suggests, is it HAARP whacking the atmosphere? Or is someone out > there shooting at the earth with giant balls of energy? They really do look > like "impacts". Check it out. Any chance it is an effect similar to sunspot activity? Electromagnetic perculating? The effect could be expected to be more obvious for the sun given it's dynamic plasma structure, less obvious for a planet given it's relatively static structure. Both generate a gravitational magnetic signature. Why would it not be possible that both would have similar mechanics? I love those random hits too! Thanks for passing the link on. 8^) John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 10:58:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20218; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:45:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:45:06 -0700 (PDT) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <354DC8FF.45CD910A css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 08:56:15 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pressure and temperature References: <199805022051.QAA01120 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kFs_52.0.px4.UwVJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18271 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > This might be an especially important difference, because cooling might > assist in steam condensate ejection. My impression is the configuaration tracks pretty close to that of a heat pipe. Could be the circulation method through the catalyst that perpetuates the "reaction" and prevents smothering it with byproduct. Not neccessarily "the" critical element, but probably one of them. There were a few good heat pipe links I found not too long ago for an earlier thread. I could dig through my email records if there is any interest reviewing the technology..... John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 11:01:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA21625; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504095707.00c3b8b0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 09:57:07 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Commercial Nuclear Power (was Re: Confirming Dr. Case's...) Cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com In-Reply-To: <199805011518_MC2-3BA8-D7F5 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"e8Yvk1.0.kH5.N0WJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18272 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:16 PM 5/1/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mike Schaffer writes: ... > Actually, no. They run at about 300 C, but I don't remember the actual > temperature. The reason is a consequence of the choice of pressurized > water, at or near boiling, as the primary core coolant. Then the > technologically maximum pressure that the reactor vessel can manage sets > the water and/or steam pressure and hence its temperature as well. > Superheating is impossible in this arrangement. The pressure limit is not on the reactor vessel itself but on the "pins" containing the Uranium Oxide fuel. Most commercial reactor designs now have a mechanism for varying the pressure in the pins during operation to minimize the pressure differential, but they still tend to limit the maximum pressure. >I would put it another way. The choice of pressurized water is a consequence >of economics. True, in a sense. Actually in the US, Boiling water reactors (BWRs) account for more than half the commercial nuclear reactors, all AFIAK built by GE. Other competitive designs, which are not limited by pressure inside the reactor include MSRs (Molten Salt Reactors), HTGRs (High temperature Gas cooled reactors)--made by General Atomic ;-), AGRs (Advanced Gas-cooled reactors, the British like them), and LMFBRs (Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactors) mostly found in France. Others which are coolant limited include CANDUs (Canadian Deuterium), and various kinds of graphite moderated reactors, mostly of Russian manufacture. > The uranium fuel itself could be run at a higher temperature in >some other reactor design. The pressurized water design is limited to >relatively low temperatures, much lower than combustion reactors. I have read >this makes Carnot efficiency low compared to combustion plants. It wastes >fuel. Most commercial nuclear reactors run around 25% thermal efficiency. The HTGR at Fort Saint Vrain managed over 40%. There have been a few fossil fueled demonstration plants that used dual cycle co-generation to reach 60% efficiency, but they have never been practical. (A high temperature system usually boiling mercury or some other metal, and the condenser, for the high temperature side boils water which also generates power. Of course that condenser is a maintenance nightmare.) Convetional steam plants are usually around 36% efficient. Philadelphia Electric built a plant which generated steam at the triple-point and got 38.4% efficiency, but maintenance problems caused them to back off a bit. (At the triple point, converting water to steam requires no energy, and vice-versa. Causes havoc when the steam in pipes turns to water just before a bend in the pipe.) >However, the fuel cost per BTU is much cheaper than oil or coal, and >the turbines and other equipment in the plant is relatively expensive. So it >makes economic sense to run the equipment at mild temperatures and prolong >equipment life. In other words, superheating is impossible and undesirable. Philadelphia Electric also had a plan to build two convetional nuclear reactors with oil-fired superchargers. The plans were scraped for other reasons, and I don't know if any other utility has ever built such a plant. Incidently there really was a time when PE was the pioneer in lots of high-efficiency power generation technologies. They bought the first HTGR plant (Peach Bottom I), did a lot of work on cogeneration, and built the conventional plant mentioned above. However that period ended decades ago... 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 Mon May 4 11:07:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03999; Mon, 4 May 1998 11:04:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:04:35 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 08:04:00 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Inventor (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"EMdg3.0.tz.mCWJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18275 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John - I sure hope you get some work soon. And I wish you'd market that electret tape. That could be a hottie. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 11:15:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA05979; Mon, 4 May 1998 11:11:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:11:14 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 14:05:04 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Inventor (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"umLQK1.0.LT1.1JWJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18276 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Rick, I have work, but the contracts are 90 days pay. On Mon, 4 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > John - > > I sure hope you get some work soon. And I wish you'd market that electret > tape. That could be a hottie. > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 11:40:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA12246; Mon, 4 May 1998 11:38:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:38:15 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 14:41:05 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"M84y_3.0.E_2.MiWJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18277 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:13 PM 5/4/98 -0400, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >I don't see the point here, Robert... >Isn't this similar to storing energy in a capacitor made of a dielectric and >two metal plates? Here again we are limited by the dielectric strength of >the material. No quite. Consider a capacitor made of two flat plates. Calculate the pressure on the dialectric from a voltage of say 1000 volts. Next consider what happens when the plates are curved. The pressure at the same voltage is higher. Now, instead of charging the capacitor, lets give both plates a charge of one million volts with respect to ground. The plates repel each other. Charge up this charged capacitor, and you can get a much higher charge difference between the plates than when the capacitor as a whole is at ground potential. For the virial theorem to hold requires a net zero charge. (More generally it requires that all lines of force be closed in the system.) >I don't understand, Robert - a charge metalized balloon will tend to >explode from the electric pressure. No! Touch a balloon to a Van de Graff generator and what happens? Do it just right, and the balloon will collapse! It is one of those non-intuitive things, but I have seen it done. (With the van De Graff generator at the Franklin Institute. If you don't have a hole in the balloon the effect is not obvious. Best is to inflate one of those metallic balloons with air, hold it closed then release it near the VdG. Do it just right, and it touches the top ball while full of air, then flattens. Both the force pulling it to the VdG and the force which collapses it are due to second order effects.) > But it takes very high voltages to create the initial conditions. >Tell me what it takes, Robert and old Stenger is dumb enough to try >to do it. :-) Actually Paul Kuloc gave pretty good directions for creating mini-ball lightning on sci.physics.fusion a while ago. If you just want to have fun with non-linear electric effects, you can do that with a Tesla coil. You can do such fun things as put a pointed electrode near a (grounded) pan of water, and get the surface of the water to dimple up a few inches. (Slowly add water to the pan until the water is about 1" below the electrode.) My favorite such trick used a wire set into a 1/2" diameter lucite rod. (It helps to keep yourself very isoloted from ground for this trick...) Connect the free end of the wire to your favorite VdG and away you go. You can get a puddle of water to stand up and walk over to the drain, and other such fun things. 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 Mon May 4 11:50:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15668; Mon, 4 May 1998 11:48:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:48:24 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <354E0D70.D63AAD6C css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 13:48:16 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qCowR3.0.fq3.srWJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18278 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Maybe EM 'earthspots', maybe iceballs as Schnurer suggested. > Some of them are enormous! Iceballs that would cause that big of an effect would surely be noticed. My 'earthspots' idea is based on looking at the SCALE of the disturbance and the localized effects in proximity to it. Lots of electrostatic energy shooting OUT of a centalized area it what I see in the radar image. Picture looking at a smoke ring as it is shot AT you and you will see what I am thinking. Any collelation to plate fault locations? Maybe the effect may be piezo electric from crust stress? An energy gieser if you will. Any significant coinciding celestial events or alignments? John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 12:23:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06809; Mon, 4 May 1998 12:18:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 12:18:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <015701bd7790$b2e21980$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Fw. Inventors Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:13:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"XFAIR2.0.Gg1.nHXJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18279 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I saw commercial quantities of electret plastic film marked by Stanford R. Ovshinsky a prolific inventor and President of; Energy Conversion Devices Inc. Troy, Michigan. Stan is "Japan's American Hero". The IBM patent search shows 180 patents attributed to Stan and his R&D Company. In all honesty John, You should search the IBM and uspto.gov patent search pages to see if your efforts are in the right direction. Trust me, it saves a lot of time and money as well as giving a clue as to where one might show an improvement over "prior art". Best, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 12:36:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA27855; Mon, 4 May 1998 12:33:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 12:33:20 -0700 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 15:27:00 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: "Frederick J. Sparber" cc: Vortex-L , George Subject: Re: Fw. Inventors In-Reply-To: <015701bd7790$b2e21980$3e8cbfa8 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"p12rp3.0.8p6._VXJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18280 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Fred, Search had been done, in US and internationaly. We filed the provisional and then the formal full patent, the formal was filed late last year. Patent is valid for the properties, methods and materials. This is a significant improvement in the art and application. The USPTO found only one possible infringement and it was not even close and it has been addressed. So far as we know at this time all claims hold. We have more than one follow on patents in the mill. We are aware of the prior art. JHS On Mon, 4 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > To: Vortex > > I saw commercial quantities of electret plastic film marked by Stanford R. > Ovshinsky a prolific inventor and President of; Energy Conversion Devices > Inc. Troy, Michigan. Stan is "Japan's American Hero". The IBM patent search > shows 180 patents attributed to Stan and his R&D Company. > > In all honesty John, You should search the IBM and uspto.gov patent search > pages to see if your efforts are in the right direction. Trust me, it saves > a lot of time and money as well as giving a clue as to where one might show > an improvement over "prior art". > > Best, Frederick > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 12:46:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA11505; Mon, 4 May 1998 12:43:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 12:43:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <017e01bd7794$7971acc0$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: United Solar Flexible Solar Shingles Receive Grand Award From Popular Science ( Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:39:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01BD7762.226E5B80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"gV-Uf2.0.hp2.vfXJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18281 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BD7762.226E5B80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable UNITED SOLAR FLEXIBLE SOLAR SHINGLES RECEIVE GRAND AWARD FROM POPULAR = SCIENCE November 12, 1996 -- United Solar Systems Corp.'s (United Solar) = flexible solar shingles received Popular Science's 1996 "Best of What's = New" Grand Award. The Editors reviewed thousands of new products, = technology developments and scientific achievements. The Grand Award (in = the Environmental Technology category), which is the highest in any = given category, was presented today in New York City. United Solar is an American joint venture between Energy Conversion = Devices, Inc. (ECD)(NASDAQ National Market:ENER) and Canon Inc. The = solar shingles, which employ proprietary thin-film photovoltaics, can be = incorporated aesthetically into the roof to provide electrical energy to = the household by converting sunlight directly into electricity. The = unique product was developed in collaboration with ECD under a = cost-shared industry/government PV:BONUS program funded by the U.S. = Department of Energy (DOE) and has recently been showcased at the 1996 = Olympics on an energy efficient home. Christine Ervin, DOE's Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and = Renewable Energy, commented on the innovative solar shingles, "This = achievement is an excellent example of the effective use of federal = funds to hasten the commercialization of an important energy resource to = address environmental issues of this nation and the world." Commenting on this award, Stanford R. Ovshinsky, President and CEO of = ECD, stated, "Flexibility and ruggedness are the unique features of our = thin-film photovoltaic (PV) technology. United Solar scientists have = integrated both features into an aesthetically-pleasing, much-needed new = product. These lightweight shingles will become ubiquitous and serve = vast new markets." ECD and United Solar are pioneers and leaders in = thin-film technology. United Solar announced on October 28, 1996 the = achievement of a new world record solar-to-electricity initial cell = conversion efficiency of 14.5 percent. More electrical generating capacity will be required in the next 25 = years than was built over the last century. Photovoltaics, the = conversion of sunlight directly into electricity, is one of the most = environmentally safe, renewable energy options to meet these needs. = Solar panels using thin films of semiconductor materials are widely = recognized as the best way to bring down the cost of solar electricity. ECD and United Solar also pioneered the low-cost manufacturing = technology of thin-film amorphous silicon alloy multijunction solar = modules. The proprietary technology uses one-half-mile-long substrates = in a roll-to-roll process for production of solar cells in a manner = similar to the production of newsprint or photographic film. New = state-of-the-art production equipment, designed and built for United = Solar by ECD, incorporates major advances in solar cell design and = manufacturing processes achieved by United Solar and ECD with support = from DOE. The production plant, scheduled to come on-line in early 1997, = includes a triple-junction amorphous silicon alloy processor and = annually can produce solar panels capable of delivering 5 million watts = of electrical power. Products from the plant will be available for a = variety of applications including rooftop solar products developed by = ECD and United Solar such as the award-winning solar shingles for = residential rooftops and solar! ! ! met al roofing products for = commercial rooftops. These products can be installed by commercial = roofers without additional supporting structures and have been showcased = in an energy-efficient house in Atlanta, Georgia and at a National = Association of Home Builders townhouse in Maryland. Back=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BD7762.226E5B80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable United Solar Flexible Solar Shingles = Receive Grand Award From Popular Science
 

UNITED SOLAR FLEXIBLE SOLAR SHINGLES RECEIVE GRAND AWARD FROM = POPULAR=20 SCIENCE

November 12, 1996 -- United Solar Systems Corp.'s (United Solar) = flexible=20 solar shingles received Popular Science's 1996 "Best of What's = New"=20 Grand Award. The Editors reviewed thousands of new products, technology=20 developments and scientific achievements. The Grand Award (in the = Environmental=20 Technology category), which is the highest in any given category, was = presented=20 today in New York City.

United Solar is an American joint venture between Energy Conversion = Devices,=20 Inc. (ECD)(NASDAQ National Market:ENER) and Canon Inc. The solar = shingles, which=20 employ proprietary thin-film photovoltaics, can be incorporated = aesthetically=20 into the roof to provide electrical energy to the household by = converting=20 sunlight directly into electricity. The unique product was developed in=20 collaboration with ECD under a cost-shared industry/government PV:BONUS = program=20 funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and has recently been = showcased at=20 the 1996 Olympics on an energy efficient home.

Christine Ervin, DOE's Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and=20 Renewable Energy, commented on the innovative solar shingles, "This = achievement is an excellent example of the effective use of federal = funds to=20 hasten the commercialization of an important energy resource to address=20 environmental issues of this nation and the world."

Commenting on this award, Stanford R. Ovshinsky, President and CEO of = ECD,=20 stated, "Flexibility and ruggedness are the unique features of our=20 thin-film photovoltaic (PV) technology. United Solar scientists have = integrated=20 both features into an aesthetically-pleasing, much-needed new product. = These=20 lightweight shingles will become ubiquitous and serve vast new = markets."=20 ECD and United Solar are pioneers and leaders in thin-film technology. = United=20 Solar announced on October 28, 1996 the achievement of a new world = record=20 solar-to-electricity initial cell conversion efficiency of 14.5 = percent.

More electrical generating capacity will be required in the next 25 = years=20 than was built over the last century. Photovoltaics, the conversion of = sunlight=20 directly into electricity, is one of the most environmentally safe, = renewable=20 energy options to meet these needs. Solar panels using thin films of=20 semiconductor materials are widely recognized as the best way to bring = down the=20 cost of solar electricity.

ECD and United Solar also pioneered the low-cost manufacturing = technology of=20 thin-film amorphous silicon alloy multijunction solar modules. The = proprietary=20 technology uses one-half-mile-long substrates in a roll-to-roll process = for=20 production of solar cells in a manner similar to the production of = newsprint or=20 photographic film. New state-of-the-art production equipment, designed = and built=20 for United Solar by ECD, incorporates major advances in solar cell = design and=20 manufacturing processes achieved by United Solar and ECD with support = from DOE.=20 The production plant, scheduled to come on-line in early 1997, includes = a=20 triple-junction amorphous silicon alloy processor and annually can = produce solar=20 panels capable of delivering 5 million watts of electrical power. = Products from=20 the plant will be available for a variety of applications including = rooftop=20 solar products developed by ECD and United Solar such as the = award-winning solar=20 shingles for residential rooftops and solar! ! ! met al roofing products = for=20 commercial rooftops. These products can be installed by commercial = roofers=20 without additional supporting structures and have been showcased in an=20 energy-efficient house in Atlanta, Georgia and at a National Association = of Home=20 Builders townhouse in Maryland.

Back

------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BD7762.226E5B80-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 12:56:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA00114; Mon, 4 May 1998 12:54:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 12:54:09 -0700 Message-ID: <354E1CF9.62B5 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 15:54:33 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Commercial Nuclear Power (was Re: Confirming Dr. Case's...) References: <3.0.1.32.19980504095707.00c3b8b0 spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eUCrk1.0.a1.VpXJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18282 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > Philadelphia Electric built a plant which > generated steam at the triple-point and got 38.4% efficiency, but > maintenance problems caused them to back off a bit. (At the triple point, > converting water to steam requires no energy, and vice-versa. Causes havoc > when the steam in pipes turns to water just before a bend in the pipe.) > Robert, I assume you mean at the critical point above, right? At the triple point water has the following properties: pressure = 0.0888 psia temp = 32.02 deg F At the critical point: pressure = 3206.2 psia tenp. = 705.4 deg F This looks like a powerplant condition! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 13:11:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05964; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:55:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:55:57 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354DD05C.68A619FA css.mot.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 07:55:19 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? Resent-Message-ID: <"HCDTK.0.uS1.f4WJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18274 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: > Any chance it is an effect similar to sunspot > activity? Electromagnetic perculating? My first guess has to be rings of air flow surrounding convection cells as I mentioned before. But it seems that if it's not that or just data glitches, then it's real interesting Phenomena. Maybe EM 'earthspots', maybe iceballs as Schnurer suggested. Some of them are enormous! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 13:28:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA17590; Mon, 4 May 1998 13:17:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:17:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354E0D70.D63AAD6C css.mot.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:15:04 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? Resent-Message-ID: <"5GoEg2.0.eI4.Y9YJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18283 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: > My 'earthspots' idea is based on looking at the > SCALE of the disturbance and the localized > effects in proximity to it. Lots of > electrostatic energy shooting OUT of a > centalized area it what I see in the radar > image. Picture looking at a smoke ring as > it is shot AT you and you will see what I am > thinking. That sounds like a good idea to check out, but I think we're just guessing here. It's all I have time for personally on this, and it's fun, but any real effort at analysis has to start by gathering more data. Water vapor, IR, and visible images of the time and place should be gathered and oriented properly on a timeline. Then probably it's best to ask the experts involved - weather and radar people - for their analysis. If their conclusions don't seem to fit appearances in the data, then begin a more detailed analysis. One possible clue to your EM suggestion is that there is known to be some diurnal upper level air flows driven by solar energy and implicated in slight magnetic field shifts. Came across that when I was looking for things to correlate to when I was doing those capacitor experiments. I don't recall seeing such structures in any visible light weather images*, so it has to be a pattern of air movement embedded within larger cloud structures that isn't obvious in visible light. Altitude matters, and these may be very low. Look at the comments and photos about the low wall clouds on that web site. The structures also seem to be pretty common and numerous, and the wall clouds are common and well known. If these circular spots correlate strongly to the big convection cells, then that's probably what they are. I just never knew they were usually such regular circles, and we don't see them like that in the visible light images. Maybe they're always obscured by highter clouds. I just remembered where I've seen these exact image structures before: the old video game "Missle Command"! Some of those radar images look like they've been overlayed with a sequence of screen shots from the game. I think that's why the look of it creeped me out so much, aside from the overall apocalyptic tone to the web site. *But there are some low light NASA images that show numerous huge circular bursts and glowspots in the atmosphere that are somewhat like the radar images. Not talking about lightning or sprite phenomena here either, but really large spots and bullseyes appearing momentarily in the upper atmosphere, some of them then moving very fast, covering hundreds of miles in a few seconds. I don't think they were glitches, lens flares or reflections, or conventional aurora-realted phenomena. It was at non-artic lattitudes. These sound more like your earthspots. They very well could be the cross-section imprint of large streamers of charge movements or magnetism passing through the atmosphere. There was some talk and reports about this sort of thing a while back, some of it even making the mainstream media if I recall. STS-81? Terry Blanton probably knows what I'm talking about. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 13:27:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA08207; Mon, 4 May 1998 13:22:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:22:44 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> References: <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:22:12 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Resent-Message-ID: <"VeGz71.0.u_1.IEYJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18284 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Eachus wrote: > You can get a puddle of water to stand up and > walk over to the drain, and other such fun > things. Bill Beaty ... calling Bill Beaty... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 13:45:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13407; Mon, 4 May 1998 13:43:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:43:28 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01af01bd779d$22459c00$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Commercial Nuclear Power (was Re: Confirming Dr. Case's...) Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 14:42:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"2Fd8u1.0.PH3.lXYJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18285 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 04, 1998 1:55 PM Subject: Re: Commercial Nuclear Power (was Re: Confirming Dr. Case's...) Frank Stenger wrote: >Robert I. Eachus wrote: >> > Philadelphia Electric built a plant which >> generated steam at the triple-point and got 38.4% efficiency, but >> maintenance problems caused them to back off a bit. (At the triple point, >> converting water to steam requires no energy, and vice-versa. Causes havoc >> when the steam in pipes turns to water just before a bend in the pipe.) >> > >Robert, I assume you mean at the critical point above, right? >At the triple point water has the following properties: > pressure = 0.0888 psia > temp = 32.02 deg F > >At the critical point: > pressure = 3206.2 psia > tenp. = 705.4 deg F >This looks like a powerplant condition! Nit-Picking, Frank? LOL! :-) Also a great Temp-Press. for Biomass Conversion: H2O + CxHyOz ---> xCO + H2 (synthesis gas) which can use a proprietary low temp-pressure catalyst developed by United Catalyst Co (1970's).(Source for the G75E Pd-Carbon) to produce Methanol (CH3OH) in plants that turn out 5,000 to 10,000 TONS/DAY. The Ag wastes from Iowa alone, can produce a large portion of this annually. Put this in a Ceramic Piston-Stirling-Powered Auto using a molecular sieve oxygen-air separator and catalytically burning Methanol-Oxygen sans CO and NOx and you're talking a 75 MPG "Green Car". Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 13:51:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA14654; Mon, 4 May 1998 13:47:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:47:06 -0700 Message-ID: <354E5342.766 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 16:46:10 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QOz8x3.0.ta3.9bYJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18286 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > John Steck wrote: > > > Any chance it is an effect similar to sunspot > > activity? Electromagnetic perculating? > > My first guess has to be rings of air flow surrounding convection cells as > I mentioned before. But it seems that if it's not that or just data > glitches, then it's real interesting Phenomena. Maybe EM 'earthspots', > maybe iceballs as Schnurer suggested. Some of them are enormous! > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI I think these "doughnuts" are the result of a weather radar propagation anomaly instead of a precipitation anomaly. Have you seen some of the Cydonia claims on the same web site? Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 14:00:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA16414; Mon, 4 May 1998 13:57:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:57:01 -0700 Message-ID: <354E55BF.353E bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 16:56:47 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bcmLS1.0.N04.SkYJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18287 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Rick Monteverde wrote: [snip] >There was some talk and reports > about this sort of thing a while back, some of it even making the > mainstream media if I recall. STS-81? Terry Blanton probably knows what I'm > talking about. > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI Namedropper! Actually, Debbie probably knows more about the explanations of those things seen in shuttle's weather studies. She talked directly with the NASA dude responsible for imaging the blue jets, red sprites, yellow moons, and purple hearts. Oops, the last two are "Lucky Charms". You could email her directly as she is a transient on this list. But I think philkent's weather anomalies are radar imaging problems. I know for a fact that the scythe one in GA is an artifact of the imaging system. Maybe the "doughnuts" result from the radar echo switch being poorly timed so that it just misses part of the echo return signal. I'll just bet that the center of each "doughnut" is the location of a radar site. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 14:06:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05891; Mon, 4 May 1998 10:55:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:55:46 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:03:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Confirming Dr. Case's Catalytic Fusion Resent-Message-ID: <"WEXoM1.0.zR1.X4WJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18273 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:30 AM 5/4/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 08:20 AM 5/1/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >>Assuming 21 days for the experiment, the 4.6 MJ created is spread over >>21*24*60*60 = 1.81x10^6 seconds. The power output accounted for by fusion >>would thus be (4.6 J)/(1.81 s)= 2.5 J/s = 2.5 watts, so we are very roughly >>in the ballpark. >> >>If 90 ppm helium accounts for 2.5 W output over 3 weeks, then 360 ppm would >>be expected to account for the 10 W output. Still, assuming the caculation >>is correct, this seems very encouraging, when we consider that helium may >>be trapped in the catalyst or tank walls, that there may be sampling >>errors, that the exact run time and power are not accurately known, nor is >>the error known on the helium measurements at 90 ppm. > > Actually, I would expect the Helium to diffuse through the tank walls. >It is pretty mobile. The above 90 ppm number equates to 25 watts, based on the "improved" values used below. The main chnage is due to the gas volume calculation. I now estimate 46 MJ of fusion energy output corresponding to the helium. This is too much helium. I really wish someone would check the numbers used. Of special doubt are (1) my assumption that helium is monatomic (2) the density of D2 gas used (3) D + D fusion energy of 23.3 MeV and (4) any of the "Experiment values." The following are the best available data posted from the Case three week run that demonstrates "beyond chemical" energy output. This was placed in a spread sheet to make re-calculation easier, in order to update the calculations as better data becomes available. Any corrections or improvements in accuracy are appreciated. Experiment values: Initial Gas Pressure 50.00 PSI Initial Gas Temperature 18.00 C Initial Gas Volume 1.60 liters Run Duration 504.00 Hours Weight of Catalyst 100.00 grams Ratio of Pd to catalyst 0.03 Pd/total Helium content before run 6.00 ppm Helium content at end of run 96.00 ppm Heat output 7.50 watts Misc. Constants Used: Avogadro's Number 6.0221367E+23 atoms/mole Standard Temperature 273.00 deg. K Standard Pressure 14.69594 psi Density of helium at STP 0.1787 g/liter Density of D2 at STP 0.1798 g/liter AMU to MeV conversion factor 9.315E+02 AMU/MeV Atomic weight of deuterium 2.0104 Atomic weight of helium 4.0026 Atomic weight of carbon 12.0110 D + D fusion energy 23.3 MeV J/eV 1.6021773E-19 J/eV Calculated Values: D2 volume at std temperature 1.50 liters D2 volume at STP 5.11 liters D2 weight 0.9182 g Moles of D2 0.2284 moles STP helium volume created 4.5963E-04 liters Helium mass 8.2135E-05 g Helium moles 2.0520E-05 moles Helium atoms created 1.2358E+19 atoms Fusion energy based on He 4.6132E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.426 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules Energy per mole of carbon 23,360.03 J/mole Fusion energy per mole of helium 2.2481E+12 joules Fusion energy per mole of D2 2.2481E+12 joules Energy from total experiment D2 5.1340E+05 MJ Max run duration 2168.27 years Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 14:47:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA25651; Mon, 4 May 1998 14:44:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 14:44:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504174739.00c27230 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 17:47:39 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Commercial Nuclear Power (was Re: Confirming Dr. Case's...) Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <354E1CF9.62B5 interlaced.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19980504095707.00c3b8b0 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9ZAiy3.0.eG6.ERZJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18288 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:54 PM 5/4/98 -0400, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Robert, I assume you mean at the critical point above, right? >At the critical point: > pressure = 3206.2 psia > tenp. = 705.4 deg F >This looks like a powerplant condition! Yep, and I was always amazed that backing off about 5 degrees solved their water hammer problems. Incidently, they also tried for the triple point at the plant, getting the condensers down (in the winter) to under 0.1 psia for maximum thermal efficiency. But there the limit was not mechanical, it was the cooling water, drawn from the Schuykill(sp?) River. Evaporating too much resulted in the contained solids cloging up the evaporators. The solution was to run "excess" water through the evaporators, keeping them warm. 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 Mon May 4 14:48:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26134; Mon, 4 May 1998 14:47:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 14:47:11 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354E55BF.353E bellsouth.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:45:56 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? Resent-Message-ID: <"0G3r_1.0.uN6.TTZJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18289 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry - > Namedropper! Well, you lurk too much. Speak up now and then! :) > I'll just bet that the center of each "doughnut" > is the location of a radar site. Could be. Some of the things are pretty obviously radar or processing glitches. The "scythe" is certainly one. But those smaller circles with the central structure and the slightly irregular rings spreading in consecutive images look much more like a natural phenomena of some sort. But you're right, the web site source is *way* out there, and the images need some professional interpretation to call these things accurately. So Phil Kent tends to run a little to the left of even Hoaglund, hmm? Kewel. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 14:58:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA30054; Mon, 4 May 1998 14:56:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 14:56:16 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980504175911.00c36100 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 17:59:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NWCNo1.0.UL7._bZJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18290 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:22 AM 5/4/98 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Robert Eachus wrote: > > > You can get a puddle of water to stand up and > > walk over to the drain, and other such fun > > things. > >Bill Beaty ... calling Bill Beaty... Real cool, but not something for the amateur. Megavolts, handheld wand, and water on a concrete floor, not something to mix without experience. The Franklin Institute which is sort of a cross between your average Science Museum, like the one in Boston, and a very serious research lab, with among other things, its own journal. They often have demonstrations that are not for the unwary. My favorite was having someone drop an extiguished cigarette into a (special insulated) bucket of liquid oxygen. Safe if done right, but you had to practice the toss. You need to get it into the bucket from five feet away, and be sheltered by the lab bench before it hits. 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 Mon May 4 15:20:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA01819; Mon, 4 May 1998 15:17:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 15:17:37 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 15:17:39 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: smallcomets usa.net Subject: Re: Target: Earth - dirt on lens In-Reply-To: <354E55BF.353E bellsouth.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"l2-5v.0.LS.0wZJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18291 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 4 May 1998, Terry Blanton wrote: > But I think philkent's weather anomalies are radar imaging problems. I > know for a fact that the scythe one in GA is an artifact of the imaging > system. Maybe the "doughnuts" result from the radar echo switch being > poorly timed so that it just misses part of the echo return signal. > I'll just bet that the center of each "doughnut" is the location of a > radar site. Aha! My thoughts exactly. We see one circle all the time on the local Seattle news, and it obviously is centered on the location of the actual radar antenna. The images which show the entire country are probably not satellite-based, they are probably a composite of many separate radar images, each with its own circular artifact. If there is some noise in the receiver circuitry which is synched with the pulse, then that noise should always have the same phase, and so it should draw a circle as the antenna rotates. I'd still like to see something anomalous though. I just finished Louis Frank's THE BIG SPLASH, about the small fluff-ball comets (found it in a local library!) A worthwhile read. His battle against nasty skepticism, goalpost-moving, convenient misremembering, etc., will sound verrrrrry familiar to everyone here. Good fodder for any sociologists studying the behavior of scientists. http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu/ I still don't know if the miles-wide circular hole I saw in the cirrostratus in 1993(?) could have been a Frank comet. The little jellyfish-shaped puff of cloud in the exact center should not have been there (since the comet presumably had expanded into a miles-wide cloud.) Or would the heavier pebbles be left in a cluster while the fluffy stuff evaporates into an enormous vortex ring? Wouldn't the expanding gas take everything with it? Maybe these comets need a gravitational seed, so they form around a rock rather than just forming from dense spots in the Oort material. If so, then Frank's Iceballs should not simply be a 30-mile spot on a UV photograph, they should also have a small or large conventional meteor in the center of each H2O splotch. Would the meteor event precede the water-vapor impact? ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 May 4 15:23:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA02054; Mon, 4 May 1998 15:19:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 15:19:25 -0700 Message-ID: <354E6881.10DE bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 18:16:49 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Wunrc1.0.wV.hxZJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18292 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Well, you lurk too much. Speak up now and then! :) As Uncle Abe once said, "T'is better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt." > But those smaller circles with the > central structure and the slightly irregular rings spreading in consecutive > images look much more like a natural phenomena of some sort. Maybe a circular diffraction pattern, hmmm? > But you're > right, the web site source is *way* out there, and the images need some > professional interpretation to call these things accurately. > > So Phil Kent tends to run a little to the left of even Hoaglund, hmm? My typo, he goes by phikent on other listservers. His name is Kent Steadman. He's got Richard beat by a mile. Just back up a couple of backslashes on your browser location and look at little closer to the apex of his pyramid. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 16:12:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA14770; Mon, 4 May 1998 16:10:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 16:10:27 -0700 Message-ID: <003901bd77b1$ab918780$d141d3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: Target: Earth - who's shooting at us? Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 17:13:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZuALC1.0.cc3.WhaJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18293 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ice Balls is the most probable cause. All interested should go directly to http://smallcomets.physics.uiowa.edu for a rundown on Frank's discovery of the continuous rain of ice comets onto the earth. The radar circles shown on the site cited previously are consistent with atmospheric disturbances caused by these impacts.I find it plausible that not every impact will produce such an artifact, but they might well happen often. This would be an interesting additional cooberation of interest to DR. Frank. Look up the story of what happened to Frank after his initial discovery for a parallel reprise of the punishment F&P got from the establishment. That these haven't been seen before may be a matter of updated technology on the weather radars, or simply no one taking sufficient notice. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 19:27:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07410; Mon, 4 May 1998 19:21:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 19:21:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <015f01bd7792$420e35c0$3e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. Home Page (http://www.ovonic.com/) Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 13:24:06 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD775F.E9F6B560" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"dBv-72.0.ep1.tUdJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18294 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD775F.E9F6B560 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Stan Ovshinsy's R&D Company http://www.ovonic.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD775F.E9F6B560 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. Home Page.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. Home Page.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.ovonic.com/ Modified=E033950B9277BD017A ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD775F.E9F6B560-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 21:22:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA24596; Mon, 4 May 1998 21:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 21:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 17:07:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id VAA24550 Resent-Message-ID: <"_D1ow1.0.D06.r0fJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18295 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Posted below are the best available data posted from the Case three week run that demonstrates "beyond chemical" energy output. This was placed in a spread sheet to make re-calculation easier, in order to update the calculations as better data becomes available. Any corrections or improvements in accuracy are appreciated. Note that the helium detected accounts for a heat output of 46.8 MJ, while the run output was only 13.60 at the estimated 7.5 watts output. If the helium measurement and other data is accurate, and the cell output is due to D + D fusion, then the average cell output should have been 25.8 watts. Gene Mallove posted in the Case patent application: "EXAMPLE 1 Into a 300-series stainless steel bottle of 1700 ml. volume, fitted with pressure gauge, thermowell reaching to near the bottom of the bottle, an inlet-outlet valve, and 3/4" plugged opening for addition and removal of solids, and heated on the lower outside and bottom by a hemispherical, electrically-heated heating mantle, was placed 28.0 g. of 1% Pt on activated carbon, of 62% H20 content, and being very fluffy and light weight. The vessel was then sealed, and alternatively heated to about 100 °C., and evacuated with a good mechanical vacuum pump, until the pressure in the vessel at 100 °C. was much less than 1 psia. Then the vessel was filled to 32 psia with high purity (grade 4.7) hydrogen gas. After heating for several hours, at 60 V. on the heating mantle the vessel stabilized at 156 °C. and 18.5 psia. Then the vessel was evacuated well with the mechanical vacuum pump, and filled to 32.5 psia with grade 2.5 deuterium. The vessel was then heated again for several hours, and at 60 V. on the heating mantel, the vessel stabilized at a temperature of 166 °C. The current to the heating mantle was 1.79 A for the H2 run, and 1.78 A for the D2 run, thought to be indistinguishably different. The temperature difference for D2 over H2, at the same power input is 10 °C., corresponding to a few watts of power generation. On maintaining the voltage at 60 V. for many days, the temperature vessel containing D2 increased another one or two °C." Gene, was this the subject 3 week run? Note that D2 pressure was 32.5 psia, fill temperature unknown, unless 100 C is assumed, catalyst weight was 28.0 g, run duration not specified. Here are the best available values so far for the "beyond chemical" run: Experiment values: Initial Gas Pressure 50.00 PSI Initial Gas Temperature 18.00 C Initial Gas Volume 1.60 liters Run Duration 504.00 Hours Weight of Catalyst 50.00 grams Ratio of catalyst Pd 0.03 Pd/total Helium content before run 6.00 ppm Helium content at end of run 96.00 ppm Heat output 7.50 watts Misc. Constants Used: Avogadro's Number 6.0221367E+23 atoms/mole Standard Temperature 273.00 deg. K Standard Pressure 14.69594 psi Density of helium at STP 0.1787 g/liter Density of D2 at STP 0.1796 g/liter AMU to MeV conversion factor 931.459539710 MeV/AMU Atomic weight of 2H (deuterium) 2.0140 AMU Atomic weight of 4He 4.00260 AMU Atomic weight of carbon 12.0110 AMU D + D fusion energy 23.66 MeV J/eV 1.6021773E-19 J/eV Calculated Values: D2 volume at std temperature 1.50 liters D2 volume at STP 5.11 liters D2 weight 0.9174 g Moles of D2 0.2277 moles STP helium volume created 4.5963E-04 liters Helium mass 8.2135E-05 g Helium moles 2.0520E-05 moles Helium atoms created 1.2358E+19 atoms D + D fusion energy based on AMU 23.6591 MeV Fusion energy based on He 4.6845E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.818 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules Energy per mole of carbon 23360.03 J/mole Fusion energy per mole of helium 2.2828E+12 joules Fusion energy per mole of D2 2.2828E+12 joules Energy from total experiment D2 5.1992E+05 MJ Max run duration on the D2 2195.78 years Time till fuel recycle at 5 pct 109.79 years Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 22:33:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA17401; Mon, 4 May 1998 22:29:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 22:29:25 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <9417d931.354ea39d aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 01:29:00 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"XczFk3.0.nF4.qEgJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18296 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-04 00:44:19 EDT, you write: > Vince, if you're using a half-wave rectifier, the transformer CURRENT > may have a very lopsided waveform. > Frank Stenger Frank, I'll hang a scope on it and check. Vince Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 22:35:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA06151; Mon, 4 May 1998 22:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 22:32:28 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <9870d9a1.354ea3da aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 01:30:00 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZjxkH3.0.1W1.gHgJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18297 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-04 01:07:08 EDT, you write: > How are you going to measure the input power, Vince? > > > Scott Little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 4 22:51:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA09564; Mon, 4 May 1998 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 22:50:11 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 01:47:34 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"ADJQE3.0.GL2.GYgJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18298 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-04 01:07:08 EDT, you write: > How are you going to measure the input power, Vince? > Scott Little Well Scott, I will measure, at first (because it's easy) the power feed to the primary of the high voltage transformer. Later on, the voltage drop across a 1 ohm resistor in the HV feed to the tube. Other than that, I don't know. Ideas? Volt and ammeter did not arrive yet so I went ahead and tried a no K run to see how the ballast assembly would work. It is eight 7.5 watt lamps in series. I am going to add four more. The glow discharge is more stable when the lamps glow at dull red heat and the eight lamps are at almost full brillience now when running. This is the old 3 inch electrode gap tube and the 5/8 inch gap tube is sure to draw more current. Sigh... the old power supply wouldn't put out enough current and the new one puts out too much. A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the inside of the tube? Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 05:27:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA07638; Tue, 5 May 1998 05:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 05:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980505072446.009598b0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 07:24:46 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"j41Uc1.0.Et1.CLmJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18299 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:47 AM 5/5/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >Well Scott, I will measure, at first (because it's easy) the power feed to >the primary of the high voltage transformer. good start. If you see higher temps on your experiment tube for the same (or lower) total input power, at least that will be a sign of something interesting....but it might not be excess heat. Unless you devise a way to actually calibrate the temperature sensors on your tube (i.e. develop a relationship between temperature reading and watts of power dissipated in the tube) you won't know if your experiment is o-u. >A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the inside >of the tube? I don't know. W is relatively immune to attack by acids. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 06:28:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA03013; Tue, 5 May 1998 06:23:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 06:23:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199805051323.JAA10546 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Taubes Attacks Cold Fusion in MIT Techology Review Date: Tue, 5 May 98 09:25:51 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id GAA02986 Resent-Message-ID: <"hzZDT.0._k.5BnJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18300 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians: It comes as no surprise that Gary Taubes and the new editors at MIT Technology Review are brain dead on the subject of cold fusion. Still, the pernicious insults by this know-nothing Taubes were particularly vicious this time: In an article in the new "Viewpoint" section in the May/June 1998 issue of Technology Review, Taubes pontificates about the standards science journalists should uphold in reporting new scientific claims (as though he is anyone to judge!). He has discover ed a new disease, or so it seems: "The challenge for science reporters is how to deal with the onslaught of fascinating -- and quite likely erroneous -- results. At times this chronic problem shows up in an acute episode like the infection known as cold fusion. In 1989, during three mont hs of hysteria surrounding the outbreak of cold fusion, a then Washington Post science reporter described daily science reporting, especially during such periods of extreme activity, as akin to playing goalie in a hockey match. Pucks come whizzing at you fast and furious, he said, and most you block, but a few get by." Later in the article..."Consider the cold fusion episode. Within three weeks of the purported discovery of room temperature nuclear fusion by researchers at the University of Utah, the pursuit had developed into a nuclear version of the emperor's new clot hs. On one side were those scientists who believed Nobel laureate Luis Alvarez's adage: 'Only trust what you can prove.' They pointed out repeatedly that no reliable data existed to support the claim of cold fusion-let alone prove it‹ and that certain fun damental experimental procedures had consistently been ignored. The press treated these scientists as being firmly entrenched on the wrong side of the 'new' paradigm. After all, most of them were nuclear physicists who had spent long years NOT discovering cold fusion; therefore they must be jealous. The rest of the skeptics were chemists, also tarred by their failure to discover cold fusion. That they did not embrace the new finding could only be because of hopeless self-interest." "Judgements like these render science reporting on most controversial subjects perilously close to anti-intellectualism. Science reporters tend to be fans of science who sincerely want to believe that there was once life on Mars, or that fusion power c an be achieved in a glass of water...." and blah, blah, blah -- ad nauseam. The saving grace is that Taubes has further stuck himself to royal fly paper that will end up cementing his position as one of the greatest incompetent boobs in the history of science journalism ‹ to paraphrase what his Princeton hot fusion buddy said abo ut Pons and Fleischmann. Yes, this Taubes virus will eventually be cured, but it will take strong medicine. I also note that Technology Review is now touted as "MIT's Magazine of Innovation" -- what pathetic chutzpah for a magazine with such a banner to be show-casing this trash from Taubes. Best, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302 Phone: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 07:22:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA12617; Tue, 5 May 1998 07:17:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:17:22 -0700 Message-ID: <354F1F85.14D2 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 10:17:41 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: <3.0.5.32.19980505072446.009598b0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aL1QR1.0.253.mznJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18301 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > Unless you devise a way to > actually calibrate the temperature sensors on your tube (i.e. develop a > relationship between temperature reading and watts of power dissipated in > the tube) you won't know if your experiment is o-u. > Scott, Vince: I would think that a longish, round tube positioned horizontally several diameters above a table-top, would have fairly constant air flow characteristics - don't you think? I'm thinking of a copper tube "oven", maybe 1 inch water pipe (3/4 might work) 6 or 8 inches long. The end plugs would need to accomodate the power leads, insulate against the 1200 volts, and keep flow in and out of the tube to a minimum so the primary cooling would be from the reactor tube to the copper interior via convection and radiation. The copper needs to be "blackened" with some stable coating to get a "constant" heat transfer surface on the outside. Vince could put a small peep hole in the copper tube to view the reactor - drop in a small plug between "peeps". What I'm trying to do is get away from the complex radiation + convection heat transfer thru a quartz tube which we know is passing UV. The idea of the copper tube would be to: 1. simplify the external air flow to stabilize the convective heat loss. 2. the copper tupe would tend to smooth out the temperature profile of the convective surface. 3. hopefully, provide NO direct transmission of the complex reactor radiation, in exchange for a stable "black body" radiation from the tube exterior. The down side is added complexity, longer time constant with the thermocouple now on the copper tube, and Vince can't get a good look at the reactor except thru the peep hole. A wad of fiberglass insulation might work to plug the tube ends. I don't know about the black coating - I'm not sure I would trust black stove paint. I know sulfur compounds (copper sulfide) make a nice black coating on copper if you store a piece of copper and sulfur in the same container. Any good copper blackening ideas out there for the 200 > 300 deg C temperature range? These are just off-the-top ideas, if Vince should decide to reject this mission this post will self-destruct as soon as Vince hits the "delete" button. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 07:36:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA16669; Tue, 5 May 1998 07:33:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:33:18 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <354F230A.83A24C44 css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 09:32:42 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Scientists see sun, not people, behind global warming Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zOYgL1.0.J44.iCoJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: By Neil Winton, Science and Technology Correspondent LONDON (Reuters) - World governments are signing on to a treaty that seeks to stop mankind from destroying the Earth's climate, but some experts say the sun may be to blame and want to test the theory. John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 08:08:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA29755; Tue, 5 May 1998 08:04:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 08:04:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:10:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"T4OrZ3.0.oG7.DgoJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18303 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:24 AM 5/5/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 01:47 AM 5/5/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: > >>Well Scott, I will measure, at first (because it's easy) the power feed to >>the primary of the high voltage transformer. > >good start. If you see higher temps on your experiment tube for the same >(or lower) total input power, at least that will be a sign of something >interesting....but it might not be excess heat. Unless you devise a way to >actually calibrate the temperature sensors on your tube (i.e. develop a >relationship between temperature reading and watts of power dissipated in >the tube) you won't know if your experiment is o-u. > >>A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the inside >>of the tube? > >I don't know. W is relatively immune to attack by acids. The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 08:33:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03471; Tue, 5 May 1998 08:29:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 08:29:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505102800.00bda7cc mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 10:28:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"tJUBH2.0.5s.Z1pJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18304 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:10 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. Curious, The Merck index says, "Very stable to acids, attacked only superficially by concd nitric or aqua regia." The Merck has been wrong on occasion. I've got a table of recommended etchants for various metals and it recommends a 1:1 mixture of conc HF/HNO3 for W. 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 May 5 08:35:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03650; Tue, 5 May 1998 08:31:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 08:31:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:23:06 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex , John Schnurer Subject: Two slit experiment ... with electrons Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"049pP3.0.xu.53pJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., Any references for the two slit experiment done with electrons as opposed to photons? Thanks, John From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 08:43:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA04904; Tue, 5 May 1998 08:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 08:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:44:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"wueR53.0.YC1.q9pJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18306 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:28 AM 5/5/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 07:10 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >>The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. > >Curious, The Merck index says, "Very stable to acids, attacked only >superficially by concd nitric or aqua regia." > >The Merck has been wrong on occasion. > >I've got a table of recommended etchants for various metals and it >recommends a 1:1 mixture of conc HF/HNO3 for W. I think our emails crossed, as I have corrected myself twice already before breakfast! 8^) Yes, CRC also lists W as soluble in HNO3 + HF. I have a feeling Vince wants to get rid of the blackening on the tube, which should be oxidized W, shouldn't it? What was that tungsten "water cycle" again? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 09:38:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA13603; Tue, 5 May 1998 09:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 09:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:26:12 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: Horace Heffner cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"V5VdK2.0.TK3.p-pJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18307 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Cleaning tungsten: Probably the best ways... safety wise ... although it may not seem so, is fused salts bath. A corbon crucible is acceptable and a mixture 50 50 is OK of N or K ... chloride and hydroxide is used... NO WATER!!!! The salts mixture is melted at ~ 600 to 900 C. Read up on it first... AND ... not good to breathe or expose anything to vapor. HF is NASTY and will not do your quartz any good. OR: Diamond or alumina abrasive or silicon carbide.... OR: Run a halogen rich atmosphere ... for example sodium iodide with some extra iodine solid ... and fire up your arc! The last method is probably the most benign. Unless you can live with abrasion. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 09:56:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA16783; Tue, 5 May 1998 09:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 09:47:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980505102800.00bda7cc mail.eden.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 09:45:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"pJTah1.0.864.hAqJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18308 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re Vince's request for suggestions to clean W off SiO2: Tungsten oxidizes fairly quickly in air at high enough temperature. Then you can dissolve the W oxide away with just about any acid. I don't know what a good minimum temperature is. It's probably worth trying to put your tube in an oven for a while. A self cleaning oven gets hotter than a common one. Just make sure the oven is clean first, to minimizes chances that you deposit junk on the quartz tube. If you can find someone with a hobbyist kiln, eg for pottery, you can get over 1000 C. A cheap source of concentrated HCl is swimming pool acid. It's probably not very pure, so rinse your components well many times after using it. Re your discharge: Do you have an arc or a glow discharge? Do you know how to recognize the difference? Which one do you want? 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 Tue May 5 10:21:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA02164; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:09:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:09:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505104600.00bdd9ec mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 10:46:00 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Y1yw7.0.cX.QVqJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18309 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:44 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >I have a feeling Vince wants to get rid of the blackening on the tube, >which should be oxidized W, shouldn't it? What was that tungsten "water >cycle" again? I believe it is metallic W. The water cycle goes like this: A water molecule goes near incandescent W and dissociates. The O reacts with the W to make WO3 which volatizes and condenses on the glass. The H's (in atomic form) drift over to the glass and reduce the WO3 to W metal (left on the glass) forming H2O so the process can repeat. 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 May 5 10:23:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA02425; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:10:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:10:13 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:16:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"6KRNx2.0.pb.qVqJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18310 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:10 AM 5/5/98, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 7:24 AM 5/5/98, Scott Little wrote: >>At 01:47 AM 5/5/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >> >>>Well Scott, I will measure, at first (because it's easy) the power feed to >>>the primary of the high voltage transformer. >> >>good start. If you see higher temps on your experiment tube for the same >>(or lower) total input power, at least that will be a sign of something >>interesting....but it might not be excess heat. Unless you devise a way to >>actually calibrate the temperature sensors on your tube (i.e. develop a >>relationship between temperature reading and watts of power dissipated in >>the tube) you won't know if your experiment is o-u. >> >>>A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the inside >>>of the tube? >> >>I don't know. W is relatively immune to attack by acids. > > >The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. Oops! The abbreviation was "v sl s", meaning very slightly soluble. Also lists H2SO4 in that category. Got any battery acid handy? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 10:25:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA03573; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:13:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:13:28 -0700 Message-ID: <354F3352.A27B66AA ariel.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 11:42:10 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980504175911.00c36100@spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MSPVL1.0.Tt.sYqJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18312 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > At 10:22 AM 5/4/98 -1000, Rick Monteverde wrote: > >Robert Eachus wrote: > > > > > You can get a puddle of water to stand up and > > > walk over to the drain, and other such fun > > > things. > > > >Bill Beaty ... calling Bill Beaty... > > Real cool, but not something for the amateur. Megavolts, handheld wand, > and water on a concrete floor, not something to mix without experience. > The Franklin Institute which is sort of a cross between your average > Science Museum, like the one in Boston, and a very serious research lab, > with among other things, its own journal. They often have demonstrations > that are not for the unwary. My favorite was having someone drop an > extiguished cigarette into a (special insulated) bucket of liquid oxygen. > Safe if done right, but you had to practice the toss. You need to get it > into the bucket from five feet away, and be sheltered by the lab bench > before it hits. > > Robert I. Eachus So what happened? Inquiring minds want to know. You know, reading about stuff like second-order effects, making water sit up & beg, etc... gives a lot more credence to the typical skeptic's copout answer of 'atmospheric disturbances' when trying to explain UFO phenomena. Terren PS. Howdy everyone... I've been lurking for a week, and while most of this stuff is way over my head, I enjoy reading it all. I'm writing an article for a very non-scientific magazine, which will be more or less about what it's like here out on the fringe of science. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 10:27:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA03139; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:12:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:12:38 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:33:40 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"BYXC61.0.dm.2YqJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18311 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:10 AM 5/5/98, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 7:24 AM 5/5/98, Scott Little wrote: >>At 01:47 AM 5/5/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >> >>>Well Scott, I will measure, at first (because it's easy) the power feed to >>>the primary of the high voltage transformer. >> >>good start. If you see higher temps on your experiment tube for the same >>(or lower) total input power, at least that will be a sign of something >>interesting....but it might not be excess heat. Unless you devise a way to >>actually calibrate the temperature sensors on your tube (i.e. develop a >>relationship between temperature reading and watts of power dissipated in >>the tube) you won't know if your experiment is o-u. >> >>>A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the inside >>>of the tube? >> >>I don't know. W is relatively immune to attack by acids. > > >The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. Oops! The abbreviation was "v sl s", meaning very slightly soluble. Also lists H2SO4 in that category. Got any battery acid handy? Oops again! You probably want to get get rid of WO3, which is listed as soluble in hot alkali. Hot Draino or Red Devil Lye? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 10:39:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11069; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:30:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:30:38 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980505173035.00691d28 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 13:30:35 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"XAiuc.0.li2.xoqJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:07 PM 5/4/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > > >Here are the best available values so far for the "beyond chemical" run: > >Experiment values: > Initial Gas Pressure 50.00 PSI > Initial Gas Temperature 18.00 C > Initial Gas Volume 1.60 liters > Run Duration 504.00 Hours > Weight of Catalyst 50.00 grams > Ratio of catalyst Pd 0.03 Pd/total > Helium content before run 6.00 ppm > Helium content at end of run 96.00 ppm > Heat output 7.50 watts > >Misc. Constants Used: > Avogadro's Number 6.0221367E+23 atoms/mole > Standard Temperature 273.00 deg. K > Standard Pressure 14.69594 psi > Density of helium at STP 0.1787 g/liter > Density of D2 at STP 0.1796 g/liter > AMU to MeV conversion factor 931.459539710 MeV/AMU > Atomic weight of 2H (deuterium) 2.0140 AMU > Atomic weight of 4He 4.00260 AMU > Atomic weight of carbon 12.0110 AMU > D + D fusion energy 23.66 MeV > J/eV 1.6021773E-19 J/eV > >Calculated Values: > D2 volume at std temperature 1.50 liters > D2 volume at STP 5.11 liters > D2 weight 0.9174 g > Moles of D2 0.2277 moles > STP helium volume created 4.5963E-04 liters > Helium mass 8.2135E-05 g > Helium moles 2.0520E-05 moles > Helium atoms created 1.2358E+19 atoms > > D + D fusion energy based on AMU 23.6591 MeV > Fusion energy based on He 4.6845E+07 joules > Fusion power over run duration 25.818 watts > Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules > Energy per mole of carbon 23360.03 J/mole > > Fusion energy per mole of helium 2.2828E+12 joules > Fusion energy per mole of D2 2.2828E+12 joules > Energy from total experiment D2 5.1992E+05 MJ > Max run duration on the D2 2195.78 years > Time till fuel recycle at 5 pct 109.79 years > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > I was interested in the number of fusion events that were occurring during a second so using your figures these are the calculations: D + D fusion energy = 23.66 MeV One molecule D2 produces two atoms of D. Therefore one D2 is used per event. The energy per event is: 23.66 MeV/event * 10^6 eV/1MeV * 1.6021773*10^-19 J/1 eV = 3.790751*10^-12 J/event 1.3608 * 10^7 J/Run * Run/504 hrs * 1 hr/3600 sec * 1 event/(3.790751 * 10^-12) J = 1.0029 * 10^15 events/sec Using this figure I get these results comparinf them with yours: Total number of events: 1 event/1 molecule D2 * 0.2277 mole D2 * 6.0221367 * 10^23 molecules/mole D2 = 1.371241 * 10^23 events 3.790751 * 10^-12 J/event * 1.371241 * 10^23 events = 5.198 * 10^11 J or 5.198 * 10^5 MJ You get 5.1992 * 10^5 MJ; we agree Total time for 0.2277 mole of D2: 1.371241 * 10^23 events/0.227 mole D2/(1.9785 * 10^12 events/sec) = 6.9307101339 * 10^10 sec/0.227 mole D2 6.9307171339 * 10^10 sec * 1 hr/3600 sec * 1 day/24 hrs * 1 yr/365 days = 2197.7 yrs You get 2195.78 yrs; we agree Now, can anything be said about the apparent coulomb barrier under these conditons if we suspect what is happening is happening? Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 10:42:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA16669; Tue, 5 May 1998 07:33:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 07:33:18 -0700 Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <354F230A.83A24C44 css.mot.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 09:32:42 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Scientists see sun, not people, behind global warming Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zOYgL1.0.J44.iCoJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: By Neil Winton, Science and Technology Correspondent LONDON (Reuters) - World governments are signing on to a treaty that seeks to stop mankind from destroying the Earth's climate, but some experts say the sun may be to blame and want to test the theory. John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 10:45:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26713; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:37:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:37:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <354F3352.A27B66AA ariel.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980504175911.00c36100 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:36:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth Resent-Message-ID: <"AMAEd1.0.HX6.pvqJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18314 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terren wrote: >PS. Howdy everyone... I've been lurking for a week, and while most of >this stuff is way over my head, I enjoy reading it all. I'm writing an >article for a very non-scientific magazine, which will be more or less >about what it's like here out on the fringe of science. with respect to Eachus' post:" >> Real cool, but not something for the amateur. Megavolts, handheld wand, >> and water on a concrete floor, not something to mix without experience. >> The Franklin Institute which is sort of a cross between your average >> Science Museum, like the one in Boston, and a very serious research lab, >> with among other things, its own journal. They often have demonstrations >> that are not for the unwary. My favorite was having someone drop an >> extiguished cigarette into a (special insulated) bucket of liquid oxygen. >> Safe if done right, but you had to practice the toss. You need to get it >> into the bucket from five feet away, and be sheltered by the lab bench >> before it hits. Terren, don't get so excited. Eauchus is talking about stuff that is part of mainstream science. It just looks wierd and impressive to those who don't know. My recommendation: Be sure you understand what you are reporting, or for sure you will report in error. 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 Tue May 5 11:04:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29480; Tue, 5 May 1998 10:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 10:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:50:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805051750.MAA24664 dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: Re: Two slit experiment ... with electrons To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"R9tl6.0.YC7.i7rJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18315 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: May 5, 1998 John, you wrote, > Any references for the two slit experiment done with electrons as >opposed to photons? Recently in the science section of the New York Times and/or the weekly Science News, there was reporting of the two slit experiment done with particles or atoms (much more massive than photons or electrons) and results showed a similar 'wave interference pattern' found with photons! The news exited me but with an older brain, slipped my mind since nobody else picked up on it until you just mentioned it. :) You should be able to resource it easily enough. It should have important bearing on understanding the cf action. -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 11:15:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA23051; Tue, 5 May 1998 11:03:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:03:58 -0700 Message-ID: <354F53AA.C58A1186 ariel.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 14:00:10 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980504175911.00c36100 spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9mPsr1.0.td5.AIrJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18316 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > Terren wrote: > >PS. Howdy everyone... I've been lurking for a week, and while most of > >this stuff is way over my head, I enjoy reading it all. I'm writing an > >article for a very non-scientific magazine, which will be more or less > >about what it's like here out on the fringe of science. > > with respect to Eachus' post:" > >> Real cool, but not something for the amateur. Megavolts, handheld wand, > >> and water on a concrete floor, not something to mix without experience. > >> The Franklin Institute which is sort of a cross between your average > >> Science Museum, like the one in Boston, and a very serious research lab, > >> with among other things, its own journal. They often have demonstrations > >> that are not for the unwary. My favorite was having someone drop an > >> extiguished cigarette into a (special insulated) bucket of liquid oxygen. > >> Safe if done right, but you had to practice the toss. You need to get it > >> into the bucket from five feet away, and be sheltered by the lab bench > >> before it hits. > > Terren, don't get so excited. Eauchus is talking about stuff that is part > of mainstream science. It just looks wierd and impressive to those who > don't know. > > My recommendation: Be sure you understand what you are reporting, or for > sure you will report in error. Thanks for the warning. You can be sure I won't be wading too deep into this pool of heavy water. For one, the intended audience will have no scientific background whatsoever. Not to mention my intent in writing the article lies closer to illuminating the conflict between skeptics & fringe scientists... the charlatans and the visionaries... the characters, not the science itself. Terren From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 11:52:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03939; Tue, 5 May 1998 11:38:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:38:08 -0700 From: Puthoff Message-ID: <2b1861b9.354f5c25 aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 14:36:20 EDT To: herman antioch-college.edu, vortex-l@eskimo.com, herman college.antioch-college.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Two slit experiment ... with electrons Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78 Resent-Message-ID: <"Sevpz2.0.Oz.DorJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18317 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 5/5/98 9:31:37 AM, herman antioch-college.edu wrote: <> All the Aharonov-Bohm experiements in which electron waves pass around both sides of a magnetic sliver are equivalent. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 12:55:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19457; Tue, 5 May 1998 12:44:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:44:01 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08DC xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:43:19 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"n43811.0.pl4._lsJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18318 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince I sent you this post last week, but the vagaries of e-mail are such that you may not have gotten it. I can give you more specific design information if you want. Hank Vince, Frank The only sure way to compute your power is to use a digital oscilloscope, or a two channel A/D, one for the current into the system and the other for the voltage driving the current. A small non inductive resistor in the input lead will give you a voltage proportional to the current flowing. After you collect the data, multiply the current times the voltage at each time point to get the instantaneous power, and then sum this for the duration of the experiment to compute the energy used. The problem you are facing is that the arcs are unstable, and change with time a lot, fairly quickly. You have to run the A/D at a sample rate fast enough to get at least several samples during the changes, and you should have an input low pass filter on the A/D analog input, with a cutoff frequency equal to half the sampling frequency. I would suggest using a conventional analog oscilloscope first to observe the arc behavior, to determine what frequency sampling you need. There are a lot of good, relatively cheap A/D's on the market now, by Linear, Texas Instruments, or Burr-Brown for example, and a low pass filter is easily built up using an op-amp, which will also set the gain for you to drive the A/D in its input voltage range. Just using Fluke voltmeters (evan RMS) to measure the current and voltage won't do the trick because you loose the timing information between the voltage and current, which is all important for this type of measurements. Hank > ---------- > From: VCockeram[SMTP:VCockeram aol.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Monday, May 04, 1998 10:47 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > In a message dated 98-05-04 01:07:08 EDT, you write: > > How are you going to measure the input power, Vince? > > Scott Little > > Well Scott, I will measure, at first (because it's easy) the power > feed to > the primary of the high voltage transformer. Later on, the voltage > drop > across a 1 ohm resistor in the HV feed to the tube. > Other than that, I don't know. Ideas? > > Volt and ammeter did not arrive yet so I went ahead and tried a no K > run to see how the ballast assembly would work. It is eight 7.5 watt > lamps > in series. I am going to add four more. The glow discharge is more > stable when the lamps glow at dull red heat and the eight lamps are at > almost full brillience now when running. This is the old 3 inch > electrode > gap tube and the 5/8 inch gap tube is sure to draw more current. > Sigh... > the old power supply wouldn't put out enough current and the new one > puts out too much. > > A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the > inside > of the tube? > > Regards, > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 12:59:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA18467; Tue, 5 May 1998 12:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 15:41:29 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: comp hu (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"HL_Hd3.0.TW4.UrsJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18319 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 11:24:24 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: comp hu (fwd) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 3) Abbot and Costello Meet Windows 95 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Costello: Hey, Abbot! > Abbot: Yes, Lou? > > Costello: I just got my first computer. > Abbot: That's great Lou. What did you get? > > Costello: A Pentium II-266, with 40 Megs of RAM, a 2.1 Gig hard drive, > and a 24X CD-ROM. > Abbot: That's terrific, Lou. > > Costello: But I don't know what any of it means! > Abbot: You will in time. > > Costello: That's exactly why I am here to see you. > Abbot: Oh? > > Costello: I heard that you are a real computer expert. > Abbot: Well, I don't know- > > Costello: Yes-sir-ee. You know your stuff. And you're going to train > me. > Abbot: Really? > > Costello: Uh huh. And I am here for my first lesson. > Abbot: O.K. Lou. What do want to know? > > Costello: I am having no problem turning it on, but I heard that you > should be very careful how you turn it off. > Abbot: That's true. > > Costello: So, here I am working on my new computer and I want to turn > it off. What do I do? > Abbot: Well, first you press the Start button, and then- > > Costello: No, I told you, I want to turn it off. > Abbot: I know, you press the Start button- > > Costello: Wait a second. I want to turn it Off. I know how to start > it. So tell me what to do. > Abbot: I did. > > Costello: When? > Abbot: When I told you to press the Start button. > > Costello: Why should I press the Start button? > Abbot: To shut off the computer. > > Costello: I press Start to stop. > Abbot: Well Start doesn't actually stop the computer. > > Costello: I knew it! So what do I press? > Abbot: Start. > > Costello: Start what? > Abbot: Start button. > > Costello: Start button to do what? > Abbot: Shut down. > > Costello: You don't have to get rude! > Abbot: No, no, no! That's not what I meant. > > Costello: Then say what you mean. > Abbot: To shut down the computer, press- > > Costello: Don't say, "Start!" > Abbot: Then what do you want me to say? > > Costello: Look, if I want to turn off the computer, I am willing to > press the Stop button, the End button and Cease and Desist button, but > no one in their right mind presses the Start to Stop. > Abbot: But that's what you do. > > Costello: And you probably Go at Stop signs, and Stop at green lights. > Abbot: Don't be ridiculous. > > Costello: I'm being ridiculous? Well. I think it's about time we > started this conversation. > Abbot: What are you talking about? > > Costello: I am starting this conversation right now. Good-bye. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 13:29:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA25940; Tue, 5 May 1998 13:18:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 13:18:58 -0700 X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:18:30 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"Rt9I.0.EL6.mGtJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18320 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:30 PM 5/5/98, Edwin Strojny wrote: >You get 2195.78 yrs; we agree > >Now, can anything be said about the apparent coulomb barrier under these >conditons if we suspect what is happening is happening? > >Ed Strojny Thanks for checking my calcs Ed. If the helium is being manufactured in the Case device, then what do we know? It is seems reasonable that: (1) Electrolysis is not necessary for the effect. (2) Since the helium is not trapped in the Pd, and the catalysis continues unabated at a constant pressure, it is apparent this is a surface effect. (3) Since it is a surface effect, it is reasonable to assume it takes place at catalytically active sites on the surface. (4) Since many Pd catalysts Case tried do not work, and pure Pd does not work, or is at least not nearly as effective in this pressure and temperature range, then it is reasonable to assume the active site involves both Pd and carbon atoms, or Pd and impurity atoms in the carbon. (5) Possibly special forms of carbon are involved in the catalysis, like carbon nanotubes, or Fullerenes. (6) Possibly Pd is not involved at all. (7) Since a lower critical temperature is involved, the importance of the electro-mechanical dynamics of the catalytic sites are indicated. Possibly one factor is the opening and closing of gaps in nanotubes which permit entry of H2 or H through carbon rings (8) Possibly the dynamics of the H2 molecule itself, trapped in a vibrating "anvil" of atoms, like a dumbell caught in a buttonhole, somehow contains conditions which allow overcoming the coulomb barrier. This is not a new idea. It was discussed many times in relation to H2 in Pd. I think neither pressure nor knietic energy applies directly to the barrier penetration, but rather some unique situation, like creation of momentary quasi-neutron, would have to be involved in such a process. (9) Somehow at least an H2 or carbon ionizing energy must be involved in such a process, because, otherwise, neither free electrons, nor other than common nuclei can be involved. There appears to be no electrolyte involved, though it is possible Li is in the catalyst, and that there may be water on at least part of the catalyst surface. (10) The process appears to be aneutronic, and free of x-rays, etc., so that leaves fusion of D2, or hydrogen an Li as the primary candidates, but perhaps we should take a closer look at fusion carbon, especially reactions that could release an alpha. After all, C14 is manufactured in our environment continually, so maybe carbon has some unknown tendency to react. Another point is that unstable C14 is present and may be involved the active sites. It may be a good idea to take a look at the possibility C14 is being consumed at a higher half life than 5715 years, in some manner, or is involved in the catalysis by emission of 0.156 MeV betas. Just some grist to prime the mill. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 14:05:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA02650; Tue, 5 May 1998 14:01:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 14:01:19 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:57:04 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805051659_MC2-3BFE-3C33 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"PRBRM1.0.Te.MutJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18321 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Horace Heffner speculates: (1) Electrolysis is not necessary for the effect. Yes, I think this was established long ago, by gas loading, ion implantation, and other non-electrolysis methods. Years ago Fleischmann told me he thinks other methods will probably prove superior to electrochemistry. In his ICCF7 abstract, he said that before 1989 he and Pons thought about five different methods of producing the cold fusion effect: 1. Systems based on the electrodifusion of D+ in host lattices (especially Pd wires); 2. Systems based on the electrochemical charging of host lattices (especially of Pd electrodes); 3. Chemical Systems based on superacid/highly oxidizing conditions: the link to "Hot Fusion"; 4. Chemical Systems based on superbasic/highly reducing conditions; 5. Hybrids of these systems. (2) Since the helium is not trapped in the Pd, and the catalysis continues unabated at a constant pressure, it is apparent this is a surface effect. Yup. And so is Arata's cell, even though the He may get caught in the Pd black, in that case. I think it comes off the surface of one grain and gets shoved into the next grain. It has no place to go. (3) Since it is a surface effect, it is reasonable to assume it takes place at catalytically active sites on the surface. Yup. Bockris, Mizuno, Ohmori and others think it occurs at dislocations and protrusions. Huggins says it happens at grain boundaries. Ohmori scraped the surface of his gold cathodes and found the microscopic explosions and apparent transmutations only at the sites that had been scraped, not the remaining smooth surface. (4) Since many Pd catalysts Case tried do not work, and pure Pd does not work, or is at least not nearly as effective in this pressure and temperature range . . . I do not think this has been established. Pure Pd has never been tested at this pressure and temperature. This would take a pressurized liquid electrolysis system. . . . then it is reasonable to assume the active site involves both Pd and carbon atoms, or Pd and impurity atoms in the carbon. (5) Possibly special forms of carbon are involved in the catalysis, like carbon nanotubes, or Fullerenes. That's a reach! I doubt the C has anything to do with it, except in conventional chemical reactions which bring the D into the Pd lattice. (6) Possibly Pd is not involved at all. I doubt it! Many systems work with Pd alone, but I have never heard of one working with C alone. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 14:06:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA02683; Tue, 5 May 1998 14:01:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 14:01:22 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:57:17 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Abbot and Costello Meet Windows 95 Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805051659_MC2-3BFE-3C34 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"PQFT23.0.1f.RutJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18322 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; John Schnurer >INTERNET:herman antioch-college.edu That's hysterical! Thank you John Schnurer! If anyone out there has a copy of the original "baseball lesson" that was based upon, I would appreciate at copy. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 15:36:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA24282; Tue, 5 May 1998 15:31:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 15:31:32 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <354F9346.317C math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 15:31:34 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Taubes Attacks Cold Fusion in MIT Techology Review References: <199805051323.JAA10546 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NGIcL.0.Dx5.3DvJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18323 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > > Vortexians: > > It comes as no surprise that Gary Taubes and the new editors at MIT > Technology Review are brain dead on the subject of cold fusion. Gene: I suggest you simply mellow out...if you are right, then indeed the scientists who publicly dismissed cold fusion will be duly embarrased. So, rather than get uptight, simply go out there and produce a working demonstration CF reactor. On the other hand, I suggest that maybe the pot should not call the kettle black. Certainly you have made a number of predictions about the future of CF which have not come to pass...do you deserve eternal damnation for that? However, you should also realize that if CF is real, even the big name scientists that discounted it will jump on the bandwagon, and in all likelyhood become the leading researchers in the area in short order. Thats the beauty of it really...opinions are one thing, but in science empiricism cuts through those pretty effectively. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 16:07:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA00462; Tue, 5 May 1998 16:05:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:05:44 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505190843.00be7eb0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 19:08:43 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4LVnz1.0.17.7jvJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18324 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:47 AM 5/5/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >A question: Is there an easy way to clean the W deposited on the inside >of the tube? Depending on your preferences, water or iodine. Running the tube with a bit of iodine inside--about 2 or three salt grains is more than enough--will redeposit the tungsten on the electrodes. You can also do the same with tungsten hydroxide, but there you are better off purging the gas from the tube. 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 May 5 16:22:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03430; Tue, 5 May 1998 16:19:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:19:34 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505192219.00bb7100 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 19:22:19 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: Horace Heffner , vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cyIhO.0.Tr.5wvJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18325 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:26 PM 5/5/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote: > OR: Run a halogen rich atmosphere ... for example sodium iodide >with some extra iodine solid ... and fire up your arc! The last method >is probably the most benign. Unless you can live with abrasion. Actually, elemental iodine is better. You want the iodine free to form WI on the surface, have it vaporize, then break down near the electrode. Works fine, and withoout the arc is how those quartz halogen lamps work. Cleaning up carbon is harder, best is monoatomic oxygen, which you can get either chemically or with a nice little arc in low pressure O2. (Don't use air since HCN, or any cyanide, can ruin your whole day.) 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 May 5 16:30:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05320; Tue, 5 May 1998 16:27:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:27:02 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505193003.00c20880 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 19:30:03 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth In-Reply-To: <354F3352.A27B66AA ariel.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19980504144105.00c09bf0 spectre.mitre.org> <354DF752.5018 interlaced.net> <3.0.1.32.19980504122205.00bf9b60 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980504175911.00c36100 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"d7tLn1.0.1J1.51wJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18326 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:42 AM 5/5/98 -0400, Terren Suydam wrote: >So what happened? Inquiring minds want to know. You know, reading >about stuff like second-order effects, making water sit up & beg, etc... >gives a lot more credence to the typical skeptic's copout answer of >'atmospheric disturbances' when trying to explain UFO phenomena. The science is simple, but impressive. Non-linear electric fields is all it takes. When I was in college we thought it might be fun to start a religion where all sorts of "miracles" really happened. Then RAH and Ron Hubbard had a go at it. (For those who aren't "in on the joke," Robert A. Heinlien and L. Ron Hubbard were both science fiction authors. The story goes that they made a bet about which would be the first to make a million by inventing a religion. Hubbard came up with dianetics--which incidently is still going strong--but Heinlien made it to a million first by writing "Stranger in a Strange Land.") 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 May 5 16:37:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07587; Tue, 5 May 1998 16:34:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 16:34:55 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505193753.00c20ce0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 19:37:53 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08DC xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"kkJmc3.0.Qs1.U8wJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18327 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:43 PM 5/5/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > The only sure way to compute your power is to use a digital >oscilloscope, or a two channel A/D, one for the current into the system >and the other for the voltage driving the current. A small non inductive >resistor in the input lead will give you a voltage proportional to the >current flowing. After you collect the data, multiply the current times >the voltage at each time point to get the instantaneous power, and then >sum this for the duration of the experiment to compute the energy used. >The problem you are facing is that the arcs are unstable, and change >with time a lot, fairly quickly. You have to run the A/D at a sample >rate fast enough to get at least several samples during the changes, and >you should have an input low pass filter on the A/D analog input, with a >cutoff frequency equal to half the sampling frequency. I would suggest >using a conventional analog oscilloscope first to observe the arc >behavior, to determine what frequency sampling you need. There are a lot >of good, relatively cheap A/D's on the market now, by Linear, Texas >Instruments, or Burr-Brown for example, and a low pass filter is easily >built up using an op-amp, which will also set the gain for you to drive >the A/D in its input voltage range. > >Just using Fluke voltmeters (evan RMS) to measure the current and >voltage won't do the trick because you loose the timing information >between the voltage and current, which is all important for this type of >measurements. You can put enough inductance into a DC arc circut to make it stable, but with an AC arc, you end up with an LC circut which must be tuned to the arc, and the circut is at best neutrally stable with respect to voltage. I guess if you can sample about 1 MHz, you could get meaningful readings, but I said before, it is much easier to get the resistance out of the (AC) circut and measure input power. That way you don't have to worry about the stored power in the circut. (Time constant about one-tenth second.) 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 May 5 17:10:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA03206; Tue, 5 May 1998 17:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 17:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980505200931.00c0b100 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 20:09:31 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lg1EJ.0._n.0ewJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18328 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: There is another intriguing possibility. If the power and He data are roughly correct, you are getting about 10 MeV per alpha. Consider the template: X (d, alpha) ---> Y The problem is that it doesn't fit most Palladium isotopes at all. The only real possibility would be Pd108, but the product, Rh106 would have an obvious signature. Silver on the other hand fits nicely. Ag107 or Ag109, the two stable silver isotopes produce either Pd105 which is stable, or Pd107 with a half-life of 6.5 million years. Of course, the other interesting possibility is: d --> n + p X + n ---> Y + alpha Again, Palladium doesn't seem to fit as X. Carbon also seems remote. But I keep coming back to one of those nagging intuitions that when we discover what is really going on, it will be some trace element or isotope with a whopping big cross-section to low energy deuterons. 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 May 5 17:23:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA15439; Tue, 5 May 1998 17:21:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 17:21:17 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Barry M. on Empiricism {was Re: Taubes...) Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:20:50 +0000 Message-ID: <19980506002048.AAA10390 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"QyM5F.0.9n3.ypwJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18329 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote to Gene Mallove: >On the other hand, I suggest that maybe the pot should not >call the kettle black. Certainly you have made a number of >predictions about the future of CF which have not come to pass...do >you deserve eternal damnation for that? Gene is not standing in the way of something potentially stupendously beneficial, he is encouraging healthy curiousity. There's nothing wrong with hypothesizing about possibilities if you are familiar with and reasonable about what seems to be happening. > >However, you should also realize that if CF is real, even >the big name scientists that discounted it will jump on the >bandwagon, and in all likelyhood become the leading >researchers in the area in short order. Thats the beauty of >it really...opinions are one thing, but in science >empiricism cuts through those pretty effectively. > I used to think so, Barry, but pathological skepticism as exhibited by Taubes is a potent shield to that blade. Few will tolerate for long being ridiculed, especially ongoing, scathing and systematic ridicule. Can you persuade me, for instance, that Claytor's experiments, which have for years, reproducibly produced tritium with deuterium, but much less with hydrogen in arc discharges on palladium, do not provide evidence of nuclear reactions at energy levels thought impossible? I do not see that empirical knife separating anything in the mush of scientific politics that keeps people from seeing what is real. I do not mean to be critical of you, perhaps I misunderstand the workings of science. Pretend I'm a student. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TRITIUM PRODUCTION FROM A LOW VOLTAGE DEUTERIUM DISCHARGE ON PALLADIUM AND OTHER METALS T. N. Claytor, D. D. Jackson and D. G. Tuggle Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, NM 87545 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ABSTRACT Over the past year we have been able to demonstrate that a plasma loading method produces an exciting and unexpected amount of tritium from small palladium wires. In contrast to electrochemical hydrogen or deuterium loading of palladium, this method yields a reproducible tritium generation rate when various electrical and physical conditions are met. Small diameter wires (100 - 250 microns) have been used with gas pressures above 200 torr at voltages and currents of about 2000 V at 3-5 A. By carefully controlling the sputtering rate of the wire, runs have been extended to hundreds of hours allowing a significant amount (> 10's nCi) of tritium to accumulate. We will show tritium generation rates for deuterium-palladium foreground runs that are up to 25 times larger than hydrogen-palladium control experiments using materials from the same batch. We will illustrate the difference between batches of annealed palladium and as received palladium from several batches as well as the effect of other metals (Pt, Ni, Nb, Zr, V, W, Hf) to demonstrate that the tritium generation rate can vary greatly from batch to batch. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Barry, I'm glad you are doing the investigations that you are. I do wish you spent the time and resources you did with Champion with Bush and Eagleton instead or checking other more credible claims that I wish I had the opportunity, resources and skills to do. IE has recently made me aware of this Li based additive to various conventional fossil fuels with the result that alpha particles are emitted and much enhanced engine performance is claimed. Now, this looks highly repeatable and cheap and easy, but the inventor (who is dead) seemed to have little success achieving much credibility. Is that something you might be interested in attempting to verify (bound to be easier than alchemy)? As the self-appointed spokesman for empiricism, you seem to be the one to ask. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 18:22:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA11800; Tue, 5 May 1998 18:15:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 18:15:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354FE31B.5C92 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 21:12:11 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [off topic] Surrealist Compliment Generator Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ad1iW2.0.4u2.8dxJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18330 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Need a boost? Or, a new line to critique CF? Visit: http://pharmdec.wustl.edu/cgi-bin/jardin_scripts/SCG It always makes you think. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 18:27:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA27564; Tue, 5 May 1998 18:20:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 18:20:39 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:14:26 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth In-Reply-To: <354F53AA.C58A1186 ariel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"YT1Af1.0.bk6.chxJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18331 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Terren, Please examine your last paragraph. You cannot KNOW in advance who the audience it. To accurately write about something you must also know of it. Make sure, or as surely ad you can, you follow the history and ethics of the science.... and well as the science. J On Tue, 5 May 1998, Terren Suydam wrote: > Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > > > Terren wrote: > > >PS. Howdy everyone... I've been lurking for a week, and while most of > > >this stuff is way over my head, I enjoy reading it all. I'm writing an > > >article for a very non-scientific magazine, which will be more or less > > >about what it's like here out on the fringe of science. > > > > with respect to Eachus' post:" > > >> Real cool, but not something for the amateur. Megavolts, handheld wand, > > >> and water on a concrete floor, not something to mix without experience. > > >> The Franklin Institute which is sort of a cross between your average > > >> Science Museum, like the one in Boston, and a very serious research lab, > > >> with among other things, its own journal. They often have demonstrations > > >> that are not for the unwary. My favorite was having someone drop an > > >> extiguished cigarette into a (special insulated) bucket of liquid oxygen. > > >> Safe if done right, but you had to practice the toss. You need to get it > > >> into the bucket from five feet away, and be sheltered by the lab bench > > >> before it hits. > > > > Terren, don't get so excited. Eauchus is talking about stuff that is part > > of mainstream science. It just looks wierd and impressive to those who > > don't know. > > > > My recommendation: Be sure you understand what you are reporting, or for > > sure you will report in error. > > Thanks for the warning. You can be sure I won't be wading too deep into > this pool of heavy water. For one, the intended audience will have no > scientific background whatsoever. Not to mention my intent in writing > the article lies closer to illuminating the conflict between skeptics & > fringe scientists... the charlatans and the visionaries... the > characters, not the science itself. > To do this you must also know at tleas some of what the conflict is ABOUT. > Terren > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 18:53:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA02704; Tue, 5 May 1998 18:49:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 18:49:19 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 17:48:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"69QXo.0.tf.S6yJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18332 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:09 PM 5/5/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > There is another intriguing possibility. If the power and He data are >roughly correct, you are getting about 10 MeV per alpha. Consider the >template: > > X (d, alpha) ---> Y > > The problem is that it doesn't fit most Palladium isotopes at all. The >only real possibility would be Pd108, but the product, Rh106 would have an >obvious signature. Silver on the other hand fits nicely. Ag107 or Ag109, >the two stable silver isotopes produce either Pd105 which is stable, or >Pd107 with a half-life of 6.5 million years. > > Of course, the other interesting possibility is: > > d --> n + p > X + n ---> Y + alpha Seems possible doesn't it? Except just skipping the intermediate stage by a direct swap, due to lack of detectable neutrons: X + D ---> Y + alpha + p In either case, it may be possible to check this using really pure D2, long run times, and then looking for the H corresponding to the He. Easier to find Y though I bet. Getting rid of H would be very difficult. In the case of 12C for X, we have 9Be for Y: 12C6 + 2D1 ---> 9Be4 + 4He2 + 1p1 12C 12.00000 2H 2.0140 + 9Be 9.012182 - 4He 4.00260 - 1H 1.007825 - ========= - 0.008607 so this reaction can not fly Looking at 12C6 + 2D1 ---> 10B5 + 4He2 12C 12.00000 2H 2.0140 + 10B 10.012937 - 4He 4.00260 - ========= - 0.001537 this wont fly either Looking at 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 11B5 + 4He2 13C 13.003355 2H 2.0140 + 11B 11.009305 - 4He 4.00260 - ========= 0.00545 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.076675 MeV but this flies. This provides a better fit to the Case energy data as well: D + D fusion energy based on AMU 23.6591 MeV Fusion energy based on He 4.6845E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.818 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules because it predicts the Case cell should produce 5.54 watts, which is closer to the estimated 7.5 watts than the 25.818 watts predicted by the 23.66 MeV energy for D + D fusion. > Again, Palladium doesn't seem to fit as X. Carbon also seems remote. >But I keep coming back to one of those nagging intuitions that when we >discover what is really going on, it will be some trace element or isotope >with a whopping big cross-section to low energy deuterons. > > Robert I. Each How about some miraculous special situation low energy cross section for C13? That's only asking for one miracle! 8^) C13 has a natural presence of 1.10 percent, which might be enough to make this fly. It is intersting that lithium, especially LiOH, or LiDH is used in many CF cells, and this solution tends to absorb CO2, creating a carbonate. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 19:06:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07014; Tue, 5 May 1998 19:02:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 19:02:56 -0700 X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 18:02:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"GkUt11.0.Qj1.FJyJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18334 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just tried to send the following, but my computer crashed. If duplicated sorry. Some additional comments: (1) I would like to add that graphite contains the same carbon 6-rings as nanotubes, except the angles are changed slightly. Powdered graphite might make a good thing to test in pressurized H2 at about 150 C. (2) It would also be possible to load the graphite with Pd, etc., by electrolysis, and then use it in a Case type cell. (3) This discussion brings to mind the past vortex discussion about the overunity production of CO by underwater carbon arc. Maybe C13 and natural D in H2O played the ou roll? Getting kind of slim on that, with D natural abundance at only 0.015 percent. At 8:09 PM 5/5/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > There is another intriguing possibility. If the power and He data are >roughly correct, you are getting about 10 MeV per alpha. Consider the >template: > > X (d, alpha) ---> Y > > The problem is that it doesn't fit most Palladium isotopes at all. The >only real possibility would be Pd108, but the product, Rh106 would have an >obvious signature. Silver on the other hand fits nicely. Ag107 or Ag109, >the two stable silver isotopes produce either Pd105 which is stable, or >Pd107 with a half-life of 6.5 million years. > > Of course, the other interesting possibility is: > > d --> n + p > X + n ---> Y + alpha Seems possible doesn't it? Except just skipping the intermediate stage by a direct swap, due to lack of detectable neutrons: X + D ---> Y + alpha + p In either case, it may be possible to check this using really pure D2, long run times, and then looking for the H corresponding to the He. Easier to find Y though I bet. Getting rid of H would be very difficult. In the case of 12C for X, we have 9Be for Y: 12C6 + 2D1 ---> 9Be4 + 4He2 + 1p1 12C 12.00000 2H 2.0140 + 9Be 9.012182 - 4He 4.00260 - 1H 1.007825 - ========= - 0.008607 so this reaction can not fly Looking at 12C6 + 2D1 ---> 10B5 + 4He2 12C 12.00000 2H 2.0140 + 10B 10.012937 - 4He 4.00260 - ========= - 0.001537 this wont fly either Looking at 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 11B5 + 4He2 13C 13.003355 2H 2.0140 + 11B 11.009305 - 4He 4.00260 - ========= 0.00545 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.076675 MeV but this flies. This provides a better fit to the Case energy data as well: D + D fusion energy based on AMU 23.6591 MeV Fusion energy based on He 4.6845E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.818 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules because it predicts the Case cell should produce 5.54 watts, which is closer to the estimated 7.5 watts than the 25.818 watts predicted by the 23.66 MeV energy for D + D fusion. > Again, Palladium doesn't seem to fit as X. Carbon also seems remote. >But I keep coming back to one of those nagging intuitions that when we >discover what is really going on, it will be some trace element or isotope >with a whopping big cross-section to low energy deuterons. > > Robert I. Each How about some miraculous special situation low energy cross section for C13? That's only asking for one miracle! 8^) C13 has a natural presence of 1.10 percent, which might be enough to make this fly. It is intersting that lithium, especially LiOH, or LiDH is used in many CF cells, and this solution tends to absorb CO2, creating a carbonate. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 19:07:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05285; Tue, 5 May 1998 18:56:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 18:56:21 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:54:14 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [way off topic] Win95 vs Linux (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"8Kn921.0.VI1.4DyJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18333 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I couldn't resist this lovely email passed on by a friend at work. I particularly like the line: "I heartily recommend Windows as a way to maximize resource utilization". Enjoy! Why Win95 Is Better Than Linux Because of the harsh attacks on Dave Hewson recently, I have prepared a summary of the technical reasons why I find 95/NT better than Linux: Because all operating systems are written by programmers, I assume that any operating system is much smarter than me. Thus, any good operating system should try to outsmart me by restricting my options at every turn. Linux, like all versions of Unix, is lousy at restricting my options because at the command line virtually any operation can be performed with ease. (For example, 'rm -rf /win' could delete an entire mounted directory, with no popup window warnings whatsoever.) I'm proud to say that there is no such danger in 95/NT. Windows pop up when I want to make a change, and then more pop up to ask if I'm sure I want the change. Thankfully, Windows 95/NT operating systems look after my computer's well-being by occasionally switching configuration settings from the way I want them to what the OS programmers think they might probably ought to be. Boy, I'm just impressed with how smart they are. Once I learned to live with whatever the default settings are on any new hardware I install, I can't say the number of hours I have saved. I use that spare time to reboot my Windows machine multiple times a day. Technical support personnel recommend that I do it regularly - kind of like brushing my teeth. To help remind me of this necessity, windows pop up to tell me to reboot whenever I make a configuration change. By now my machine is minty fresh, I figure. There is no such useful rebooting in a Linux system. It is as reliable as the sunrise, with uptimes in weeks and months. Virtually no configuration change requires a reboot, to boot. Imagine all that plaque in the computer. Gross! In 95/NT I am prevented from making dangerous fundamental configuration changes unless I use a special 'registry editor'. I have found it so useful to have this separate editor that I hope in future versions they go all the way and supply a separate editor for each file on the disk-in that way windows could pop up at every keystroke to warn me that changing any line in the file I am editing could cause the system to not run properly. If this were only the case, people would finally learn that it is best to just stick with the mouse and they would be freed of the need to constantly move their hands back to the keyboard. (If one stops to think about it, the mouse is a much better device to use than the keyboard. Ever hear of someone getting carpal tunnel syndrome from a mouse? No. It's comfortable and ergonomic. Like Morse code devices. That's how long distance communication started, after all.) Linux, by contrast, requires no special editor to change configuration files. The fact that there is no 'registry' in Linux allows the abomination of using any text editor whatsoever to do the configuration. Can you believe that configuration files are usually stored clear text? Talk about dangerous! I am also happy to report that I have experienced no truth to the rumor that Windows disks become corrupt after improper shutdowns. Indeed, I have been forced to improperly shutdown the machine innumerable times after it locks up, and I have no apparent problems to report regarding the disk. No such claim can be made for Linux. They say something about lack of data points. Excuses are all I ever seem to hear from the Linux crowd. By sheer size alone, Windows 95/NT beats Linux hands down. It is so much bigger, it is obvious that it is better. Why would you want a small OS with the large disks and RAM sizes we have these days? For this reason alone, I heartily recommend Windows as a way to maximize resource utilization. Your CPU and disk will constantly be pegged to the limit, the way god intended. The Linux kernel and drivers accounts for only about 750KB. Why, even the Microsoft Win16 subsystem uses more space than that. It is no surprise that Windows costs $270 on the retail market and Linux doesn't cost anything. People know what they want, and they want Windows. Because Linux is free, that means it's basically worthless. The same goes for all the development tools, remotable GUIs, and applications, which all cost money for windows (i.e., are worth something) and free for Linux (worthless!). Installing software is very easy in Windows. I usually slip in CDs without even reading instructions or warnings, and just double click on whatever window pops up. There is no need to read anything or touch the keyboard. (Did I mention that I hate that thing?) Well, OK, I have learned the hard way the the machine locks up if I don't take the time to close all other applications. Linux, by contrast, requires typing on the keyboard to get anything to install at all. And you always have to know the NAME of program you want to install. For example, in Redhat, you have to type 'rpm -ivh ' to install the program and documentation. Linux needs to get with the '90s! Windows follows the DOS convention of putting \r\n at the end of every line of a text file. While this is only a mild concern because of the relative rarity of text files on Windows machines these days (thank god) it helps to differentiate between the text files and the other files. Sadly, Linux makes no distinction between text and other files. If I legitimately purchase Windows 95/NT, I can call Microsoft customer support to get help with my problems. After a short hold time of an hour or so, they always help me. Ever since I told them that I was dual booting to Linux, they were able to flag my account and now each time I call even the entry level support personnel I am connected to say that Linux is the source of my problems. Everyone seems to agree that Linux is no good. The more I listen, the more I'm impressed with the knowledge of the support staff there. By contrast, in Linux, all I have is stockpiles of resources and documentation that I would actually have to read in order to understand. Sure, I could obtain Linux support from a commercial organization, but they would probably just tell me I have to use a text editor to fix up my system. In the end, I have no need for that old computer donkey Unix. I don't need to run big Unix tasks, afterall. I refuse to become one of those a bug-eyed computer users, that's for sure. As soon as I can keep Windows from crashing for long enough, I'm going to delete my Linux partition, i.e., the equivalent of moving it to the recycle bin, saying that I'm sure, emptying the recycle bin, and again saying that I'm sure. Hope you enjoyed this. :) Comments or suggestions for improvement of this text are welcome. ----------------------------------------------------- Michael H. Kelley Phone: (301) 975-3722 Electron Physics Group Fax: (301) 926-2746 NIST, Bldg. 220, Rm B206 email: mkelley nist.gov Gaithersburg, MD 20899 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 19:44:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA27989; Tue, 5 May 1998 19:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 19:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805060239.WAA15164 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Taubes Attacks Cold Fusion in MIT Techology Review Date: Tue, 5 May 98 22:40:14 -0000 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"hSZAT2.0.Fr6.DtyJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18335 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: >I suggest you simply mellow out...if you are right, then indeed >the scientists who publicly dismissed cold fusion will be duly >embarrased. So, rather than get uptight, simply go out there >and produce a working demonstration CF reactor. I am pursuing both avenues. The most important is to get those working demo units. Secondarily, I think it is a civic duty, when one is in a position to act, to expose the abuses and excesses of the original perpetrators of mass confusion about the evidence for cold fusion. > >On the other hand, I suggest that maybe the pot should not >call the kettle black. Certainly you have made a number of >predictions about the future of CF which have not come to pass...do >you deserve eternal damnation for that? Predictions can be pessimistic or optimistic and one can be correct or not correct about them. I believe that my predictions of what cold fusion technology will bring to the world will eventually be seen as too conservative. It is only in time-scale that I have erred -- mainly becuase of the infamous "own worst enemy" syndrome on the part of many of the holders of these technologies. Thanks to recent developments, I believe that is about to change -- of course, I could be wrong about this impending good fortune, but I do not think I am. But telling and spreading falsehoods about cold fuison is the stock-in-trade of Taubes. Predictions -- wrong or right -- do not equal the Big Lies of Taubes. > >However, you should also realize that if CF is real, even >the big name scientists that discounted it will jump on the >bandwagon, Don't be so sure they will! Not that I give a damn about what they do after... >and in all likelyhood become the leading >researchers in the area in short order. Oh, you are saying that these people like Douglas Morrison, Ronald Parker and Petrasso and Luckhardt will suddenly start working on CF after V-Day? I doubt that very much! >Thats the beauty of >it really...opinions are one thing, but in science >empiricism cuts through those pretty effectively. Nope! Empiricism does not readily cut through vested interests -- whether financial or intellectual. > > I am very happy that you have made approving statements recently of how we are going about testing Case, etc. I look forward to showing you some good things -- much more worthy of your and my time than Joe Cahmapion's clear exaggerations. Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 19:58:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA22645; Tue, 5 May 1998 19:53:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 19:53:28 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980505204601.00ade790 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> X-Sender: claytor_t_n popmail.esa.lanl.gov X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 20:46:02 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: Run 1b results confirmed Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Hyqbd.0.lX5.d2zJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18336 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, I just tried a similar experiment (to the Bow experiment) with some Pd on Carbon (18 g) from one of our Materials persons. H2 and D2 are the same, no discernable temperature variation (+-1 C) (upon switching isotopes) at 50.3 psia. I may try the "real" catalyst if your results indicate a positive result. Based on these two independent trials, the demonstration that was done at Bow is definitely anomalous in some regard. (By the way, I see very little in the way of a pressure variation that would indicate the Carbon is reacting). Looking forward to your results from the new catalyst. Tom. At 02:23 AM 5/2/98 -0500, you wrote: >Howdy, > >I just posted the graphical results from Run 1b along with a written >description of the run. > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run1b.html > >Take a look at the graph...our calorimetry is working particularly well >now...and it is astonishing how insensitive the system is to which isotope >of hydrogen is used to fill the chamber... > >At least we have a pretty good control run to compare the real catalyst >runs next week to. > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > http://www.nde.lanl.gov/staff/claytor/claytor.htm Thomas N. Claytor Claytor_t_n lanl.gov Los Alamos National Laboratory ESA-MT, MS C914 Los Alamos NM, 87545 505-667-6216 voice 505-665-7176 fax From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 20:09:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA02933; Tue, 5 May 1998 20:07:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 20:07:28 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <621ea5cf.354fd351 aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:04:48 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"7myIj.0.kj.kFzJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18338 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 11:04:36 EDT, you write: > The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 20:09:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26992; Tue, 5 May 1998 20:05:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 20:05:05 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <56b1a78f.354fd32a aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:04:09 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"UP5xJ2.0.fb6.WDzJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18337 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 10:19:35 EDT, you write: > These are just off-the-top ideas, if Vince should decide to reject this > mission this post will self-destruct as soon as Vince hits the "delete" > button. > Frank Stenger Frank, I never delete any serious posts regarding this experiment. The file is getting around 5 megabytes now and worth keeping. And I do go back over previous posts in case I missed some important point. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 20:28:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA03556; Tue, 5 May 1998 20:26:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 20:26:30 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <1dd72819.354fd830 aol.com> Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:25:35 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"hYJvH2.0.Ut.bXzJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18339 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 11:04:36 EDT, you write: > The CRC Handbook shows it very soluble in HNO3 - nitric acid. > Regards, > Horace Heffner Oh Lord....more dangerious stuff to get a hold of. Still no meters for the power supply. This power supply is scary. It will slag the eight 7.5 watt ballast resistors in series at full output if I tried (I wont). This evening I added a 10 ohm 1% resistor to the string and measured 1/4 (.25) volts across it with the discharg running in H2. Voltage across the tube was 720 volts which with negative at the upper electrode, caused the upper electrode (a 1/2 inch stub of heavy W coiled filiment) to glow at bright yellow heat. Reversing polarity caused the reverse to happen. (the lower electrode yellow hot and the upper, no apparent heat at all). The lower electrode is a stub of heavy metal that the original quartz lamp filiment was wound around. Unknown metal. I think I want the upper W filiment to get hot to bust up the H2. I fused the power supply input with an 8 amp slo-blow fuse. Before making any wiring changes, I crowbar the supply after turning power off. I am supposed to remove the shorting plug before turning power back on. I am running short of 8 amp fuses. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 20:35:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA08310; Tue, 5 May 1998 20:32:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 20:32:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 19:30:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: More on carbon + deuterium Resent-Message-ID: <"_XLD6.0.f12.QdzJr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18340 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wrote: "Looking at 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 11B5 + 4He2 13C 13.003355 2H 2.0140 + 11B 11.009305 - 4He 4.00260 - ========= 0.00545 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.076675 MeV but this flies." This brings up the possibility of: 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 15N7 13C 13.003355 2H 2.0140 + 15N 15.000108 - ========= 0.017247 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 16.066 MeV and this flies too. This provides a better fit to the Case energy data than D + D as well: D + D fusion energy based on AMU 23.6591 MeV Fusion energy based on He 4.6845E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.818 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules because it predicts the Case cell should produce 17.53 watts, which is closer to the estimated 7.5 watts than the 25.818 watts predicted by the 23.66 MeV energy for D + D fusion. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 20:53:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA08122; Tue, 5 May 1998 20:43:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 20:43:33 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:42:59 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"99rmb1.0.q-1.anzJr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18341 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 11:31:17 EDT, you write: > I've got a table of recommended etchants for various metals and it > recommends a 1:1 mixture of conc HF/HNO3 for W. > Scott Little Jeeze....No way I want to fool with that stuff. Here's one for you; when, at the completion of a run with K, with the tube all blackened with W, K and who knows what else, I open up the tube and, with the open end pointed away from me, trickle some water in...a small sizzle, a gurgle, and once, a small H2 flame and like magic, the tube is sparkling clean. ( I wear heavy leather welding gloves and a face shield for this, and it's performed outside in my back yard) However, using K as a cleansing agent is not what I want to do. Steel wool wrapped around a cotton swab with alcohol in the tube sorta works but it takes a lot of scrubbing... no problem with scrubbing, the Army trained me very well in that detail. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 21:02:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA10397; Tue, 5 May 1998 21:01:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:01:08 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <2b19c5a6.354fe065 aol.com> Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:00:36 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"AhuXc.0.CY2.42-Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18342 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 12:53:44 EDT, you write: > A cheap source of concentrated HCl is swimming pool acid. It's probably > not very pure, so rinse your components well many times after using it. Now that I will try. My swimming pool Ph is getting high and have been meaning to pick up a couple of gallons anyway. I did try some H2SO4 battery acid fill left over from the last battery I bought...It didn't work. > Re your discharge: > Do you have an arc or a glow discharge? Do you know how to recognize > the difference? I think so. An arc would be a very thin, spark like discharge in the tube. I get that at higher partial pressures. A glow discharge is a smooth even glow that fills the entire inside diameter of the tube. (like a neon sign) >Which one do you want? A glow discharge. I get the glow going at pressures >24 in Hg partial pressure. At < 24 in Hg, it's an arc. > Michael J. Schaffer BTW, any time any Vorts are in Vegas and want to avoid paying my taxes by feeding quarters into these funny TV's we have here, you are welcome to visit me anytime. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 21:09:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA12446; Tue, 5 May 1998 21:06:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:06:09 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <80c8ca55.354fe116 aol.com> Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:03:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"cKPIm2.0.K23.k6-Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18343 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 13:18:20 EDT, you write: > Got any battery acid handy? > Regards, > Horace Heffner See previous post on this. H2SO4 (battery acid) in the tube for 3 hours. Result: no cleaning at all. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 21:12:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA11968; Tue, 5 May 1998 21:08:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:08:16 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <509c9803.354fe21b aol.com> Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:07:54 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"s00rB3.0.rw2.l8-Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18344 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 13:23:55 EDT, you write: > You probably want to get get rid of WO3, which is listed as > soluble in hot alkali. Hot Draino or Red Devil Lye? > Regards, > Horace Heffner Ahh! Good! Another (fairly) non dangerious thing to try. Many thanks Horace. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 21:22:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA14077; Tue, 5 May 1998 21:21:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:21:33 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <77d8412b.354fe536 aol.com> Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:21:09 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"g9gp22.0.sR3.CL-Jr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18345 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 15:52:51 EDT, you write: > Vince, Frank > The only sure way to compute your power is to use a digital > oscilloscope, or a two channel A/D, one for the current into the system > and the other for the voltage driving the current. A small non inductive > resistor in the input lead will give you a voltage proportional to the > current flowing. > Hank Yes, Hank, I read your post. Forgive me for not replying sooner. Instrumentation such as you mention is beyond my means right now. I figure if Mills is right (and I think he is) the effect will be impossible to miss. I mean, 1000 times as much energy from H2 than you can get by burning would be darn easy to measure with simple instruments, and by simple, I mean cheap stuff. I will do the best I can with what I've got because thats all I can do at the present time unless some government flack decides to give me a grant, which is about as possible as snowflake in a atmosphere of K at 500 C! Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 21:27:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA15527; Tue, 5 May 1998 21:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 21:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <354F8F11.23580476 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 22:13:37 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [way off topic] Win95 vs Linux (fwd) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XcykH.0.Vo3.iN-Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18346 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Martin Sevior wrote: I couldn't resist this lovely email passed on by a friend at work. ... Why Win95 Is Better Than Linux ... As soon as I can keep Windows from crashing for long enough, I'm going to delete my Linux partition, ... Michael H. Kelley Hi Martin, That was delicious. Tell Michael that that he can boot any OS with System Commander. I use Win95 when I play Civ 2. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 5 23:06:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA25830; Tue, 5 May 1998 23:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <354FEDB4.5E76 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 23:57:24 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, mica@world.std.com, drom vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la@utkux.utk.edu, orian001 maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge@students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani@frascati.infn.it, opa aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak@nosc.mil, bossp nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly@mse.ogi.edu, dg cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell@lanl.gov, sphkoji sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos@juno.com, g-miley uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti@msn.com, design73 aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre@qm.sri.com, tchubb aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger@eneco-usa.com, cincygrp ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Sarfatti: life, mind, quantum reality 05/05/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34DFC098.4 EB3 earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6@earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earthlink.ne t> <34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6F8AA.18 37 earthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D@earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthlink.net>! <3504077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350DAD0F.5 35F earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F@earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@earthlink.n et> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <35173888.2F 66 earthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B@earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@earthlink.n! et> <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@earthli nk.net> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <352D3FA7 .574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@earthlink .net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <3547586D! .E74 eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> <354B3358.3FDD@earthlin k.net> <354B9371.1DB9 earthlink.net> <354BCF38.5CFB@earthlink.net> <354F1495.4471@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EEaPv2.0.UJ6.dn_Jr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18347 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [Rich Murray: folks, if you're interested and willing, Jack Sarfatti revels in a revelatory vision from new quantum physics for a unified view of life, mind, and quantum reality.] By the way, two papers that hold that configuration space is as real as spacetime will appear in Proceedings of the August 1997 Symposium in honor of Jean-Pierre Vigier "Causality and Locality in Modern Physics" (Kluwer, Netherlands, Aug 1998) edited by Geoffrey Hunter from York University, Stan Jeffers, and Vigier himself. These papers are: 1) "Are the Bader Laplacian and the Bohm Quantum Potential Equivalent?" p. 353 with NASA's Creon Levit. Creon won the Feynman Prize in Nanotechnology last year. Our paper assumes that configuration space is real. The second paper in that volume is "Beyond Bohm-Vigier Quantum Mechanics" by me. This is also at http://www.hia.com/hia/pcr/vigier/slides/Vigier.HTM. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 00:10:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA03245; Wed, 6 May 1998 00:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:08:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 23:06:40 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"LEtUX.0.co.7o0Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18348 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:02 PM 5/5/98, Horace Heffner wrote: >(1) I would like to add that graphite contains the same carbon 6-rings as >nanotubes, except the angles are changed slightly. Powdered graphite might >make a good thing to test in pressurized H2 at about 150 C. The above should say "in pressurized D2 at 150 C and above." Looking at another reaction: 12C 12.000000 2H 2.0140 + 15N 14.003074 - ========= 0.010926 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 10.178 MeV and this flies too. There appear to be 3 candidate fusion reactions between carbon and D2: 13C6 + 2H1 ---> 11B5 + 4He2 + 5.077 MeV 13C6 + 2H1 ---> 15N7 + 16.066 MeV 12C6 + 2H1 ---> 14N7 + 10.178 MeV Of these only the first provides a good explanation of the He in the Case device, and as a bonus, nearly matches the energy output. Possibly the catalyst should be examined for an elevated boron level corresponding to the helium level. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 00:11:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA05480; Wed, 6 May 1998 00:08:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 00:08:26 -0700 Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 09:31:29 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <355011d7.itim itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"MLwGE.0.YL1.fn0Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18349 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 5 May 1998 14:01:20 -0700, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: Dear Vortexers, >From obvious reasons I am very enthusiastic re. the Case case, that is after preaching for six years that CF is an extreme form of catalysis it is fine to meet a genuine catalytic CF system. In my opinion, both Scott and Tom have obtained very valuable negative results working with _a_ Pd/C catalyst because it is necessary to work with _the_ adequate Pd/C catalyst(s) and it is now obvious that NOT the differences in heat conductivity or whatever between hydrogen and deuterium are responsible for the heat effect. Technologically, this system will be viable and adquate for scale-up because it is supported by a great experience in the chemical industry. I am anxiously waiting for new results coming from Case and from our fellow Vortexers. Trying to get the "good" catalyst as described in Gene's report, it was stated that United Catalysts is actually a German company, Sued Chemie well known for its high quality products. I wrote them for a sample of hydrogenation catalyst G-75E and I am waiting for a response. As regarding the role of the catalytic support, i.e. if carbon as such can be cold-fusionally active, Jed wrote: > I doubt it! Many systems work with Pd alone, but I have never heard of one > working with C alone. There is a Japanese researcher, Ryoji Takahashi, who says he has obtained excess heat working with drilled charcoal. He was at ICCF-6 and was scheduled to ICCF-7 with a paper entitled: "Excess heat caused by electrolysis for drilled charcoal cathode and heat without power input by immersion of charcoal in heavy or light water at elevated temperatures" He also has a theoretical model based on "microdrop in a bubble". R. Takahashi's work was never commented in our journals and magazines--as far I know, for reasons I don't know. 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 Wed May 6 05:37:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA28490; Wed, 6 May 1998 05:35:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 05:35:00 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980506073559.0092adf0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 07:35:59 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ri9cQ1.0.3z6.qZ5Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18350 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Take a look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run2.html This run also used the provisional catalyst but changes were made to more closely approximate Dr. Case's setup. Despite the changes, there was no sign of an excess temperature with the D2 gas. There was also no sign of excess heat. There was a peculiar temperature anomaly but it did not involve the sensor in the catalyst! Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 05:39:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA24031; Wed, 6 May 1998 05:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 05:38:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Geosas Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 08:35:49 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.i for Windows sub 164 Resent-Message-ID: <"zt-CE2.0.Nt5._c5Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18351 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi there - I understand that the problem is to measure the instantaneous input to a transformer, the secondary of which has a fluctuating load in the form of an arc discharge. Surely the way to do this is to use an analog multiplier chip, which gives a DC output proportional to the product of input voltages X and Y. The Analog Devices AD633JN for example has bandwidth 1 MHz and accuracy +/- 2% full scale. The output voltage can be smoothed without any fear of loss of phase information, and integrated to give total power input. The AD633JN costs about $10 here in Britain but Analog Devices do higher-spec ones though more expensive. All the best, George. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 05:50:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA25878; Wed, 6 May 1998 05:49:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 05:49:05 -0700 (PDT) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client mothost.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-Id: <35505BC7.45C12636 css.mot.com> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 07:47:03 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: [off topic] Surrealist Compliment Generator References: <354FE31B.5C92 bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YZ53c3.0.6K6.ym5Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18352 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > http://pharmdec.wustl.edu/cgi-bin/jardin_scripts/SCG > It always makes you think. ...and laugh. Thanks for the post! HA! John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 06:07:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA05976; Wed, 6 May 1998 06:06:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 06:06:21 -0700 Message-ID: <3550606E.4D9A interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 09:06:54 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sLOZB3.0.IT1.C16Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18353 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Geosas wrote: > > Surely the way to do this is to use an analog multiplier chip, which > gives a DC output proportional to the product of input voltages X and > Y. The Analog Devices AD633JN for example has bandwidth 1 MHz > and accuracy +/- 2% full scale. The output voltage can be smoothed > without any fear of loss of phase information, and integrated to give > total power input. > > The AD633JN costs about $10 here in Britain but Analog Devices do > higher-spec ones though more expensive. Thanks for the valuable tip, George! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 06:15:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA07153; Wed, 6 May 1998 06:13:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 06:13:59 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:07:51 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nmVQT.0.bl1.M86Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18354 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Geo., Why not use RMS to DC converter ? BUT: The best instruments, IMO, are thermal ... Ask any Ham about a Bird! On Wed, 6 May 1998, Geosas wrote: > Hi there - > > I understand that the problem is to measure the instantaneous > input to a transformer, the secondary of which has a fluctuating > load in the form of an arc discharge. > > Surely the way to do this is to use an analog multiplier chip, which > gives a DC output proportional to the product of input voltages X and > Y. The Analog Devices AD633JN for example has bandwidth 1 MHz > and accuracy +/- 2% full scale. The output voltage can be smoothed > without any fear of loss of phase information, and integrated to give > total power input. > > The AD633JN costs about $10 here in Britain but Analog Devices do > higher-spec ones though more expensive. > > All the best, George. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 06:26:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA02966; Wed, 6 May 1998 06:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 06:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805061321.JAA10589 mail.enter.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robert G. Flower" Organization: Applied Science Associates To: John Schnurer , vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:33:11 -0500 Subject: Re: Two slit experiment ... with electrons Reply-to: chronos enter.net Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52) Resent-Message-ID: <"09hAb3.0.8k.pH6Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18355 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 5 May 98 at 11:23, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: > From: John Schnurer > Subject: Two slit experiment ... with electrons > Dear Vo., > > Any references for the two slit experiment done with electrons as > opposed to photons? A. Tonomura, A., et. al. (1989) Am. J. Phys. vol. 57, pp. 117-120. D. Brandt and S. Hirschi (1974); Am. J. Phys. vol. 42, pp. 4 - 11. H. Lichte (1986). Ann. NY Acad. Sci., vol. 480, pp. 175-89. Photos from Tonomura's paper are in the frontspiece of the book "Quantum Theory of Motion: An account of the deBroglie-Bohm causal interpretation of quantum mechanics" by Peter Holland. Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993. This entire book can be read as a response to the 2-slit electron experiment. The photos show self-interference of electrons sent ONE AT A TIME through a two-slit interferometer. Feynman called this experiment the ONLY MYSTERY of quantum mechanics. Was he a comedian or what? Self-interference was also observed with neutrons (A. Zeilinger et. al, 1988, Rev. Mod. Phys. vol. 60, pp. 1067-73 ) and helium atoms (O. Carnal, 1991, Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 66, pp. 2689-92.), per Hollands. Best regards, Bob Flower ============================================= Robert G. Flower - Applied Science Associates > Scientific Software & Instrumentation < > Quality Control Engineering < ============================================= From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 07:01:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA13685; Wed, 6 May 1998 06:59:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 06:59:01 -0700 Message-ID: <355096B9.3BDF bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 09:58:33 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: Scientists at Odds with Jeffrey Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Itcqh.0.kL3.ao6Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18356 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: The Journal of Scientific Exploration web site: http://www.jse.com/PR_Roswell_98.html [reformatted for UpDates] <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> SOCIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION PRESS RELEASE Embargoed until April 6, 1998 CONTACT: Marsha Sims, Executive Editor, Journal of Scientific Exploration phone: 650-593-8581, fax: 650-595-4466 The Roswell UFO Crash: Myth or Reality Stanford, CA, April 6, 1998 --- The "Roswell Declaration" was formulated in 1994 as a public petition to the government. After summarizing the claim that an extraterrestrial craft crashed near Roswell, New Mexico in 1947, it concludes by requesting that the President issue an Executive Order declassifying any government information that might exist concerning UFO's, regardless of whether positive or negative on the topic. It also requests a termination of any security oaths that might still be prohibiting individuals from openly discussing information they, or the government, might have. One of the prime movers behind this initiative was Kent Jeffrey, an airline pilot by profession. He worked with other key members of the three primary UFO groups (Hynek Center for UFO Studies, the Mutual UFO Network and the Fund for UFO Research) to bring this about. It was thus a surprise and a newsworthy event when Jeffrey published an article in the MUFON Journal last year concluding that his investigations no longer supported the claim of a crashed saucer at Roswell. With Jeffrey's approval and with the permission of MUFON, the Journal of Scientific Exploration obtained permission to reprint the article and to invite two experts in UFO studies to critique it. The Jeffrey article and articles by Prof. Michael Swords, Western Michigan University, and Dr. Robert Wood, a retired research director for McDonnell Douglas, appear in the current issue of the Journal (Vol. 12, No. 1, March). Key arguments made by Jeffrey are: 1.Jesse Marcel, Jr., who handled the wreckage as an 11-year old, gave testimony under hypnosis that shows that it might have been just balloon parts. 2.Sketches of writing on the wreckage made during that testimony compare favorably with writing from a conventional source - flowered tape from a Mogul balloon. 3.The Air Force has released some classified information pertaining to Roswell. 4.Three retired colonels, apparently in a position to have known about a project to examine wreckage, did not know about it. 5.Extraterrestrial spacecraft would be far too advanced and reliable to crash. Wood argues that Jeffrey fails to consider alternative interpretations of the same facts. An example would be the interviews with three colonels retired from the Air Force who all say that the Air Force did not have a covert program. The author simply accepts this as fact without seriously considering the possibilities that one of them lied or that none of them knew about it. Wood argues that: 1.The testimony, captured on 6 hours of video tape, is significantly inconsistent with an ordinary interpretation. Marcel Jr. himself reportedly rejects Jeffrey's interpretation. 2.The sketches proffered show little similarity in detail and may be based upon contaminated sources, since the hieroglyphic writing had much prior media exposure. 3.The Air Force information, obtained via the Freedom of Information Act, is from a source at the secret level of classification which would be irrelevant to the existence of a so-called "black" project. Almost no SCI (Special Compartmented Information) has ever been released for the public. 4.It is just as likely that the personnel interviewed by Jeffrey were kept totally unaware of the existence of a covert project. 5.Speculation on the reliability of extraterrestrial spacecraft could just as easily include consideration of reliability associated with lighting, mid-air crashes, proximity fused shells, or electromagnetic interference caused by radar. Swords critiques the Jeffrey viewpoint on Roswell's alleged crashed disk from the position of a student of the early document exchanges between Wright-Patterson Air Force Base's Intelligence Division and the headquarters of the U.S. Air Force in the Pentagon. This historical research is germane, because Jeffrey admits that it was the reading of three of these documents that changed his entire opinion on the case from strongly "pro-crash" to completely and uncompromisingly "anti." Swords' analysis goes deeply into the background which gives meaning to these documents, and concludes that Jeffrey's interpretations (due to lack of analysis and historical context) are in error in every case. Swords also comments upon the second main element of Jeffrey's piece, a videotaped hypnotic experiment with one of the prominent case witnesses. Swords was one of only five UFOlogists privileged to view these tapes, and reports that all but Jeffrey interpret the information on the tapes non-prejudicially to the authenticity of the case. Swords sets the debate in its contrasts before the interested public for the readership to decide. A detailed response by Jeffrey will appear in a subsequent issue. ### The Journal of Scientific Exploration is the quarterly peer-reviewed research journal of the Society for Scientific Exploration, an interdisciplinary organization of scholars formed to support unbiased investigation of claimed anomalous phenomena. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 07:06:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA14624; Wed, 6 May 1998 07:04:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 07:04:25 -0700 Message-ID: <35506DEB.54F1 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 10:04:27 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 2 References: <3.0.5.32.19980506073559.0092adf0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"57t0W.0.Qa3.et6Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18357 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > (snip) > There was a peculiar temperature anomaly but it did not involve the sensor > in the catalyst! Aside, from an instrument problem, Scott, I like your "shifting catalyst" theory. If the last refill caused the top of the catalyst to "cone up" around the two upper TC stems, and "lock" there for a time, then the thermal path between Tmid and the catalyst could have shortened to raise the value of Tmid. This catalyst surface cone could also have set up a much taller recirculation cell in the gas, with an upward leg against the wall - the lower portion of which would be nearer the heaters - and a general downward draft over the cone shaped catalyst surface. The downdraft would be along the central axis of the cylinder. To make this idea fly, the effect on Tmid would have had to be biased toward the "hotter" side from greater conduction heating from the catalyst. Room vibration, the downdraft over the coned catalyst surface, etc. might have eventually caused the surface "lock" to break and let the catalyst slump back to a more horizontal position. Neat run! The data give a lot of interesting insight. Maybe you should "tap" the reactor (35 0z hammer :-)) after each refill to level the catalyst? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 07:14:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA08552; Wed, 6 May 1998 07:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 07:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35509873.2652 bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 10:05:55 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: Misdirected Mail Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-MgxC1.0.U52.4y6Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18358 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > From: > > The Journal of Scientific Exploration web site: > > http://www.jse.com/PR_Roswell_98.html > > [reformatted for UpDates] Oops! Sorry, folks! This was intended for the "other" listserver. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 07:14:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA17048; Wed, 6 May 1998 07:11:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 07:11:04 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506091128.00bde3b0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 09:11:28 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 1b results confirmed In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19980505204601.00ade790 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qUh-W2.0.HA4.tz6Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18359 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 20:46 5/5/98 -0600, Thomas N. Claytor wrote: >Scott, >I just tried a similar experiment (to the Bow experiment) with some Pd on >Carbon (18 g) from one of our Materials persons.... Hi Tom, Please give us a brief description of your apparatus. Was it like Case's with a large gas space above the catalyst and heat applied only from the bottom? 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 May 6 07:20:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA18729; Wed, 6 May 1998 07:17:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 07:17:24 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506091745.00be4a00 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 09:17:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 2 In-Reply-To: <35506DEB.54F1 interlaced.net> References: <3.0.5.32.19980506073559.0092adf0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"G1zL7.0.Va4.o37Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18360 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:04 5/6/98 -0400, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Aside, from an instrument problem, Scott, I like your "shifting >catalyst" theory..... >Room vibration, the downdraft over the coned catalyst surface, etc. >might have eventually caused the surface "lock" to break and let the >catalyst slump back to a more horizontal position. I forgot to mention that the chamber is subject to a constant but very mild (due mainly to the isolation afforded by the fiberglas insulation) vibration caused by the pulsations of the fluid metering pump I use for the water-flow calorimetry. Thus the mechanism for "unlocking" such a cone definitely exists. >Maybe you should "tap" the reactor (35 0z hammer :-)) after each refill >to level the catalyst? Yeah...but presumably this will not be necessary with the "real" catalyst which is supposed to be a coarse granular material. Right now I'm disassembling my apparatus and cleaning it in preparation for the arrival of the real catalyst (hopefully today). 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 May 6 08:38:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03710; Wed, 6 May 1998 08:34:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 08:34:23 -0700 Message-ID: <35508251.1E2FD406 ariel.com> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 11:31:29 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spacecraft finds solar tornadoes as wide as the Earth References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OMEtp3.0.uv.-B8Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18361 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > > Dear Terren, > > Please examine your last paragraph. You cannot KNOW in advance > who the audience it. To accurately write about something you must also > know of it. Make sure, or as surely ad you can, you follow the history > and ethics of the science.... and well as the science. > > J > > > > > Thanks for the warning. You can be sure I won't be wading too deep into > > this pool of heavy water. For one, the intended audience will have no > > scientific background whatsoever. Not to mention my intent in writing > > the article lies closer to illuminating the conflict between skeptics & > > fringe scientists... the charlatans and the visionaries... the > > characters, not the science itself. > > > To do this you must also know at tleas some of what the conflict > is ABOUT. That's why I'm here ;] Yes, an understanding of the science itself is important, but my *intended* audience's collective eyes will glaze over the second I mention a term like 'water-flow calorimetry'. I'm not going to detail the experiments, which in and of themselves are far less interesting (to me) than the dynamics and interaction between the players involved. Carry on! :] Terren From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 09:34:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA01074; Wed, 6 May 1998 09:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:24:56 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: News from Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805061226_MC2-3C10-7C24 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"hgTX8.0.eG.b_8Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18362 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Case called Mallove who called me with brief news of Case's present experiments. They are both extremely busy, so I'll post it. I do not usually like to relate third-hand information because it gets confused. Case took the large steel cell that he demonstrated to Mallove and placed it, heating blanket in all, into a large Dewar. Scott Little was right: the Dewar was not insulated well enough to allow input power to go to zero. However, Case was able to turn down the heater power. Let me describe what he did, and I hope I have it right. He tested a temporary, intermediate arrangement, with a steel cell and blanket inside the large Dewar. Case used the same cell he demonstrated at Bow. Initially it was in the same configuration, set out on the table, not in the Dewar. He turned blanket power up to 92 watts, as before, and this time the cell internal temperature rose to 195 deg C, 4 deg C higher than climbed during the Bow test. He then transferred the entire thing, cell and blanket, into the large Dewar and began turning down the power. When he reduced input to 49 watts the cell temperature began to fall. He increased input power slightly (three volts, probably 3.5 watts), and the temperature began climbing again. It went up to ~220 deg C and stabilized. I think these present results show that the effect is not caused by the heat applied from the bottom. Putting the electric blanket inside the larger Dewar and turning the power down would make the heat to surround the steel vessel more evenly, from all sides. Case is now fabricating a Dewar-within-a-Dewar for his next test, kind of like a Russian doll-within-a-doll. He hopes this will be well enough insulated so that he can reduce input to zero, perhaps with a little more catalyst. He wants to proceed directly to a self-heating test, rather than trying to evaluate these results, calibrating, or running a dummy with this temporary arrangement. I think that is a wise course of action. One could learn a great deal about the cell performance by "interrogating" this temporary Dewar calorimeter with various tests. but it is more important to proceed to the ultimate test. The new calorimeter, looked at from inside to outside, will consist of: Catalyst inside . . . A gas-tight steel cell surrounded by . . . A heater of some sort, place inside . . . A Dewar which is placed . . . . . . inside a bigger Dewar Here is an interesting question. When you put a 50 gram lump of carbon inside a steel flask inside Dewar which is inside another Dewar, and you raise the temperature of the steel flask and carbon to ~200 deg C, how long should it take to cool? I am not sure of the mass of the steel, or the thermal mass of carbon, but I suppose you approximate by pretending the whole thing is 20 moles of iron (1.1 kg). I believe the molar heat capacity of iron is ~26 J/mole/degrees. That is from John Logajan's "Thermodynamic Scorecard," Revision 1.4 for Ni, and from the Dulong-Petit law: "the gram-atomic heat capacity (specific heat times atomic weight) of an element is a constant; that is, it is the same for all solid elements, about six calories per gram atom." (Britannica) This was formulated in 1814 and it is now considered an approximation for "metallic elements at intermediately high temperatures." Anyway, to cool 20 moles of iron from 200 deg C to 20 deg C you have to lose ~93,600 joules. I will not attempt to grapple with emissivity for *two* Dewar barriers, or the Stefan-Boltzman radiation law, or cooling curves. As a gross approximation let's say the thing loses 20 watts from 200 to 100 deg C. It better be ~20 watts or it will not work. Anyway, in that case it should cool down to 100 deg C, losing 52,000 joules in about . . . 43 minutes. I would say if it stays at 200 deg C for 24 hours we can declare victory. Here is something to hope for: often the cell temperature fluctuates, and climbs. If all input power is turned off, and an hour later temperature begins climbing measurably (more than, say, 2 deg C), I would say that is definite proof that a reaction is occurring inside the cell -- chemical or nuclear. It would rule out any possible artifacts from thermometry alone. It would rule out transient effects from rain inside the cell or gas currents. It would mean the previous 2 and 3 week runs were real. And that, of course, means they must have been CF, not chemical. Scott Little wrote: This run also used the provisional catalyst but changes were made to more closely approximate Dr. Case's setup. Despite the changes, there was no sign of an excess temperature with the D2 gas. There was also no sign of excess heat. (The term "excess temperature" is confusing. I would call it "a temperature excursion" or "artifactual excess heat." "Excursion" has a nice ring to it. It reminds me of day-trips up the Potomac river on a dumpy old open decked steamer, and warm soft-drinks on a summer afternoon.) I consider that good news. Between Little and Claytor I think we can now feel fairly confident that this setup, with the catalyst in contact with the steel, does function as a reasonable calorimeter. The thermal conductivity of the gas does not make a significant difference, presumably because thermal losses directly to the metal dominate. Schaffer said this setup is "not a calorimeter" -- meaning it is too crude, not calibrated, and there are too many open questions about gas conductivity and so on. I think Little and Claytor have answered a few of these questions already. Case built six calorimeters before he arrived at this design. It facilitates a quick, reliable presence-or-absence test for excess heat. Case was well aware of gas conductivity problem. When I asked him about this, he quoted the ratio for hydrogen versus deuterium from memory. Then he said he designed this cell to avoid that problem, he cited the fact that the catalyst comes in contact with the steel and the thermocouple touches the catalyst, and he cited those hundreds of non-performing blank runs in which H and D produced the same temperature +/- 1 deg C. Perhaps this calorimeter is not as crude as we think. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 09:47:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17497; Wed, 6 May 1998 09:44:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:44:57 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506124756.00c3b230 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 12:47:56 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"KFcA5.0.HH4.8E9Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18363 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:48 PM 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >Looking at > > 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 11B5 + 4He2 > >13C 13.003355 >2H 2.0140 + >11B 11.009305 - >4He 4.00260 - > ========= > 0.00545 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.076675 MeV but this flies. Unfortunately: 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 15N7 + gamma 13C 13.0033548 2H 2.0141018 + 15N 15.0001089 - ========== 0.0173477 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 16.1594 MeV Note that both: 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 14N7 + n 13C 13.0033548 2H 2.0141018 + 14N 14.0030740 - n 1.0086649 - ========== 0.0057177 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.326 MeV and 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 14N7 + n 13C 13.0033548 2H 2.0141018 + 14C 14.0032420 - 1H 1.0078250 - ========== 0.0063896 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.952 MeV are energetically very possible. So I think that if we are seeing a reaction between C13 and deuterium, helium would not be the only or even the main product. I wouldn't discard the theory completely because: B11 + p ---> 3 He4 is one of the favorite aneutronic fusion reactions. Unlikely here though. 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 May 6 09:57:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA03968; Wed, 6 May 1998 09:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:52:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08E4 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:49:35 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"cfI3w3.0.sz.mK9Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18364 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John What is the bandwidth of an RMS to DC converter? Hank > ---------- > From: John Schnurer[SMTP:herman antioch-college.edu] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 1998 6:07 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode > > > > > Geo., > > Why not use RMS to DC converter ? > > > BUT: The best instruments, IMO, are thermal ... > Ask any Ham about a Bird! > > > On Wed, 6 May 1998, Geosas wrote: > > > Hi there - > > > > I understand that the problem is to measure the instantaneous > > input to a transformer, the secondary of which has a fluctuating > > load in the form of an arc discharge. > > > > Surely the way to do this is to use an analog multiplier chip, which > > gives a DC output proportional to the product of input voltages X > and > > Y. The Analog Devices AD633JN for example has bandwidth 1 MHz > > and accuracy +/- 2% full scale. The output voltage can be smoothed > > without any fear of loss of phase information, and integrated to > give > > total power input. > > > > The AD633JN costs about $10 here in Britain but Analog Devices do > > higher-spec ones though more expensive. > > > > All the best, George. > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 10:57:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11155; Wed, 6 May 1998 10:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 10:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506134504.00c4a150 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 13:45:04 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2CIQn3.0.Dk2.a5AKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18365 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:02 PM 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >How about some miraculous special situation low energy cross section for >C13? That's only asking for one miracle! 8^) Hmmm. There is also another miracle required... There are a number of graphite moderated nuclear reactors around. So even though the www.dne.bnl.gov site has little or no data on C13 reactions, they can't seriously affect the operation of those reactors. 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 May 6 10:55:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28758; Wed, 6 May 1998 10:50:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 10:50:26 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:49:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"74T2E1.0.B17.XBAKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18366 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:47 PM 5/6/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: [snip] > 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 14N7 + n I take this to mean: 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 14C6 + 1H1 > >13C 13.0033548 >2H 2.0141018 + >14C 14.0032420 - >1H 1.0078250 - > ========== > 0.0063896 x 931.5 MeV/AMU = 5.952 MeV > To summarize prior discussion, we have looked at the following candidate reactions: 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 11B5 + 4He2 + 5.077 MeV (1) 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 15N7 + 16.066 MeV (2) 12C6 + 2D1 ---> 14N7 + 10.178 MeV (3) 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 15N7 + gamma + 16.1594 MeV (4) 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 14N7 + n + 5.326 MeV (5) 13C6 + 2D1 ---> 14C6 + 1H1 + 5.952 MeV (6) 2D1 + 2D1 ---> 4He2 + 23.66 MeV (7) 6Li3 + 2D1 ---> 2(4He2) + 22.28 MeV (8) Of these only (1), (7) and (8) account for the He production, and only (1) accounts for the importance of the carbon catalyst. Also, only (1) matches the energy produced by the experiment, but the energy produced is highly questionable. The problem with (1), and actually all the reactions, is they require some kind of miracle to overcome the coulomb barrier. Number (1) also requires the "branching ratio" miracle, as (4) (5) and (6) are also in the picture. If helium production is actually producing the energy in the Case cell, and (1) is not the reaction, then there remains the question of the importance of carbon to the catalyst, and what is the nature of the active sites on the catalysts that work? If (1) *is* the reaction, there remains the question as to why all forms of carbon do not work, what is so special about the specific catalysts that work? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 11:06:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA13488; Wed, 6 May 1998 11:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 10:01:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"Y9egC1.0.fI3.ROAKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18367 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:45 PM 5/6/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 06:02 PM 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>How about some miraculous special situation low energy cross section for >>C13? That's only asking for one miracle! 8^) > > Hmmm. There is also another miracle required... There are a number of >graphite moderated nuclear reactors around. So even though the >www.dne.bnl.gov site has little or no data on C13 reactions, they can't >seriously affect the operation of those reactors. > > Robert I. Eachus Yes, I checked there also - noting but electron reactions. Opportunity for a deuterium carbon fusion rection would be rare in anuclear reactor, wouldn't it? If happening, it would go undetected due to the small amount? Besides, it is postulated to be a catalytically produced reaction. The miracle is the overcoming of the coulomb barrier via some QM governed action. I agree possibly another miracle is required - the "branching ratio miracle", which is so common to CF results. But that seems to be part and parcel of the low energy coulommb barrier defeating catalysis miracle, so does that really count as two miracles, or just one. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 11:11:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA14103; Wed, 6 May 1998 11:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506140859.00c44620 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 14:08:59 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <1dd72819.354fd830 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2f-7D1.0.CS3.1SAKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18368 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:25 PM 5/5/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >I fused the power supply input with an 8 amp slo-blow fuse. >Before making any wiring changes, I crowbar the supply after turning >power off. I am supposed to remove the shorting plug before turning >power back on. I am running short of 8 amp fuses. Better fuses than hands, but I'll tell you what I used to do. I ran a yellow nylon cord from the circut breaker to the shorting plug. That reminded me to put it in if I opened the breaker, and take it out before powering up. Of course, since I used a 10A circut breaker, I never ran out of fuses... Also my shorting plug was a 1/8" x 5/8" x 6" section of copper busbar, wrapped with a roll of electrical tape in the middle. It went into a 60 amp fuse holder (and the cord went to the handle of that). I could pull the inner part turn it 180 degrees and it would sit on, but not in the rest of the holder. Since it held two fuses and only one position had a shunt in it, I didn't have to worry about accidental shorts. I did have to worry about idiots though. Finally put "Danger High Voltage" and "Do Not Touch" signs on the panel. That fuse holder sitting cockeyed was an irresistable lure to some fidgiting fingers. One idiot picked it up, and in spite of my outcry, turned it around and inserted it. Bruised his fingers, but didn't hurt the shunt. (I think the capacitor bank was 800 microfarads at that time, and charging towards 4000 volts.) 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 May 6 11:13:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA14826; Wed, 6 May 1998 11:11:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:11:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 10:08:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Resent-Message-ID: <"UDrIX2.0.Yd3.qUAKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18369 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:45 PM 5/6/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 06:02 PM 5/5/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>How about some miraculous special situation low energy cross section for >>C13? That's only asking for one miracle! 8^) > > Hmmm. There is also another miracle required... There are a number of >graphite moderated nuclear reactors around. So even though the >www.dne.bnl.gov site has little or no data on C13 reactions, they can't >seriously affect the operation of those reactors. At 0.4 W/g in pure D2, or 400 W/kg, it might be considered significant. But the low concentration of He, and the fact the carbon is in block form, not granulated, should almost totally eliminate the signal - except possibly for a tendency for the *surface* of the carbon to overheat. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 11:40:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA05959; Wed, 6 May 1998 11:36:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:36:11 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506143905.00c52280 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 14:39:05 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <2b19c5a6.354fe065 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xf16X1.0.qS1.NsAKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18370 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:00 AM 5/6/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >I think so. An arc would be a very thin, spark like discharge in the tube. I >get that at higher partial pressures. A glow discharge is a smooth even >glow that fills the entire inside diameter of the tube. (like a neon sign) No! If a glow discharge is what you want fine, but... A glow discharge is a smooth even glow that fills the entire inside diameter of the tube. An arc fills the tube with plasma. However, the energy from the arc almost never gets out of the tube. It excites the plasma, and after thousands of absorptions and reemissions, the outer layer of the plasma glows with a smooth even glow. You tell the difference from the voltage drop across the tube, or from the power going in. There will be a substantial drop in voltage when you stike the arc, basically from kilovolts to nothing, and a dramatic increase in current. Depending on the tube fill, you could see glow discharges up to the amp range and arcs in the 100s of milliamps to kiloamp range and above. If you once go from glow discharge to arc you will know it. Especially since it will light up the room. ;-) For the smaller Xenon tubes we used typical maximum glow was around 15 watts, and we ran them as pulsed Xenon arcs at around 1.5 Kilowatts. (Larger tubes got up to 10 KW. The limitation was the temperature of the quartz...) Since the luminous efficiency also increases from glow discharge to arc, you might notice the 200x increase in light... If your power supply starves the arc as voltage drops, you will never see a stable arc. We used variations on: ====== ____________ ______________()()()___ > || < | | AC Line > || < _|_ V > || < _ _ A ____________> || <_________|_____________| Power Choke Arc Transformer Capacitor The choke coil was a lossy inductance which could be magnetically saturated. Once it was, it was equivalent to a few turns of wire in air. So the circut basically works like this. The transformer charges the capacitor up to about 1000 volts (and order of 50 joules*). The choke finally saturates, and the current avalanches through the tube, discharging the capacitor. The AC cycle reverses, and the process starts again. Obviously you want to tune the elements in the circut so that the capacitor finishes discharging just as the AC voltage crosses though zero. *50 joules is for a power supply for four 1500 watt tubes in parallel: 50 joules * 120 cps = 6000 watts Not all of the power for the arc needs to be stored in the capacitor, but we found that to be most efficient. 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 May 6 12:04:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA10424; Wed, 6 May 1998 11:59:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 11:59:03 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 14:56:12 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: News from Case - addendum Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805061458_MC2-3C14-AB69 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"hXr9g.0.nY2.sBBKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18371 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Earlier I wrote: If all input power is turned off, and an hour later temperature begins climbing measurably (more than, say, 2 deg C), I would say that is definite proof that a reaction is occurring inside the cell -- chemical or nuclear. It would rule out any possible artifacts from thermometry alone. It would rule out transient effects from rain inside the cell or gas currents. I meant that the hypothetical processes described here, that would produce artifactual heat, would be driven by heat from outside the cell. If I understand these hypotheses correctly, they require a continuous flux of heat coming in from the bottom of the cell and going out of the top, which creates thermal gradients, drives gas convection, or drives chemical reactions. To take the rain example, you would not have continuous rain on a dark planet after the sun goes out. When the external power is turned off and there is no energy production within the cell, I would expect all chemical and physical processes to peter out and cease within an hour or so, and of course the cell should gradually cool. That's the main thing! - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 12:06:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA11047; Wed, 6 May 1998 12:01:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:01:26 -0700 Message-ID: <3550B1B4.6161 skylink.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 11:53:40 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Giorgio Fontana's paper References: <3545E65C.5E5C152F verisoft.com.tr> <3545F6D6.5775@skylink.net> <3545FD2A.DF79674F@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PJj-R3.0.Ti2.5EBKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18372 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re: Giorgio Fontana's paper gr-qc/9804069 " A possibility of emission of high frequency gravitational radiation from d-wave to s-wave type superconductor junctions" http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9804069 Hamdi Ucar wrote: >> James Cox, editor of Antigravity News, has found this effect >> experimentally and applied for a patent. >Apparently, Antigravity News is not online. >Do you have a link or supply more info about the issue? >From Antigravity News Vol 1 No 3, November/December 1997 (Copied with Author's Permission) EVIDENCE FOR A GRAVITATIONAL PULSE FROM A SUPERCONDUCTOR TRANSITION The cover shows pictures of a simple experiment using a 1 inch diameter superconductor (Barium Yttrium Cupric Oxide) from Edmund Scientific that is first cooled in a dewar filled with liquid oxygen. it is then immediately placed inside of a heave walled steel cylinder that is completely enclosed with steel end plugs. After a time interval from 1 to 2 minutes typically (depending upon thermal environment), the SC will then transition back to a normal state. The entire cylinder is mounted in a wood stand some 6 inches above a Sunbeam digital scale (0 - 2000 grams, 1 gm increments) purchased a Office Depot, and shielded with aluminum foil. The objective is to look for a weight change of the entire apparatus. No magnets of any kind or coils are used in the experiment. No electrical power is applied. I found that at the moment of transition, there was an upset in the digital output reading: completely blanked out for about half a second. I find it hard to believe, with all this shielding, that it is simply an electromagnetic wave of some kind; although it is clearly premature to rule out ordinary explanations. A dozen or so time readings were taken of the moment of removal from the LN2 to the time of upset. This interval was in the range of 1 minute 43 seconds to 1 minute 48 seconds. A tiny cobalt magnet 1/8 inch diameter) was used to confirm the warm-up time for the SC disc to transition in a separate external experiment -- and was consistent with the digital scale reading to about +/- 10 seconds, when it started to lose the Meissner effect. Therefore the correlation of the upset of the scale with the time of removal of the SC from the LN2 is clearly established. The effect is reproducible 90% of the time and only occurs during warm-up, never during cool down. Also a bunch of broken pieces of Sc and discs in a cup full of LN2 would occasionally yield an upset (only a single one). Moreover, two sequentially cooled discs, 30 seconds apart, always gave a single simultaneous upset, suggesting that the first one to transition triggered the other one. The upset effect also occurs with the cylinder taken off the scale at any azimuthal position above or level with the scale and up to a distance of two feet. At three feet it would not upset. There is some evidence that the orientation of the disc itself relative to the scale direction may effect whether an upset will occur. My next plan is to get inside the digital scale circuit and look for the analog amplifier output signal from the strain gauge bridge. Also I have a dynamic force transducer (piezo) rated at 500 Lbs peak impulse force capacity I can set up to look for the presumed gravity pulse characteristics (or one can try a simple buzzer piezo from Radio Shack). From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 12:34:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA15986; Wed, 6 May 1998 12:28:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 12:28:13 -0700 Posted-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 22:22:47 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3550B60B.34B6553D verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 22:12:12 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Giorgio Fontana's paper References: <3545E65C.5E5C152F verisoft.com.tr> <3545F6D6.5775@skylink.net> <3545FD2A.DF79674F@verisoft.com.tr> <3550B1B4.6161@skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kFhj1.0.iv3.CdBKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18373 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > > Re: Giorgio Fontana's paper gr-qc/9804069 > " A possibility of emission of high frequency > gravitational radiation from d-wave to > s-wave type superconductor junctions" > http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9804069 > > Hamdi Ucar wrote: > >> James Cox, editor of Antigravity News, has found this effect > >> experimentally and applied for a patent. > > >Apparently, Antigravity News is not online. > >Do you have a link or supply more info about the issue? > > >From Antigravity News Vol 1 No 3, November/December 1997 > > (Copied with Author's Permission) > > EVIDENCE FOR A GRAVITATIONAL PULSE FROM A SUPERCONDUCTOR TRANSITION [snip] Thanks lot. hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 13:16:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02782; Wed, 6 May 1998 13:12:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 13:12:25 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 23:05:06 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3550BF49.563E96FC verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 22:51:37 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Comment to James Cox experiment References: <3545E65C.5E5C152F verisoft.com.tr> <3545F6D6.5775@skylink.net> <3545FD2A.DF79674F@verisoft.com.tr> <3550B1B4.6161@skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5KhZ1.0.Lh.cGCKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18374 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From Antigravity News Vol 1 No 3, November/December 1997 >(Copied with Author's Permission) >EVIDENCE FOR A GRAVITATIONAL PULSE FROM A SUPERCONDUCTOR TRANSITION >... I found that at the moment of transition, > there was an upset in the digital output reading: completely blanked > out for about half a second. I find it hard to believe, with all this > shielding, that it is simply an electromagnetic wave of some kind; > although it is clearly premature to rule out ordinary explanations. Ok there is an anomaly. But at least two more observations should be performed to help to understand the effect. 1) As the digital balance electronics seems be influenced by DC transtion, an idle balance in proximity should be influenced by this interference. 2) Is a mechanical balance was used in this experiment? Without these additional observations, one could not claim an gravitation caused interference. Even a SC transition could lead an gravitational anomaly, this transtion could also produce a EM interference without gravitational effect. I will be happy to contact directly by J.Cox and discuss further his findings. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 13:23:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA27301; Wed, 6 May 1998 13:16:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 13:16:59 -0700 Message-ID: <3550B703.AEA earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 14:16:19 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, mica@world.std.com, drom vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la@utkux.utk.edu, orian001 maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge@students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani@frascati.infn.it, opa aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak@nosc.mil, bossp nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly@mse.ogi.edu, dg cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell@lanl.gov, sphkoji sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos@juno.com, g-miley uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti@msn.com, design73 aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre@qm.sri.com, tchubb aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger@eneco-usa.com, cincygrp ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Murray: presentiment tests 05/05/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34DFC098. 4EB3 earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6@earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earthlink.n et> <34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6F8AA.1 837 earthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D@earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthlink.net! > <3504077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350DAD0F. 535F earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F@earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@earthlink. net> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <35173888.2 F66 earthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B@earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@earthlink.! net> <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@earthl ink.net> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <352D3FA 7.574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@earthlin k.net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <3547586! D.E74 eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> <354B3358.3FDD@earthli nk.net> <354B9371.1DB9 earthlink.net> <354BCF38.5CFB@earthlink.net> <354F1495.4471@earthlink.net> <354FEDB4.5E76@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tLQ-i.0.Tg6.wKCKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18375 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Murray: presentiment tests 05/05/98 Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 14:08:34 -0500 From: Rich Murray Organization: Room For All To: Jack Sarfatti , "Dean I. Radin" , lcrowell unm.edu, JosephHRowe@compuserve.com, lucille rtelis, org, sethnet efn.org, rollo@artvark.com, charlestart worldnet.att.net, catalyst sprint.meil.com, info@arsight.org, S2-blackmore wpg.uwe.ac.uk, prudence largeruniverse.com CC: Stuart R Hameroff , Gary Schwartz , Glen Lindenstadt , James M Laukes , lensman stardrive.org, density4 cts.com, jobones1@hotmail.com, davis@znet.com, creon nas.nasa.gov, 75214.115@compuserve.com, DavidMosier worldnet.att.net, DCTraub@aol.com, nids kitfox.anv.net, donkolb sprintmail.com, Puthoff@aol.com, fawolf ix.netcom.com, wardprod sirius.com, Ahlock.Chan@worldnet.att.net, jaser7 home.com, APOLLINAIR aol.com, johnpaul@sirius.com, NEONLEO@aol.com, lwilliam stars.sfsu.edu, LFuller@istar.ca, CNINews1@aol.com, rtarg espresearch.com, sirag@pond.net, fsphys@brunnet.net, tmv amigo.net, gamet isrglobal.com, west@sonic.net, Alex Burns , Amit Goswami , Anastasia , Andrew Hennessey , Art Wagner , Art Bell , Avril Corke , Basil Hiley , "bkane pmc.philips.com" , Brian Josephson , Bruce Anderson , Bruce Rosenblum , Charles Ostman , D Caruso , D Mender , David Chalmers , Don Webb , Douglas Rushkoff , Ed Komarek , Eldon Byrd , Eric Von Schweber , Foster Gamble , Frank Mosca , George Hathaway , Glenn Krawczyk , Henry Stapp , Jagdish Mann , James Anderson , Jeffrey Mishlove , Judy Thompkins , Kaitlin Quistgaard , "Kathi L. Austin" , "Krippner, Stanley" , Larry Lange , M Schlitz , Manuel Figueroa , Marcello Truzzi , "Marcus S. Robinson" , Mark Germ , Mark Pesce , Michael Gosney , Michael Ibison , Michael J Harris , Michael Rosen , Michael Rossman , MT , Nick Frank , Nick Herbert , Omega Point , P Fleming , P Glidden , "P. J. Werbos" , Paul Green , Paul Zielinski , Reg Oberlag , "Richard L. Amoroso" , Richard Metzger , Rita Lauria , Robert Flower , Robert Wolf , Ron Anastasia , Rose De Sena , "Rubik, Beverly" <"\" 101471.1777\"" compuserve.com>, "sala euronet.nl" , Sam Sternberg , Sara Diamond , schwann , "Serge N. Konyaev" , Sheri Crawford , "SKEPTICMAG aol.com" , Stan Klein , Stanley Jeffers , Stan Tenen , Steve Bassett , Steve Moreno , Tony Smith , U Awret , Victor J Stenger , Walter Bowart , William Church References: 1 , 2 May 5, 1998 Jack Sarfatti, Dean Radin, and all, I was astonished and pleased to read Dean I. Radin's "The Conscious Universe" (1997), which made me aware of the impressive extent of competent replication of key "ESP" results. I want to offer suggestions to extend the "Unconscious Precognition" work, inadvertently started in the early 1980s by Holger Klintman of the Department of Psychology at the Lund University, Sweden [pages 116-124]. He proved in five experiments that people have unconscious body reponses, automatically and continuously recorded, a few seconds before, as well as during and afterwards, viewing violent or erotic photos randomly mixed in with serene photos. Radin replicated this "presentiment effect" in a series of experiments at his Consciousness Research Laboratory, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, reported in August, 1996. Prof. Dick Bierman, a psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, replicated Radin's work. With two dozen or more subjects, highly significant results are achieved. The results are robust. This work could be extended to the Internet, by utilizing a Java applet to precisely monitor the speed of mouse clicking for a few seconds before viewing a randonly presented color photo. The subject would be instructed to start clicking his mouse quickly at an audio tone five seconds before seeing the photo, and to keep clicking for five seconds during the viewing, and for five seconds afterwards. Left hand versus right hand use could be compared, and right eye vs left eye vs both eyes. Probably, characteristic changes in the speed and variation of clicking could be correlated with the photos viewed, and given the huge numbers of participants accumulated, very signficant data achieved. A standardized program could be made available for widespread and exact replication, and a CD version sold, with provision for all data to be pooled at one Net site. Even skeptics could be tested. For users who have a microphone, then vocalization, such as an, "OOOOO...,' sound could be studied. Audio stimuli can also be studied. Other life forms can be studied with standard operant conditioning setups. Even paramacia can be imaged during a few seconds of exposure to nonlethal light, sound, and ealectric current. A group of hundreds of paramecia in a two-dimensional cell can be imaged with a digital camera, and the images processed by programs to determine the speed and direction of movement for each time interval. Such an experiment could be run indefinitely on a website, with the images and data processed real-time, available to all viewers. Another step in abstraction would be to create computer life forms, rather like the paramecia, with the program incorporating radioactive random number generators to modulate their approach- avoidance behavior to spots of different color that appear randomly in their two-dimensional world on the screen. What would be the theoretical implications of proving retrocausal effects in such a system? Here is opportunity to quickly achieve robust results with revolutionary implications. Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 14:20:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA14251; Wed, 6 May 1998 14:14:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 14:14:29 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 13:14:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: News from Case Resent-Message-ID: <"JfbRO.0.bU3.qADKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18376 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:24 PM 5/6/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >Here is an interesting question. When you put a 50 gram lump of carbon inside >a steel flask inside Dewar which is inside another Dewar, and you raise the >temperature of the steel flask and carbon to ~200 deg C, how long should it >take to cool? Jed, You need the dimensions and more specifics to calculate the thermal resistance and thermal masses involved, before heat flows and temperaturevs time can be determined. Of additional interest is what is being used for the dewar(s) "lid". Fiberglass insulation material? There is a rapidly dimininshing return as more insulation is added, because the area increases with each layer. As the distance increases, the area increases with the square of the distance, but the insulation is only proportional to distance. it is a better strategy to increase the thermal output, if possible, by increasing catalyst volume. Then the volume vs area ratio then works in your favor. As the volume of catalyst increases as r^3, it's confining area only increases as r^2. One of the prior experiments was producing about 150 W/kg, so the breakeven point should be reached at somewhere near a kg. There are obvious problems with increasing catalyst volume also, cost, delay, lack of scaling information, etc. May good fortune smile upon the efforts! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 14:42:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA18860; Wed, 6 May 1998 14:38:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 14:38:39 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007501bd7937$1c7a9640$2f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Brightest Burst in Universe (http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/ Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 15:36:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7904.B3E373E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"yI6iK2.0.bc4.UXDKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18377 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7904.B3E373E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A real blast. http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/gammaburst980506.html ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7904.B3E373E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Brightest Burst in Universe.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Brightest Burst in Universe.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/gammaburst980506.html Modified=609FCDDC3679BD0115 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7904.B3E373E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 14:48:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA20611; Wed, 6 May 1998 14:45:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 14:45:19 -0700 Message-Id: <199805062145.RAA00696 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Best "beyond chemical" Case run data Date: Wed, 6 May 98 17:47:57 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"31XPA2.0.o15.kdDKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18378 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed writes: >I doubt it! Many systems work with Pd alone, but I have never heard of one >working with C alone. AquaFuel works with C alone and the evidence is building strongly to O/U and transmutations in it. Other *proprietary* systems may employ carbon. Carbon is important. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 15:05:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA24142; Wed, 6 May 1998 15:02:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 15:02:08 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980506170232.00bc3d1c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 17:02:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: drumroll.... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qoE3a.0.8v5.VtDKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18379 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Look at what came via UPS today: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/bottle.jpg This stuff is VERY different from the Aldrich mat'l. It's quite coarse and the particles are very irregular. A bed of this stuff will permit much more circulation of the gas throughout it than the Aldrich material did. I've loaded the chamber with 30 grams of it and that covers the bottom thermocouple just about like 14 grams of the Aldrich material did. In other words, it has twice the bulk density. Everything is all sealed up and ready to go early tomorrow morning. Stay tuned... 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 May 6 15:28:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA28167; Wed, 6 May 1998 15:25:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 15:25:39 -0700 Message-ID: <3550E193.17E3 skylink.net> Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 15:17:55 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: kfbrown worldnet.att.net Subject: Progress in Synthesis of Element 114 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RKME13.0.0u6.YDEKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18380 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: We're getting close to producing material with Z = 114. It may be very unusual stuff. Or maybe not. http://newton.ex.ac.uk/aip/physnews.344.html#3 http://www.gsi.de/~demo/wunderland/englisch/Kapitel_02.html http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw17.html http://www.anomalous-images.com/news/news084.html http://www.e12.physik.tu-muenchen.de/nupecc/working_groups/stability/exotic/exotic.html Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 22:49:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA12256; Wed, 6 May 1998 22:47:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 22:47:27 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD79CE.F93A18C0 pc038---brendan> From: Brendan Hall To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Dr Case : Powders and what not Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:43:50 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA12240 Resent-Message-ID: <"zSHOK1.0.Q_2.khKKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18381 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have been unable to follow the discussion since the 2nd of May (due to a troubled proxy server). In that time I have been looking for possible non-fusion explanations for the Case experiment, however, I do not know whether the following possibility has been properly considered yet. I will say, at this point, that I lack vital information on the catalyst, specifically the particle size, the particle density, the grain size and the heat transfer rate typical for particle-to-particle (and cluster-to-cluster) contacts. The following ar gument is based on the following assumptions: 1. The mean particle size of the catalyst is less than 30 micron. 2. The heat transfer rate is dominated by the activated carbon, which is low, rather than the palladium. 3. The thermocouple is place inside the catalyst powder (or possibly at the walls). The main argument for CF is that the reaction is sustained for longer periods than is chemically possible. A secondary argument is that there is a temperature difference between H and D gas experiments. Both of these have to be simultaneously considered by the analyst. Let us consider an enclosed system half filled with small particles of a low particle-to-particle heat transfer rate, being heated from the base of the chamber. The lower half is called a packed bed, and the upper half is called a freeboard. The particl es form what can be considered to be an inter-particle matrix via contact points between adjacent particles. The first thing that needs to be noted is that convection currents will occur in the gas (hot air rises). Convection currents may be of sufficient size to cause (ideal) fluidisation of the particles (which, incidentally, promotes heat transfer). However , due to the small size of the particles, Van der Waals forces dominate the particle bed, causing it to remain a packed bed rather than fluidise. In such small particle beds, the phenomenon called "channeling" occurs. Here, the gas forces a cleared path way through the bed, effectively bypassing the majority of the particles in the bed. Thus, most of the heat is transferred from the source to the freeboard via the these channels. It is important to note that simple calculations of the convection curren t velocities based on homogeneous particle distribution and gas transport through the bed will be misleading. The presence of channels will result in most of the gas flowing through select local regions at velocities orders of magnitude higher than these expected convection currents predict. The initial formation of channels are influenced mainly by the weak points of the inter-particle matrix, in much the same way that the weakest link in a chain breaks. The weakest points in the particle bed are invariably near large obstacles (e.g. thermo couples) and, to a lesser extent, the walls bounding the bed. Consequently, channels preferentially occur around the thermocouples, and therefore they are not giving a temperature representative of the bulk of the bed. For many chemical reactions to be sustained, the following conditions need to be maintained: 1. Heat transfer to the reaction site. 2. Mass transfer of the reactants to the reaction site. 3. Product mass transfer away from the reaction site. In the particle bed, conditions 1 and 3 are maximum at the thermocouple site due to channeling, and condition 2 is partially maximised in that the deuterium gas flow is maximum within the channels. Condition 3 is true if the reaction products are gaseous or liquid (due to consideration of the partial pressures) and is likely to be the critical factor. These conditions result in the channel walls being the most likely place for chemical reactions to occur. Since the reaction site is localised, and if th e net reactions are exothermic, the powder undergoes a "slow burn" near the thermocouple, sustaining high local temperatures for a long period of time. The time can be much longer than expected chemical reaction times calculated on the assumption of homo genous temperatures throughout the bed (or linear temperature gradients across the bed), and may account for the main CF argument above. In particle-gas systems, heat transfer is dominated by particle contact. In a channel, particles (and sub-clusters) are stripped from the channel walls and are caught up by the gas in what is called entrainment. The entrainment rate is determined by a m yriad of factors, including particle-cluster bonds, local gas velocity, local gas pressure, gas density, channel shape etc. These entrained particles would thus move closer to the thermocouple, increasing and probably dominating the heat transfer rate to the thermocouple (depending on the entrainment rate). The increased density of the deuterium gas (as compared to the hydrogen gas) is expected to increase the entrainment rate from the channel walls, and may thus account for the secondary argument above . (This last point will have to be tested, as the influence of density on the entrainment rate may not be simple.) It was interesting that metallic based catalytic particles didn't exhibit a temperature difference. There are three possible, but mundane reasons for this. 1. There was no chemical reaction that could occur, unlike the carbon based catalytic particles. 2. The particle-to-particle heat transfer rate in the bed was sufficiently large to delocalise any reaction that was occurring. 3. The heat transfer to the thermocouple was reduced due to the density/particle size of the catalyst resisting differential entrainment rates from the channel walls. Conclusion The above analysis details some reasons why the reported experiments may exhibit durable chemical reactions specifically located around the thermocouple sites, thus mimicking a reaction of longer duration than believed chemically possible. It also makes some attempt at clarifying a possible cause for the temperature difference between H2 and D2 runs, by coupling the temperature measurements to the entrainment rate of inal level. For optimum shaking, it does need a freeboard, so don't fill the bed up com pletely. Can the thermocouples withstand such vigorous treatment? If the reaction does prove to be non-chemical, the break-up of channels may lead to a significant improvement in the output power of the cell, a result of the delocalisation of the reaction sites in the bed. The transport of helium and hydrogen away from the particles may prove important when optimising the power from the cell. If possible, shake the powder when evacuating and refilling. Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 23:07:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA16528; Wed, 6 May 1998 23:04:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 23:04:50 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 02:04:18 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"Tsp-12.0.524.1yKKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18382 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, The volt and ammeter arrived via UPS today. Installed in power supply, tested ok. I tried a quick and dirty H2 no K run to get an idea what temps to expect. Tube temp went up to and stabilized at 209 C. This power supply at the 209 C level was inputting 50 volts at .8 amps to the primary of the high voltage transformer. The eight ballast lamps glowing at barely red heat. A problem...the upper end of the tube gets way too hot. The vacuum hose connection softened and a leak developed. I took it down and reworked the upper electrode holder, a piece of 1/8 od copper tubing. Cut the copper tubing out and substituted a coil of .040 ss wire thinking to lengthen the thermal path to the upper end brass vacuum fittings. Second try...same thing...tubing melted... it's the short 5 inch tube...sigh... I will construct another reactor tube this time instead of being a frugal experimenter and get two tubes from one quartz lamp, will use the entire tube, about 13 inches long, with a really long upper electrode holder to keep the heat far away from the vacuum fittings. This is still, even with the problems, much fun. Note to Robert Eachus: I am, from your descriptions of arc vs. glow, getting glow discharge. The room is not lighting up. Only a pale violet glow in the tube. The brightest event occurs when firing up, and this from the ballast lamps. (Rick, it is starting to look like the mad scientist lab) I have to run the power supply up to about 1200 volts to get the glow started and back the variac off quickly. As the glow lights up the tube pulls a lot of current through the lamps. I think I should add more lamps, maybe enough so they will be able to absorb the entire output of the HV supply at full voltage. I also like your idea of the yellow cord to the crowbar and power switch.. How about a heavy duty relay with normally closed contacts in series with a 1K resistor across the supply? The relay would drop with power off shorting the supply. I have a couple of these things lying around. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 23:41:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA20331; Wed, 6 May 1998 23:40:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 23:40:29 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 02:34:20 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"syoUm1.0.az4.TTLKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18383 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, It seems you need a way to 'strike' the arc. A surface coupled electrode fed from an auto ignition coil should work. The coild and its battery and chopper should be isolated and floating. You can sticke the palsma and then more the surface electrode away. A stiff piece of stainless welding wire is fine, or irom or copper... up to you. Read about plasma tubes and lamps. J On Thu, 7 May 1998, VCockeram wrote: > All, > The volt and ammeter arrived via UPS today. Installed in power supply, > tested ok. > I tried a quick and dirty H2 no K run to get an idea what temps to expect. > Tube temp went up to and stabilized at 209 C. This power supply at the > 209 C level was inputting 50 volts at .8 amps to the primary of the high > voltage transformer. The eight ballast lamps glowing at barely red heat. > > A problem...the upper end of the tube gets way too hot. The vacuum hose > connection softened and a leak developed. I took it down and reworked > the upper electrode holder, a piece of 1/8 od copper tubing. Cut the > copper tubing out and substituted a coil of .040 ss wire thinking to > lengthen the thermal path to the upper end brass vacuum fittings. > Second try...same thing...tubing melted... it's the short 5 inch > tube...sigh... > I will construct another reactor tube this time instead of being a frugal > experimenter and get two tubes from one quartz lamp, will use the entire > tube, about 13 inches long, with a really long upper electrode holder to > keep the heat far away from the vacuum fittings. > This is still, even with the problems, much fun. > > Note to Robert Eachus: I am, from your descriptions of arc vs. glow, > getting glow discharge. The room is not lighting up. Only a pale violet > glow in the tube. The brightest event occurs when firing up, and this > from the ballast lamps. > (Rick, it is starting to look like the mad scientist lab) > I have to run the power supply up to about 1200 volts to get the > glow started and back the variac off quickly. As the glow lights > up the tube pulls a lot of current through the lamps. I think I should add > more > lamps, maybe enough so they will be able to absorb the entire output of > the HV supply at full voltage. > I also like your idea of the yellow cord to the crowbar and power switch.. > How about a heavy duty relay with normally closed contacts in series > with a 1K resistor across the supply? The relay would drop with power off > shorting the supply. I have a couple of these things lying around. > > Regards, > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 6 23:51:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA06839; Wed, 6 May 1998 23:46:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 23:46:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 02:38:24 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Model T ... for Vince Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"atoBK3.0.lg1.CZLKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18384 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A Model T replica ignition coil ... these have their own interrupter .. will work great for stiker. Battery and coil should be isolate, say on 1/4 lucite or the like, or 1/4 glass. Glass jars make good insulating standoffs. Use momentary contact normally open switch to control and use glass rod of DRY wooden stick to puch switch. Pay attention to capacitive stray coupling of high voltage. Find ham radio operator to help you ... or good HV gal or guy from power company. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 01:54:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA16640; Thu, 7 May 1998 01:50:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 01:50:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD79E8.5DF12420 pc038---brendan> From: Brendan Hall To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Dr. Case: Powders and what not Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 18:45:48 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id BAA16622 Resent-Message-ID: <"qO8sy.0.v34.QNNKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18385 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My previous post seemed to have cut out a goodly section of what I had written. Here is the final section again. Conclusion The above analysis details some reasons why the reported experiments may exhibit durable chemical reactions specifically located around the thermocouple sites, thus mimicking a reaction of longer duration than believed chemically possible. It also makes some attempt at clarifying a possible cause for the temperature difference between H2 and D2 runs, by coupling the temperature measurements to the entrainment rate of particles near the thermocouple. However, it does not explain the presence of helium in the gas analysis, so further study is desirable. In order to help those that would want to disprove the claims within the above analysis, the following may help. The whole analysis may be proved irrelevent if 1. The mean particle diameter is greater than 30 micron AND the particles are inherently non-sticky. (To come to think of it, any packed bed should exhibit channeling if the flow velocity is high enough.) 2. The convection currents and weaknesses in the inter-particle structure are insufficient to cause channeling. 3. The heat transfer rate is dominated by the palladium AND this is sufficiently high to delocalise the reaction sites. 4. The entrainment rates are insufficient to interfere with the thermocouple temperature measurements. (A wide particle distribution, with a significant number of small particles, would show entrainment if channels form, so this is not limited to small mean particle size systems only.) 5. The following recommendations still produce large excess heat results. Recommendations When heating the bed, try to maintain an homogenous temperature within the bed at all times. The homogeneity can be improved by fluidising the bed, either by aeration (pumping the gas through the bed), stirring or vibration (shaking the bed). Vibration i s an oft used method of destroying channeling. Keeping the temperature controller on top (as in Scott Little's bed) will also reduce the convection currents, but convection currents can be induced by self sustaining localised exothermic reactions within the powder. A quick test for current apparatus is to vigorously shake the bed whilst measuring the temperature. Since the channels will take several seconds to reform (or minutes, depending on the bed height and material), and if the temperature is only a local phen omenon, the temperature at the thermocouple should immediately fall, and rise slowly back close to its original level. For optimum shaking, it does need a freeboard, so don't fill the bed up completely. Can the thermocouples withstand such vigorous trea tment? If the reaction does prove to be non-chemical, the break-up of channels may lead to a significant improvement in the output power of the cell, a result of the delocalisation of the reaction sites in the bed. The transport of helium and hydrogen away from the particles may prove important when optimising the power from the cell. If possible, shake the powder when evacuating and refilling. Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 03:44:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA23228; Thu, 7 May 1998 03:40:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 03:40:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 02:38:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Water content noted, EXPLOSION HAZARD? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id DAA23204 Resent-Message-ID: <"Cw0Ar2.0.rg5.I-OKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18386 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott noted the new catalyst was much more dense than the one he tested earlier. I just noticed that at least one catalyst is described in the patent as having "62% H20 content". I have suggested the difference between D2 and H2 may be catalysis of a liquid that provides a thermal short to between Case's thermocouple and the bottom of the cell, possibly water. An alternate, but much less likely, explanation is that a liquid forms with D2 with a higher boiling temperature at the pressure and temperatures involved. It is of interest to determine how well the evacuation removes any water from the catalyst during the fill process. That initial 62 percent water should be H2O, not D2O, right? That means H may be in the mix in large quantities in the catalyst even though the gas admitted is pure D2, unless that catalyst water is removed. This also brings up the possibility of simply loading the cell with D2O, and H2O for control runs. This would eliminate the thermal shunt hypothesis. Doing such would mean having to run with the temperature gradient presently used, which guarantees condensation of any boiling liquid on the top of the cell, and thus pressure stability. Enclosing the cell in insulation, as being done presently, if there is liquid in the cell, could greatly increase the pressure in the cell, as water is not a liquid at 200 C and 185 lbs. The present high insulation runs could present an EXPLOSION HAZARD if there is any liquid in the cell. Gene Mallove posted in the Case patent application: "EXAMPLE 1 Into a 300-series stainless steel bottle of 1700 ml. volume, fitted with pressure gauge, thermowell reaching to near the bottom of the bottle, an inlet-outlet valve, and 3/4" plugged opening for addition and removal of solids, and heated on the lower outside and bottom by a hemispherical, electrically-heated heating mantle, was placed 28.0 g. of 1% Pt on activated carbon, of 62% H20 content, and being very fluffy and light weight. The vessel was then sealed, and alternatively heated to about 100 °C., and evacuated with a good mechanical vacuum pump, until the pressure in the vessel at 100 °C. was much less than 1 psia. Then the vessel was filled to 32 psia with high purity (grade 4.7) hydrogen gas. After heating for several hours, at 60 V. on the heating mantle the vessel stabilized at 156 °C. and 18.5 psia. Then the vessel was evacuated well with the mechanical vacuum pump, and filled to 32.5 psia with grade 2.5 deuterium. The vessel was then heated again for several hours, and at 60 V. on the heating mantel, the vessel stabilized at a temperature of 166 °C. The current to the heating mantle was 1.79 A for the H2 run, and 1.78 A for the D2 run, thought to be indistinguishably different. The temperature difference for D2 over H2, at the same power input is 10 °C., corresponding to a few watts of power generation. On maintaining the voltage at 60 V. for many days, the temperature vessel containing D2 increased another one or two °C." Gene, was this the subject 3 week run? Note that D2 pressure was 32.5 psia, fill temperature unknown, unless 100 C is assumed, catalyst weight was 28.0 g, run duration not specified. Here are the best available values so far for the "beyond chemical" run: Experiment values: Initial Gas Pressure 50.00 PSI Initial Gas Temperature 18.00 C Initial Gas Volume 1.60 liters Run Duration 504.00 Hours Weight of Catalyst 50.00 grams Ratio of catalyst Pd 0.03 Pd/total Helium content before run 6.00 ppm Helium content at end of run 96.00 ppm Heat output 7.50 watts Misc. Constants Used: Avogadro's Number 6.0221367E+23 atoms/mole Standard Temperature 273.00 deg. K Standard Pressure 14.69594 psi Density of helium at STP 0.1787 g/liter Density of D2 at STP 0.1796 g/liter AMU to MeV conversion factor 931.459539710 MeV/AMU Atomic weight of 2H (deuterium) 2.0140 AMU Atomic weight of 4He 4.00260 AMU Atomic weight of carbon 12.0110 AMU D + D fusion energy 23.66 MeV J/eV 1.6021773E-19 J/eV Calculated Values: D2 volume at std temperature 1.50 liters D2 volume at STP 5.11 liters D2 weight 0.9174 g Moles of D2 0.2277 moles STP helium volume created 4.5963E-04 liters Helium mass 8.2135E-05 g Helium moles 2.0520E-05 moles Helium atoms created 1.2358E+19 atoms D + D fusion energy based on AMU 23.6591 MeV Fusion energy based on He 4.6845E+07 joules Fusion power over run duration 25.818 watts Energy produced by run 1.3608E+07 joules Energy per mole of carbon 23360.03 J/mole Fusions per second 6.8109E+12 fps Power density for catalyst 0.1500 W/g Energy per He created 6.873 MeV/He Fusion energy per mole of helium 2.2828E+12 joules Fusion energy per mole of D2 2.2828E+12 joules Energy from total experiment D2 5.1992E+05 MJ Max run duration on the D2 2195.78 years Time till fuel recycle at 5 pct 109.79 years Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 04:49:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA14121; Thu, 7 May 1998 04:44:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 04:44:07 -0700 Message-Id: <199805071144.HAA03462 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Dr. Case: Powders and what not Date: Thu, 7 May 98 07:46:50 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"eIDz82.0.ZS3.6wPKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18387 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Brendan Hall wrote: > >In order to help those that would want to disprove the claims within the >above analysis, the following may help. The whole analysis may be proved >irrelevent if > 1. The mean particle diameter is greater than 30 micron AND the >particles are inherently non-sticky. They are like 0.25-inch chips! AND, they are NOT sticky. > 2. The convection currents and weaknesses in the inter-particle >structure are insufficient to cause channeling. No channeling is possible with chunks like these. > 3. The heat transfer rate is dominated by the palladium AND this is >sufficiently high to delocalise the reaction sites. These thingy's look black as coal. The Pd is an invisible coating. > 4. The entrainment rates are insufficient to interfere with the >thermocouple temperature measurements. >(A wide particle distribution, with a significant number of small >particles, would show entrainment if channels form, so this is not limited >to small mean particle size systems only.) Again, there are no very small particles in the United Catalyst material. > > >If the reaction does prove to be non-chemical, the break-up of channels >may lead to a significant improvement in the output power of the cell, a >result of the delocalisation of the reaction sites in the bed. The >transport of helium and hydrogen away from the particles may prove >important when optimising the power from the cell. Case's patent application and his discussions with me emphasize the need for a fluidized bed in a commercial reactor. > Best, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302 Phone: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 05:50:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA01411; Thu, 7 May 1998 05:41:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 05:41:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35519D00.74DD earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 06:37:36 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, mica@world.std.com, drom vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la@utkux.utk.edu, orian001 maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge@students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani@frascati.infn.it, opa aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak@nosc.mil, bossp nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly@mse.ogi.edu, dg cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell@lanl.gov, sphkoji sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos@juno.com, g-miley uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti@msn.com, design73 aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre@qm.sri.com, tchubb aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger@eneco-usa.com, cincygrp ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Halll: flow channel artifact in Case powder bed? 05/06/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34DFC0 98.4EB3 earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6@earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earthlin k.net> <34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6F8A A.1837 earthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D@earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthlink.! net> <3504077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350DAD 0F.535F earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F@earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@earthli nk.net> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <3517388 8.2F66 earthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B@earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@earthli! nk.net> <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@ear thlink.net> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <352D 3FA7.574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@earth link.net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <3547! 586D.E74 eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> <354B3358.3FDD@eart hlink.net> <354B9371.1DB9 earthlink.net> <354BCF38.5CFB@earthlink.net> <354F1495.4471@earthlink.net> <354FEDB4.5E76@earthlink.net> <354FF100.18C@earthlink.net> <35508190.22B5@earthlink.net> <35508566.2DA4@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Rxfbw2.0.zL.ImQKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18388 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Dr Case : Powders and what not Resent-Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 22:47:27 -0700 Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:43:50 +1000 From: Brendan Hall Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com To: 'Vortex Discussion Group'" I have been unable to follow the discussion since the 2nd of May (due to a troubled proxy server). In that time I have been looking for possible non-fusion explanations for the Case experiment, however, I do not know whether the following possibility has been properly considered yet. I will say, at this point, that I lack vital information on the catalyst, specifically the particle size, the particle density, the grain size and the heat transfer rate typical for particle-to-particle (and cluster-to-cluster) contacts. The following argument is based on the following assumptions: 1. The mean particle size of the catalyst is less than 30 micron. 2. The heat transfer rate is dominated by the activated carbon, which is low, rather than the palladium. 3. The thermocouple is place inside the catalyst powder (or possibly at the walls). The main argument for CF is that the reaction is sustained for longer periods than is chemically possible. A secondary argument is that there is a temperature difference between H and D gas experiments. Both of these have to be simultaneously considered by the analyst. Let us consider an enclosed system half filled with small particles of a low particle-to-particle heat transfer rate, being heated from the base of the chamber. The lower half is called a packed bed, and the upper half is called a freeboard. The particles form what can be considered to be an inter-particle matrix via contact points between adjacent particles. The first thing that needs to be noted is that convection currents will occur in the gas (hot air rises). Convection currents may be of sufficient size to cause (ideal) fluidisation of the particles (which, incidentally, promotes heat transfer). However, due to the small size of the particles, Van der Waals forces dominate the particle bed, causing it to remain a packed bed rather than fluidise. In such small particle beds, the phenomenon called "channeling" occurs. Here, the gas forces a cleared pathway through the bed, effectively bypassing the majority of the particles in the bed. Thus, most of the heat is transferred from the source to the freeboard via the these channels. It is important to note that simple calculations of the convection current velocities based on homogeneous particle distribution and gas transport through the bed will be misleading. The presence of channels will result in most of the gas flowing through select local regions at velocities orders of f magnitude higher than these expected convection currents predict. The initial formation of channels are influenced mainly by the weak points of the inter-particle matrix, in much the same way that the weakest link in a chain breaks. The weakest points in the particle bed are invariably near large obstacles (e.g. thermocouples) and, to a lesser extent, the walls bounding the bed. Consequently, channels preferentially occur around the thermocouples, and therefore they are not giving a temperature representative of the bulk of the bed. For many chemical reactions to be sustained, the following conditions need to be maintained: 1. Heat transfer to the reaction site. 2. Mass transfer of the reactants to the reaction site. 3. Product mass transfer away from the reaction site. In the particle bed, conditions 1 and 3 are maximum at the thermocouple site due to channeling, and condition 2 is partially maximised in that the deuterium gas flow is maximum within the channels. Condition 3 is true if the reaction products are gaseous or liquid (due to consideration of the partial pressures) and is likely to be the critical factor. These conditions result in the channel walls being the most likely place for chemical reactions to occur. Since the reaction site is localised, and if the net reactions are exothermic, the powder undergoes a "slow burn" near the thermocouple, sustaining high local temperatures for a long period of time. The time can be much longer than expected chemical reaction times calculated on the assumption of homogenous temperatures throughout the bed (or linear temperature gradients across the bed), and may account for the main CF argument above. In particle-gas systems, heat transfer is dominated by particle contact. In a channel, particles (and sub-clusters) are stripped from the channel walls and are caught up by the gas in what is called entrainment. The entrainment rate is determined by a myriad of factors, including particle-cluster bonds, local gas velocity, local gas pressure, gas density, channel shape etc. These entrained particles would thus move closer to the thermocouple, increasing and probably dominating the heat transfer rate to the thermocouple (depending on the entrainment rate). The increased density of the deuterium gas (as compared to the hydrogen gas) is expected to increase the entrainment rate from the channel walls, and may thus account for the secondary argument above. (This last point will have to be tested, as the influence of density on the entrainment rate may not be simple.) It was interesting that metallic based catalytic particles didn't exhibit a temperature difference. There are three possible, but mundane reasons for this. 1. There was no chemical reaction that could occur, unlike the carbon based catalytic particles. 2. The particle-to-particle heat transfer rate in the bed was sufficiently large to delocalise any reaction that was occurring. 3. The heat transfer to the thermocouple was reduced due to the density/particle size of the catalyst resisting differential entrainment rates from the channel walls. Conclusion The above analysis details some reasons why the reported experiments may exhibit durable chemical reactions specifically located around the thermocouple sites, thus mimicking a reaction of longer duration than believed chemically possible. It also makes some attempt at clarifying a possible cause for the temperature difference between H2 and D2 runs, by coupling the temperature measurements to the entrainment rate in a level. For optimum shaking, it does need a freeboard, so don't fill the bed up completely. Can the thermocouples withstand such vigorous treatment? If the reaction does prove to be non-chemical, the break-up of channels may lead to a significant improvement in the output power of the cell, a result of the delocalisation of the reaction sites in the bed. The transport of helium and hydrogen away from the particles may prove important when optimising the power from the cell. If possible, shake the powder when evacuating and refilling. Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 07:05:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA31243; Thu, 7 May 1998 07:02:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:02:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980507075513.00b7f540 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> X-Sender: claytor_t_n popmail.esa.lanl.gov X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 07:55:13 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: Re: Run 1b results confirmed Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bij-B3.0.1e7.txRKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18389 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, The sample chamber is heated from the bottom with IR hotplate and wrapped with a heavy thermal thermal blanket. Using a "Del Seal" 3-3/8 flange coupling to a closed end vacuum tube 2" OD by 4/1/2 in tall, I usually reserve for dehydriding samples. The catalyst or activated carbon (done as a control run) is in a 20 cc borosilicate jar suspended in the center of the tube using a wire support attached to the top flange. A K thermocouple was placed right in the middle of the catalyst bed. This mass takes about two hours to heat to equilibrium. There should be lots of room for convection, but it doesn't seem to be a problem. We have the usual pressure and temperature data logging that we use for tritium runs or hydriding experiments. Tom. At 09:11 AM 5/6/98 -0500, you wrote: >At 20:46 5/5/98 -0600, Thomas N. Claytor wrote: > >>Scott, >>I just tried a similar experiment (to the Bow experiment) with some Pd on >>Carbon (18 g) from one of our Materials persons.... > >Hi Tom, Please give us a brief description of your apparatus. Was it like >Case's with a large gas space above the catalyst and heat applied only from >the bottom? > > > >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) > > http://www.nde.lanl.gov/staff/claytor/claytor.htm Thomas N. Claytor Claytor_t_n lanl.gov Los Alamos National Laboratory ESA-MT, MS C914 Los Alamos NM, 87545 505-667-6216 voice 505-665-7176 fax From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 07:25:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA01540; Thu, 7 May 1998 07:21:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:21:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507092214.00be71f0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 09:22:14 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Run 3 underway Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9tKzP.0.-N.xDSKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18390 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: 0915: Run 3, with the real catalyst, is now underway. I have just started the 2nd hydrogen cycle. As before, the first cycle showed a pressure drop indicating significant reaction of the hydrogen with oxygen in/on the catalyst. The third hydrogen will start in an hour or so and, by noon local time, I'll probably be putting in the D2. This morning, while staring at the apparatus while it warmed up, I had a realization about the hydrogen purifier. It is likely that the purifier is significantly contaminating the D2 with H2 left in the Pd membrane. One solution would be to purge a lot of D2 ($$) thru the purifier before filling the chamber. However, I decided to remove the purifier entirely. Now I'm filling the chamber directly from the gas bottles....as Case does. During evacuation, I evacuate the line up to the valve on the bottle so there is nominally zero cross-contamination now. 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 May 7 07:37:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA13250; Thu, 7 May 1998 07:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 07:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507092837.00be6e04 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 09:28:37 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 1b results confirmed In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19980507075513.00b7f540 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"M0jPs1.0.yE3.uLSKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18391 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:55 5/7/98 -0600, Thomas N. Claytor wrote: >The sample chamber is heated from the bottom with IR hotplate and wrapped >with a heavy thermal thermal blanket. Using a "Del Seal" 3-3/8 flange >coupling to a closed end vacuum tube 2" OD by 4/1/2 in tall, I usually >reserve for dehydriding samples. The catalyst or activated carbon (done as >a control run) is in a 20 cc borosilicate jar suspended in the center of >the tube using a wire support attached to the top flange. Tom, this is a noticeable departure from Case's setup. You would be much closer if you dumped the catalyst into the bottom of your stainless vacuum vessel. Of course, it would also be much messier.... BTW, for folks who don't know what "Del Seal" is, it's MDC's trade name for their version of the Conflat flange....same as I am using...only Tom's is larger dia. 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 May 7 08:36:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA19538; Thu, 7 May 1998 08:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 08:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507112453.00c67320 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 11:24:53 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uhObD2.0.8n4.J8TKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18392 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:04 AM 5/7/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >Note to Robert Eachus: I am, from your descriptions of arc vs. glow, >getting glow discharge. The room is not lighting up. Only a pale violet >glow in the tube. The brightest event occurs when firing up, and this >from the ballast lamps. I can create a forty watt arc, but only by starting at much higher power and dropping down. (Of course, for sub-millimeter length arcs the rules are different.) Anyway, you have a glow discharge. In the apparatus you have, an arc would probably run around 1-2 kilowatts. (And I could probably get a glow discharge up over 300 watts before it became unstable.) >(Rick, it is starting to look like the mad scientist lab) >I have to run the power supply up to about 1200 volts to get the >glow started and back the variac off quickly. As the glow lights >up the tube pulls a lot of current through the lamps. I think I should add >more lamps, maybe enough so they will be able to absorb the entire output of >the HV supply at full voltage. Why? If you want to eliminate the start-up problem, since you are running DC, put a capacitor (say 2 microFarad, 600 VAC, preferably oil-filled) across the tube. This will accomplish lots of things, but the first is that the voltage across the tube will drop once glow discharge ignition occurs. The second is that avalanche can occur at lower settings on your Variac. (Avalanche is when one ionized atom is accelerated enough by the voltage gradient to create 1+ new ions before recombining with a free electron. But as the avalanche cascades, the current increases. Without the capacitor, that will be accompanied by a voltage drop that will quickly kill the process.) Next. To get that avalanche to start you need ions. We found that Xenon tubes stored in the dark for days before being used didn't work, but a quick trip out in the sunshine fixed things. A lot of study showed that there were sites on the electrodes that would scavenge ions. Getting the last few took hours to days, but when there were none left the tube wouldn't work. A bit of UV fixed that. We fixed that by changing the electodes to 2% thoriated tungsten. (Originally developed for flash tubes.) That is not something you want to get into. Used to be you could get radium paint, but that isn't healthy either. Sunlight, a UV light source--if a good one--and the americinium needle from a smoke detector are all possibilities. But the simple solution is a flash tube. Get one of those disco strobe light gadgets from Radio Shack, and shine it into your tube. >I also like your idea of the yellow cord to the crowbar and power switch.. >How about a heavy duty relay with normally closed contacts in series >with a 1K resistor across the supply? The relay would drop with power off >shorting the supply. I have a couple of these things lying around. Sounds very good. The reason I didn't use something like that was that we had LARGE capacitor banks that we needed to drain slowly when possible. 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 May 7 08:39:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA21487; Thu, 7 May 1998 08:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 08:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805071534.LAA18430 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Run 3 underway Date: Thu, 7 May 98 11:36:46 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"JMa9j2.0.RF5.gJTKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18393 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Now I'm filling the chamber directly from the gas bottles....as Case does. >During evacuation, I evacuate the line up to the valve on the bottle so >there is nominally zero cross-contamination now. Scott, Case "bleeds" some gas thorugh the regulator and into the plumbing leading to the chamber valve -- in order to clear out all the air in the line. Note that well. He attaches the gas line to the tank and keeps the hex pipe fitting loose to accomplish this bleed -- just a few seconds worth. Good luck on your run. Case is aiming for Monday or Tuesday of next week to have a self -sustainer using his improved catalyst, more mass of catalyst, smaller cell (500 cc), and same dewar. I am going to buy his favorite champaign for the occasion. If it works, we'll need it. If it doesn't, we may also need it! But for the record, he thinks it 100% certain that a self-sustainer can be built. Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 08:45:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA14829; Thu, 7 May 1998 08:42:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 08:42:24 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507113018.00c8ae00 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 11:30:18 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: References: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4WziK1.0.Wd3.UPTKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18394 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:34 AM 5/7/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote: > It seems you need a way to 'strike' the arc. A surface coupled >electrode fed from an auto ignition coil should work. The coild and its >battery and chopper should be isolated and floating. You can sticke the >palsma and then more the surface electrode away. A stiff piece of >stainless welding wire is fine, or irom or copper... up to you. Read >about plasma tubes and lamps. This works too, and I've done it. But it is so inelegant compared to other techniques. Note that Vince doesn't want an arc, and one of the advantages of the "third wire" approach is for causing an arc to form, instead of a glow discharge. If I want to do that, I wrap a ten turn primary on the choke coil (see previous diagram) and discharge a capacitor into it. Ten KV will break down just about anything. ;-) 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 May 7 09:06:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA18534; Thu, 7 May 1998 09:02:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 09:02:43 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:58:22 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Plan B from Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805071200_MC2-3C38-F90A compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"uUrw12.0.RX4.WiTKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18395 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Again, I hesitate to post this message because I am reporting conversations third hand . . . Readers will please consider this a report about informal "thinking aloud" or mulling over the options. Gene conferred with Dr. Case again. Case changed his plans for the self sustaining cell. He is thinking along the same lines as people who made comments here. Instead of the complicated Dewar within a Dewar design, here is what he has decided to try: 1. He is reducing the size of the gas-tight steel cell from 1.6 liters down to 500 ml, about two-thirds. 2. He wants to boost the heat, rather than improve the insulation. He is packing a larger mass of his best catalyst into the cell. This is a special proprietary formula he developed himself. I want to emphasize that he says the commercially available catalysts he recommended *do* work. He is not "giving up" on them in any sense, but he decided to bring out the best for this occasion. 3. He will use the big Dewar that has already been prepared. He hopes to perform the first test with this new setup on Monday or Tuesday next week (May 11 or 12.) If it works he will bring the cell to Bow and Gene will examine it and give us a detailed report. Case is confident it will work. If it produces enough excess they hope to run a small Peltier device with it and light an LED. This is even more convincing than thermocouple output. Case stresses the importance of uniformity: the catalyst must be heated evenly, and all parts of it must be exposed to the gas. You want the temperature of the catalyst *uniform* and *appropriate* (in the correct range), and this can be difficult to achieve. The CF reaction occurs in isolated spots within the catalyst, driving up local temperatures, so you have to ensure cooling. Case estimates that these spots can be 70 deg C hotter than the surroundings. I take it this means the 250 deg C upper limit temperature is an average with a safety factor built in, and the material will withstand higher temperatures if the heat is uniform. I do not know why Case feels he should cut back on the size of the cell, but he says he is a chemical engineer and he has his reasons. He is working very rapidly. We do not get the sense that he is floundering. My messages might give that impression, because I am getting parts of the story at 24 hour intervals. I think he considered the ultra-insulated design and decided it would be easier and faster to boost the signal instead. I was hoping he would. Let me add a note about thermocouples versus Peltier devices (PD). I mentioned this subject a couple of time while discussing Droege's calorimeter and comments made by Ben Bush during the calorimetry session. Droege and I found the PD he selected tends to drift, and the response is not linear, or worse, it doesn't stay linear. (Droege used one in a large calorimeter, Gene and I used one in clever small gadget he provided to us to do water flow calorimetry.) Bush tried other PDs and found the same problems. I do not know why, but I suspect the PD surface is changed by exposure to chemicals or air. Therefore, the PD is not good for measuring tiny heat fluxes at the milliwatt level. But it has its uses. It is equivalent to hundreds of tiny thermocouples crammed together, so it captures a significant percent of the heat, rather than just sampling it. It should be ideal for a presence or absence test, which is what Gene hopes to perform. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 09:23:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA21891; Thu, 7 May 1998 09:20:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 09:20:11 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: "Robert I. Eachus" Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 09:10:46 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980507113018.00c8ae00 spectre.mitre.org> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"shVFe.0.wL5.vyTKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18396 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 07-May-98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 02:34 AM 5/7/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote: >>It seems you need a way to 'strike' the arc. A surface coupled >>electrode fed from an auto ignition coil should work. The coild and its >>battery and chopper should be isolated and floating. You can sticke the >>palsma and then more the surface electrode away. A stiff piece of >>stainless welding wire is fine, or irom or copper... up to you. Read >>about plasma tubes and lamps. > This works too, and I've done it. But it is so inelegant compared to >other techniques. Note that Vince doesn't want an arc, and one of the >advantages of the "third wire" approach is for causing an arc to form, >instead of a glow discharge. If I want to do that, I wrap a ten turn >primary on the choke coil (see previous diagram) and discharge a capacitor >into it. Ten KV will break down just about anything. ;-) > Robert I. Eachus Vince, I use a zero stat piezoelectric gun to help light plasmas. I imagine a piezo barbecue grill lighter would work also. ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 10:42:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA12251; Thu, 7 May 1998 10:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 10:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507133937.00922c60 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 13:39:37 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Plan B from Case Cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com In-Reply-To: <199805071200_MC2-3C38-F90A compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7WcSI1.0.L_2.u6VKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18397 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:58 AM 5/7/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Let me add a note about thermocouples versus Peltier devices (PD). I mentioned >this subject a couple of time while discussing Droege's calorimeter and >comments made by Ben Bush during the calorimetry session. Droege and I found >the PD he selected tends to drift, and the response is not linear, or worse, >it doesn't stay linear. (Droege used one in a large calorimeter, Gene and I >used one in clever small gadget he provided to us to do water flow >calorimetry.) Bush tried other PDs and found the same problems. I do not know >why, but I suspect the PD surface is changed by exposure to chemicals or air. I think Tom's conclusion was that they, and the TEDs were affected by the hydrogen (or deuterium) gas. Unfortunately, in these experiments it is hard to isolate them from it. 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 May 7 10:41:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA07037; Thu, 7 May 1998 10:38:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 10:38:42 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 09:38:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Run 1b results confirmed Resent-Message-ID: <"VFVFi3.0.lj1.X6VKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18398 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:55 AM 5/7/98, Thomas N. Claytor wrote: >Scott, >The sample chamber is heated from the bottom with IR hotplate and wrapped >with a heavy thermal thermal blanket. Using a "Del Seal" 3-3/8 flange >coupling to a closed end vacuum tube 2" OD by 4/1/2 in tall, I usually >reserve for dehydriding samples. The catalyst or activated carbon (done as >a control run) is in a 20 cc borosilicate jar suspended in the center of >the tube using a wire support attached to the top flange. Sounds like you built a still. Condensed water will go to the bottom of your container, not back into the jar. Good way to dry the catalyst? > A K thermocouple >was placed right in the middle of the catalyst bed. This mass takes about >two hours to heat to equilibrium. There should be lots of room for >convection, but it doesn't seem to be a problem. [snip] All the action going on outside the jar, i.e. the artifacts now removed from the thermocouple? Two hours seems like plenty of time to dry the catalyst. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 10:45:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08115; Thu, 7 May 1998 10:40:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 10:40:39 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507134337.00963e60 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 13:43:37 -0400 To: rwormus lock-load.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19980507113018.00c8ae00 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"JgSFi.0.g-1.L8VKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18399 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:10 AM 5/7/98 -0700, R. Wormus wrote: >I use a zero stat piezoelectric gun to help light plasmas. I imagine a piezo >barbecue grill lighter would work also. I like it. Wire a piezoelectric crystal across the tube, and, if it doesn't work the first time, use a bigger hammer. ;-) (Yes, I'm joking, but the image is really worth sharing...) 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 May 7 11:11:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA16047; Thu, 7 May 1998 11:07:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:07:01 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507130649.00beb0e0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 13:06:49 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, "VORTEX" From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run 3 underway In-Reply-To: <199805071534.LAA18430 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"G4K7L.0.9w3.zWVKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18400 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:36 5/7/98 -0400, E.F. Mallove wrote: >Case "bleeds" some gas thorugh the regulator and into the plumbing >leading to the chamber valve -- in order to clear out all the air in the >line. Note that well. Surely my technique is at least equivalent...if not better at eliminating contamination. When I evacuate the chamber I also evacuate the line leading up to the main valve on the gas bottle containing hydrogen/deuterium. Once a satisfactory vaccuum has been achieved in the entire system, I isolate the system from the vacuum pump and open the aforementioned valve, admitting the hydrogen/deuterium. 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 May 7 11:17:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA17856; Thu, 7 May 1998 11:12:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:12:29 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507131256.00beb328 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 13:12:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Plan B from Case In-Reply-To: <199805071200_MC2-3C38-F90A compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FYB2h1.0.wM4.DcVKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18401 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:58 5/7/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Case stresses the importance of uniformity: the catalyst must be heated >evenly, and all parts of it must be exposed to the gas. You want the >temperature of the catalyst *uniform* and *appropriate* (in the correct >range), and this can be difficult to achieve. Wait minute! Case's apparatus looks to me as if it were designed to create the maximum possible thermal gradient in the catalyst. The bottom of the pile is in direct contact with a thin steel wall that touches the heat source! The top of the pile is in contact with a conductive gas that is free to circulate around the chamber cooling itself against the unheated upper walls! In fact, between my Run 1 and Run 2, I deliberately shifted my heaters down towards the bottom of my chamber in an effort to more closely duplicate Case's gradients. 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 May 7 11:19:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA18073; Thu, 7 May 1998 11:13:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:13:21 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:14:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"B8JUT3.0.EQ4.0dVKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18402 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some comments: The definition of "arc" probably isn't universally agreed upon, but most would agree that an arc heats one or more tiny spots on the cathode to high temperature (cathode arc spots). All the electron emission comes from these spots, which typically are too small to resolve by the naked eye. Most cathode materials vaporize at the spots. Spots may remain stationary or move about slowly or rapidly. Arc spots leave surface pits, tracks, etc.; these are not signs of cold fusion explosions or the like! Very refractory materials, like tungsten, might not melt in all arc cases. Steadily operating DC arcs have anode-cathode potential drops ranging from 10 V to a few tens of volt. Each arc spot requires a minimum current, in the range of 1 to 10 amp, depending on gas and material, to exist. There is also a maximum current per arc spot, above which the discharge ignites another spot instead of continuing to push ever more current throught the existing spot(s). Multiple spots may be too close together to distinguish by the naked eye. Glow discharges emit electrons by ion bombardment of the cathode. The cathode remains relatively cold, ie. it doesn't melt, emit vapors nor emit thermionically. The discharge spreads out considerably over the cathode. The current density at the cathode is proportional to the gas density squared. If you have a ballast in the circuit, the discharge current doesn't vary much. Therefore, if you double gas density, the current density increases by 4 times and the radius of the cathode plasma is halved, and vice versa. This kind of behavior is called a "normal glow." The anode-cathode potential drop depends on the nature of the gas, on the cathode material and its surface condition, and on geometry. For H2 and tungsten and a short plasma column, the drop is around 300 volt. Most of the electrical power input appears as heat at the cathode, because the ions have to be accelerated in the cathode region to impact the cathode to emit electrons. If you decrease gas density or increase the glow discharge current sufficiently, the cathode plasma spreads to cover the whole cathode. Now, if you go still further in this direction, since there is no more cathode area available, the current density vs density squared relationship has to give way. The plasma adjusts by requiring more voltage to maintain the same current. This regime is called the "abnormal glow." Actually, the extra voltage drop increases rather slowly with increasing current density or decreasing pressure squared, but the effect is there all the same. Cathode heating increases. Finally, if you increase the current enough, the cathode processes become thermally unstable, one spot starts to get hotter and run away thermally, and the discharge transitions into an arc. Both arcs and glows make hydrogen ions. They both also make lots of atomic hydrogen (neutral hydrogen atoms), too, because some of the hydrogen molecules get broken apart, mainly by collisions with energetic electrons. I do not like starting discharges by spark devices. They are effective, but you run a considerable risk of getting a few volts too many on an FET gate in your electronic meters and making them kaput. That gets expensive. (In the old days of vacuum tube amplifiers this wasn't a problem.) For experiments like yours, I do just what you are doing: have a large ballast to limit current to safe values, and a power supply with more than enough voltage to initiate breakdown. The large ballast makes the discharge run more stably, too. If you still have initiation problems, try varying the gas pressure. For a given geometry there is an optimum gas pressure for minimum breakdown voltage. Vince, if you are using unfiltered DC, either half wave or fullwave rectified, the discharge goes out every time the voltage drops low enough. True, not all the ions recombine in the interval before the voltage increases again, so it takes less voltage to reinitiate the discharge after the first cold start. Filtered DC is so much easier. The discharge stays on steadily. You can measure electrical power into the tube by your two meters (average anode-cathode volts times average discharge amps, if there is enough ballast to hold the current nearly constant). However, with all due respect to Eachus and his extensive experience with high power flash tubes, whose recent recommendations are more suited to arcs than to glows, do NOT put a capacitor across the glow discharge tube. The combination of glow tube, capacitor and ballast (in that order) makes a relaxation oscillator. The discharge will be unsteady again and it will be undergoing complicated oscillations---just what you do not want. What you want is glow discharge, ballast and then a capacitor, incorporated in the power supply to filter out most of the AC ripple. Be sure to put a bleeder resistor across the capacitor. Choose a time constant of, say about 10 seconds. This is to drain charge off the capacitor. Even so, it will take about a minute to drain enough to be safe. So, always use a crowbar or shorting stick. 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 May 7 11:33:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA21349; Thu, 7 May 1998 11:30:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:30:20 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 10:29:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Water content noted, EXPLOSION HAZARD? Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA21311 Resent-Message-ID: <"18NcM.0.SD5.xsVKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18403 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "water is not a liquid at 200 C and 185 lbs." This was wrong, but close to right. At 185 lbs the boiling point is about 192 C. The 200 C operating point is about 392 deg. F. I happened to notice that Case's operating range, 150 C to 250 C, is the range in which the pressure vs temperature really takes off for water. The boiling point pressure jumps from 67 psia to about 570 psia in that range, which practically guarantees some of the water somewhere in the device will remain liquid, provided there is enough water, over the entire temperature range, assuming the device can hold 570 psia. Temperature runway is an interesting case. A small amount of water, completely converted to steam, may not produce enough partial pressure to exceed even the 570 psia. This means the device may have a very controlled pressure excursion, especially during a heat runaway, where all the water is converted to steam. In fact, the runaway may be a pressure induced feedback phenomenon, indicating that the device may produce far more heat at higher temperatures, as Case has already indicated. If there is a significant variablity in the total amount of water in the cell when closed, then there is still a signifcant risk of explosion, especially during a thermal runaway. One thing interesting about all this is that a critical ingredient for the heat generation may be steam. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 12:14:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA27948; Thu, 7 May 1998 12:04:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 12:04:36 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 11:03:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Scaling up Case Resent-Message-ID: <"oXKcZ1.0.Mq6.1NWKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18404 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It should be possible to scale up the Case device using layers of level steel trays and plenums. Placing the catalyst in thin layers on trays reproduces the initial Case cell conditions. If the device is capable of generating steam, then the steam could be passed through an external heat exchanger, and then used in the device to maintain the thermal gradient by passing the steam/water through overhead cooling plenum or coils to reheat or preheat the water. Even the thermal gradient could be maintained if necessary: ------------------------------------------ cooling plenum, cooling gas/liquid ---> ------------------------------------------ XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Catalyst XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ------------------------------------------ Element or plenum for initial heating ------------------------------------------ ########################################## ###############insulation################# ########################################## ------------------------------------------ cooling plenum, cooling gas/liquid ---> ------------------------------------------ XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Catalyst XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ------------------------------------------ Element or plenum for initial heating ------------------------------------------ ########################################## ###############insulation################# ########################################## | | v repeated Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 12:23:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA26507; Thu, 7 May 1998 12:18:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 12:18:00 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:21:35 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd79ed$598154a0$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"3sCEn1.0.3U6.bZWKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18405 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Michael Schaffer wrote: ( snip summary of qualitative discharge characteristics ) ( excellent work Michael !!! ) >Both arcs and glows make hydrogen ions. They both also make lots of atomic >hydrogen (neutral hydrogen atoms), too, because some of the hydrogen >molecules get broken apart, mainly by collisions with energetic electrons. - We need to consider the distribution of generation and destruction as well as the movement of the K ions, atomic H and H ions. The ions will be driven by the field to the cathode and most of the atomic H will also be generated in the glow region near the cathode. The cathode region is the least efficient ionization generation region however, as Vince is discovering with his melting gas feed line. The K will improve this efficiency by lowering the cathode fall and other drops in the tube as well. The entire ionization process will change greatly as the partial pressure of K increases with temperature. Fewer hydrogen ions will be created, especially in the positive column, but electron collisions should still be energetic enough to make significant atomic H. - >Vince, if you are using unfiltered DC, either half wave or fullwave >rectified, the discharge goes out every time the voltage drops low enough. >True, not all the ions recombine in the interval before the voltage >increases again, so it takes less voltage to reinitiate the discharge after >the first cold start. > >Filtered DC is so much easier. The discharge stays on steadily. You can >measure electrical power into the tube by your two meters (average >anode-cathode volts times average discharge amps, if there is enough >ballast to hold the current nearly constant). - This is correct and very >However, with all due respect to Eachus and his extensive experience with >high power flash tubes, whose recent recommendations are more suited to >arcs than to glows, do NOT put a capacitor across the glow discharge tube. >The combination of glow tube, capacitor and ballast (in that order) makes a >relaxation oscillator. The discharge will be unsteady again and it will be >undergoing complicated oscillations---just what you do not want. What you >want is glow discharge, ballast and then a capacitor, incorporated in the >power supply to filter out most of the AC ripple. Be sure to put a bleeder >resistor across the capacitor. Choose a time constant of, say about 10 >seconds. This is to drain charge off the capacitor. Even so, it will take >about a minute to drain enough to be safe. So, always use a crowbar or >shorting stick. > > >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 May 7 12:37:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA29681; Thu, 7 May 1998 12:33:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 12:33:52 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode/correction Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:37:19 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd79ef$8c53aac0$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"ffSrA1.0.hF7.UoWKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18406 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry, my previous post got sent accidentally before it was completed, this is the correct post. Michael Schaffer wrote: ( snip summary of qualitative discharge characteristics ) ( excellent work Michael !!! ) >Both arcs and glows make hydrogen ions. They both also make lots of atomic >hydrogen (neutral hydrogen atoms), too, because some of the hydrogen >molecules get broken apart, mainly by collisions with energetic electrons. - We need to consider the distribution of generation and destruction as well as the movement of the K ions, atomic H and H ions. The ions will be driven by the field to the cathode and most of the atomic H will also be generated in the glow region near the cathode. The cathode region is the least efficient ionization generation region however, as Vince is discovering with his melting gas feed line. The K will improve this efficiency by lowering the cathode fall and other drops in the tube as well. The entire ionization process will change greatly as the partial pressure of K increases with temperature. Fewer hydrogen ions will be created, especially in the positive column, but electron collisions should still be energetic enough to make significant atomic H. - >Vince, if you are using unfiltered DC, either half wave or fullwave >rectified, the discharge goes out every time the voltage drops low enough. >True, not all the ions recombine in the interval before the voltage >increases again, so it takes less voltage to reinitiate the discharge after >the first cold start. > >Filtered DC is so much easier. The discharge stays on steadily. You can >measure electrical power into the tube by your two meters (average >anode-cathode volts times average discharge amps, if there is enough >ballast to hold the current nearly constant). - Michael, I think that Vince has the meters in the transformer primary. I agree that it would be much better to measure tube voltage drop and current directly at the tube, and this should be easy with some filtering of the rectified supply output. >However, with all due respect to Eachus and his extensive experience with >high power flash tubes, whose recent recommendations are more suited to >arcs than to glows, do NOT put a capacitor across the glow discharge tube. >The combination of glow tube, capacitor and ballast (in that order) makes a >relaxation oscillator. The discharge will be unsteady again and it will be >undergoing complicated oscillations---just what you do not want. What you >want is glow discharge, ballast and then a capacitor, incorporated in the >power supply to filter out most of the AC ripple. Be sure to put a bleeder >resistor across the capacitor. Choose a time constant of, say about 10 >seconds. This is to drain charge off the capacitor. Even so, it will take >about a minute to drain enough to be safe. So, always use a crowbar or >shorting stick. - Vince, this is correct and very important. - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 13:12:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04610; Thu, 7 May 1998 13:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 12:02:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Case cavitation? Resent-Message-ID: <"5m2ze1.0.x71.mFXKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18407 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "One thing interesting about all this is that a critical ingredient for the heat generation may be steam." On further thought, the critical ingredient may be the actual evaporation - boiling. This is a long strectch of the imagination, but micro-cavitation could possibly be playing a role. The Case cell is so simple - there is no ioizing event, except the high energy betas from C14, and cosmic rays. It is difficult to find any mechanism to initiate fusion. Possibly cavitation on the catalyst surface, sonoluminescence, plays a role. At some level within the catlyst, conditions might be right so that bubbles could form on the catalyst surface, detach, and collapse. A good contact microphone attached to the cell might tell something. A long stretch for sure, but food for thought. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 13:14:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA05519; Thu, 7 May 1998 13:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980507200832.28335.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [195.50.86.210] From: "John Allan" To: vortex-L eskimo.com Cc: acrogen acrogen.com Subject: London Calling: Invitation Seminars Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 13:08:30 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"LpdHv.0.3M1.MLXKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18408 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Please excuse the short notice and use of Vortex-L as publicity. Invitation to all UK based interested parties to attend an invitation only one day work study group on Sunday 10 May 1998 in Central London. For those interested in furthering the field in active experimentation , lobbying or support. For further details and acceptance of invitation please contact: John Allan, Energy Solutions T:0181 533 5880 Openmindedness and a positive attitude as equally welcome as skills and experience. We are looking to pull together a multi-talented network to promote ethical and environemntal solutions within the field of New Energy. Participants will include a wide and successful variety of disciplinesoutside of science including business, marketing, communications and law. Associates have had hands on experiences of most types of New Energy Technologies in the UK, US and Japan. An invitation has been extended on behalf of Dr Thomas Daffern to members of the New Energy Community to contribute to a ongoing series of seminars at the House of Lords on ethics and environment. If any idividuals internationally want to contribute or participate via teleconferencing, webcasting or by email ( short papers/messages accepted ); please contact me via telephone or email. John Allan >From Sustainable Development to Regerative Development New Energy Technologies: within an Ethical and Environmental Context Following on from the 2 page summary in the latest edition of Green World Magazine, Energy Solutions will be promoting a seminar on New Energy Technologies, the next generation of energy producing systems. Questions to be addressed include what is Zero Point Energy and " over-unity " ? the Cold Fusion debate; what are Low Energy Nuclear Reactions? the reduction of radioactive waste by elemental transmutation, the reaction of the Green Movement to New Energy, the sociological and anthropological implications of energy policy and whatever happened to the water powered car? Speakers as confirmed to date: •John Allan, Energy Solutions Introduction, Overview of Internet Sites on the Subjects •Harold Aspden, Ph.D, Mental Inertia and its Effects on New Energy, Addressing the Anomalies in the 2nd Law of Thermodymanics •Mike Fisher, Zenergy Corporation Cambridge Engineer, On the Work of Zenergy •Nick Hawkins, British Cold Fusion proponent Advances in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions •John Collins, MD, author of Bessler's Wheel Exploring the Archetypal Reactions of the Scientific Establishment to New Energy within a Historical Context •David Bezkorawajny, BBC Tomorrow's World/Green Party Campaigner Reactions of the Environmental Movement to New Energy •Luis Jarillo 10 years working in the British New Energy Scene •Ray Peto, PACE UK On the Work of Dr Andrew Michrowski and Planetary Association for Clean Energy a UN-NGO •Nigel Foster Symmetry in The Mathematics of the " Stuff " of Space, Raising Questions about the Nature of the Quantum Field •Xi Chan, Ph.D Phys Industrial Reactions, Understanding the Game of Science Other speakers to be confirmed: •Keith Hindley, Ph.D Chem, Technical Detail, York Anomalous Energy Devices in the UK, US, and CIS including Reference to his Extensive Study of Chernetskii-style Devices ( video footage ) and others. evening session: First UK Public showing of The Race to Zero Point, US Video The Future: Questions & Answers, a panel discussion of other systems and ongoing work. venue: London's Most Upmarket Internet Cafe Global Cafe 15 Golden Square London W1 200yd north of Piccadilly tube 1pm refreshments and buffet for 2pm to 8pm programme. large scale projection and web broadcasting facilities. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 13:19:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15144; Thu, 7 May 1998 13:16:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:16:42 -0700 Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:16:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805072016.PAA18202 dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: Case's original device proven out as presented? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"MEwhV1.0.Vi3.eQXKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18409 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 7, 1998 Vortexians, I have been a week late come home from the ICCF-7, driving down from Vancouver down some western states ( 9 altogether), seeing how the small towns themselves and mom and pop stores dying from Wal-Martitus and similar developments. I saw many towns trying survival tactics of trying to cater to tourists with the inevitable museum of local history, 'antique' stores, native arts, and whatever marginal niche stores that big developments chose to ignore (no money or volume in it). A tough call. A sure tragedy of local color dying out, huge personal lives and economic losses. Later, if the big developments do not make out, the developments themselves become abandoned after the damages have been done. I believe '60 minutes' 'touched' upon it. Not enough. I am in the midst of duping out the video archive tapes for VHS operation during which I have again viewed Case's 5 minute oral description of his poster display of three pages and a picture of his round 'bomb'-like device with tubes and meter sticking out. No view-graphs, just stright off the cuff non-technical talk of what his device does, how easy it is to duplicate, and that anyone can get a similar device going for a couple of hundred bucks in short manner using the carbon substrate Pd catalyst powder obtainable from chem supply houses. Fine. In talking to him, I understood that his device was to be tested shortly after ICCF-7 after he has made his other rounds of business. I guess I missed the initial conversation on the Vortex about Case. I am surprised it started so soon. My question here is: Was his original device demonstrated to 'Gene et al by Case at Bow, New Hampshire to show the excess heat as claimed at ICCF-7 (I also encouraged him to do so)? Or is this turning out to be another chase for refinements toward replicable confirmation? I do wish the man well. I wish anyone in the CF chase well. -AK- ps: I have 50 grams of 10% Pd on carbon catalyst powder sitting on a table since 1995 on a stopped experiment that I could use. :) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 13:25:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA16211; Thu, 7 May 1998 13:20:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:20:34 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507162335.00c6dc10 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 16:23:35 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: References: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Jo7Sr3.0.Az3.HUXKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18410 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:14 AM 5/7/98 -0800, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >The definition of "arc" probably isn't universally agreed upon, but most >would agree that an arc heats one or more tiny spots on the cathode to high >temperature (cathode arc spots). All the electron emission comes from these >spots, which typically are too small to resolve by the naked eye. Most >cathode materials vaporize at the spots. Spots may remain stationary or >move about slowly or rapidly. Arc spots leave surface pits, tracks, etc.; >these are not signs of cold fusion explosions or the like! Very refractory >materials, like tungsten, might not melt in all arc cases. Steadily >operating DC arcs have anode-cathode potential drops ranging from 10 V to a >few tens of volt. Each arc spot requires a minimum current, in the range of >1 to 10 amp, depending on gas and material, to exist. There is also a >maximum current per arc spot, above which the discharge ignites another >spot instead of continuing to push ever more current throught the existing >spot(s). Multiple spots may be too close together to distinguish by the >naked eye. All correct except that in pulsed arcs, the current per thread (there is a highly conducting thread in the plasma connecting the two electrodes held in existance by its own magnetic field) can reach into the thousands of amps. That's the whole point of going to pulsed arcs, because if there are multiple current threads, they tie themselves literally into knots. This is why a carbon arc typically sputters--the threads get intertwined enough that they finally snap temporarily breaking the arc. >Glow discharges emit electrons by ion bombardment of the cathode. The >cathode remains relatively cold, ie. it doesn't melt, emit vapors nor emit >thermionically. The discharge spreads out considerably over the cathode. >The current density at the cathode is proportional to the gas density >squared. If you have a ballast in the circuit, the discharge current >doesn't vary much. Therefore, if you double gas density, the current >density increases by 4 times and the radius of the cathode plasma is >halved, and vice versa. This kind of behavior is called a "normal glow." >The anode-cathode potential drop depends on the nature of the gas, on the >cathode material and its surface condition, and on geometry. For H2 and >tungsten and a short plasma column, the drop is around 300 volt. Most of >the electrical power input appears as heat at the cathode, because the ions >have to be accelerated in the cathode region to impact the cathode to emit >electrons. Only disagreement here is with that "most of the power." With a longer tube, you can get up to 70% of the energy radiated as photons from the plasma. How much of it is light depends on the gases used, the pressure, and power level. >If you decrease gas density or increase the glow discharge current >sufficiently, the cathode plasma spreads to cover the whole cathode. Now, >if you go still further in this direction, since there is no more cathode >area available, the current density vs density squared relationship has to >give way. The plasma adjusts by requiring more voltage to maintain the same >current. This regime is called the "abnormal glow." Actually, the extra >voltage drop increases rather slowly with increasing current density or >decreasing pressure squared, but the effect is there all the same. Cathode >heating increases. Finally, if you increase the current enough, the cathode >processes become thermally unstable, one spot starts to get hotter and run >away thermally, and the discharge transitions into an arc. I wouldn't blame the cathode. ;-) Seriously, I have initiated a transition from abnormal glow to arc by applying an external magentic field. You can also do it by mechanically restricting the plasma, and some devices do this by having a narrow neck around the electodes. (A typical DC arc tube has two relatively narrow necks containing the electrodes, and a baseball sized area in the middle.) >Both arcs and glows make hydrogen ions. They both also make lots of atomic >hydrogen (neutral hydrogen atoms), too, because some of the hydrogen >molecules get broken apart, mainly by collisions with energetic electrons. Yep. >I do not like starting discharges by spark devices. They are effective, but >you run a considerable risk of getting a few volts too many on an FET gate >in your electronic meters and making them kaput. That gets expensive. (In >the old days of vacuum tube amplifiers this wasn't a problem.) Agreed, but I've also seen the tube eaten through where the wire touches. And those tubes can be expensive, especially when hand blown. > For >experiments like yours, I do just what you are doing: have a large ballast >to limit current to safe values, and a power supply with more than enough >voltage to initiate breakdown. The large ballast makes the discharge run >more stably, too. If you still have initiation problems, try varying the >gas pressure. For a given geometry there is an optimum gas pressure for >minimum breakdown voltage. Yep. >Filtered DC is so much easier. The discharge stays on steadily. You can >measure electrical power into the tube by your two meters (average >anode-cathode volts times average discharge amps, if there is enough >ballast to hold the current nearly constant). Yes, I totally agree. >However, with all due respect to Eachus and his extensive experience with >high power flash tubes, whose recent recommendations are more suited to >arcs than to glows, do NOT put a capacitor across the glow discharge tube. >The combination of glow tube, capacitor and ballast (in that order) makes a >relaxation oscillator. The discharge will be unsteady again and it will be >undergoing complicated oscillations---just what you do not want. What you >want is glow discharge, ballast and then a capacitor, incorporated in the >power supply to filter out most of the AC ripple. Be sure to put a bleeder >resistor across the capacitor. Choose a time constant of, say about 10 >seconds. This is to drain charge off the capacitor. Even so, it will take >about a minute to drain enough to be safe. So, always use a crowbar or >shorting stick. Ah, now we do disagree. Yes, you want a capacitor in the (DC) power supply. I'd also like to see an inductance downstream from that in addition to the resistive ballast. But the (relatively small) capacitor across the tube is just there to aid in the transition from spark discharge to glow discharge. You know those toy globes they sell where the position of your hand outside the globe changes the pattern of electrical discharges inside? (They work by having a high enough impedence in the circut, plus the conductivity of the glass used is low enough to provide a high resistance.) When the discharge begins, the inductance acts to limit the current, the voltage through the arc drops, and the discharge dies out. Your hand of course adds a little bit of capacitance, and therefore the discharges in that direction last longer and glow brighter. In this case Vince wants to increase the chance that a cascade will blossom into a glow discharge. Increasing the capacitance directly across the tube will help. The tube itself will act as an inductance, creating an LC oscillator. But from experience, if you stay below two muFd, the frequency will be on the order of ten hertz, and the power from the supply and ballast should be enough to override it. If you do see low frequency oscillations, add capacitance on the supply side. Maybe this is not that big a disagreement, because I do want to see ten or twenty microfarads in the power supply. ;-) But the trick of putting a small capacitor across the tube makes obtaining a stable glow discharge that much easier. If you take Mike's approach, you can get the same results, but you will be putting most of your power into that room heater (the ballast resistor). I've operated in glow discharge mode with at most 10 to 15% of the power dissipated outside the tube. 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 May 7 13:36:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA19483; Thu, 7 May 1998 13:34:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:34:30 -0700 Message-ID: <35521AF7.5CE5 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 16:35:03 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Plan B from Case References: <3.0.1.32.19980507131256.00beb328 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kNSvT1.0.Dm4.LhXKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18412 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > At 11:58 5/7/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > >Case stresses the importance of uniformity: the catalyst must be heated > >evenly, and all parts of it must be exposed to the gas. You want the > >temperature of the catalyst *uniform* and *appropriate* (in the correct > >range), and this can be difficult to achieve. > > Wait minute! Case's apparatus looks to me as if it were designed to create > the maximum possible thermal gradient in the catalyst. Watch out Scott! INCOMING! - INCOMING! (preemptively speaking, that is) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 13:36:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA18493; Thu, 7 May 1998 13:31:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:31:38 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507163311.009689b0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 16:33:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Water content noted, EXPLOSION HAZARD? Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"iq888.0.pW4.eeXKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18411 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:29 AM 5/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >One thing interesting about all this is that a critical ingredient for the >heat generation may be steam. No, the critical ingredient would be either the boiling or the heat pipe effect. If the device is operating near the boiling point, does everyone remember fractofusion? You could have microcracks being repeatedly expanded and allowed to collapse, with the net result being high energy deuterons thrown at targets. Hmmm... The heat pipe effect is a different animal. At certain temperatures, there would be a critical range where a one degree catalyst change would correspond to ten to twenty degrees on the exterior of the contiainer. (And obviously the reverse also holds at some nearby temperature range.) 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 May 7 14:24:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA17527; Thu, 7 May 1998 14:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 14:21:18 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:23:51 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd79fe$6e19f190$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"GOxlJ1.0.nH4.CNYKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18413 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Eachus wrote: > In this case Vince wants to increase the chance that a cascade will >blossom into a glow discharge. Increasing the capacitance directly across >the tube will help. The tube itself will act as an inductance, creating an >LC oscillator. But from experience, if you stay below two muFd, the >frequency will be on the order of ten hertz, and the power from the supply >and ballast should be enough to override it. If you do see low frequency >oscillations, add capacitance on the supply side. > > Maybe this is not that big a disagreement, because I do want to see >ten or twenty microfarads in the power supply. ;-) But the trick of >putting a small capacitor across the tube makes obtaining a stable glow >discharge that much easier. If you take Mike's approach, you can get the >same results, but you will be putting most of your power into that room >heater (the ballast resistor). I've operated in glow discharge mode with at >most 10 to 15% of the power dissipated outside the tube. > Robert, It must have been quite a large current in the tube. I have observed relaxation oscillations at 1 ma current all the way down to 100 pF parallel capacitance. The stability of a capacitively loaded glow discharge is extremely difficult to predict. At uA currents, oscillation may be present with total capacitance loading of perhaps 10 pF. Of course, many of the tubes I have worked with have very small (display pixel size) discharge spaces. One tube was designed to self-scan in the relaxation oscillation mode with one discharge per scanned cathode at 20 pF loading. It would scan properly down to average currents of 30 uA. - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 14:35:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03440; Thu, 7 May 1998 14:30:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 14:30:07 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 13:29:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Water content noted, EXPLOSION HAZARD? Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"VIOMs.0.ar.TVYKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18414 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:33 PM 5/7/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 10:29 AM 5/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >>One thing interesting about all this is that a critical ingredient for the >>heat generation may be steam. > > No, the critical ingredient would be either the boiling Agreed, and previously so posted. >or the heat pipe >effect. If the device is operating near the boiling point, does everyone >remember fractofusion? You could have microcracks being repeatedly >expanded and allowed to collapse, with the net result being high energy >deuterons thrown at targets. Hmmm... If fractofusion is involved, why would a 1 percent catalyst be better than 5 percent catalyst, or even pure Pd granules? > > The heat pipe effect is a different animal. At certain temperatures, >there would be a critical range where a one degree catalyst change would >correspond to ten to twenty degrees on the exterior of the contiainer. >(And obviously the reverse also holds at some nearby temperature range.) > > Robert I. Eachus Could you explain this some more? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 14:36:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA04982; Thu, 7 May 1998 14:34:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 14:34:18 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980507162335.00c6dc10 spectre.mitre.org> References: <2f0bbdc3.35514ee9 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 14:35:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"opJo73.0.mD1.PZYKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18415 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Eachus wrote: [big snip] >.... If you take Mike's approach, you can get the >same results, but you will be putting most of your power into that room >heater (the ballast resistor). I've operated in glow discharge mode with at >most 10 to 15% of the power dissipated outside the tube. True, power efficiency from the AC line to the tube will not be high, but that is not important for Vince to do a scientific experiment. Ballast resistors (light bulbs) are sooo much cheaper than ballast inductors, especially when you need 5 sets or so to cover a wide range of operating conditions. I am assuming, of course, that Vince will learn to measure power input to the discharge at the tube terminals instead of the AC line...... 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 May 7 14:58:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA11273; Thu, 7 May 1998 14:55:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 14:55:04 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980507175802.0093b250 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:58:02 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <01bd79fe$6e19f190$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"iPPvq.0._l2.ssYKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18416 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:23 PM 5/7/98 -0400, George Holz wrote: >It must have been quite a large current in the tube. about 150 ma. > I have observed >relaxation oscillations at 1 ma current all the way down to 100 pF >parallel capacitance. Scaling 150 ma, you would expect oscillations at 15000 pF = .015 muF? Seems low to me. If you want to recommend 0.1 muF, okay, but my experience leads me to suspect that 0.5 muF would be minimal given Vince's configuration. > The stability of a capacitively loaded >glow discharge is extremely difficult to predict. At uA currents, >oscillation may be present with total capacitance loading of perhaps >10 pF. Of course, many of the tubes I have worked with have very >small (display pixel size) discharge spaces. One tube was >designed to self-scan in the relaxation oscillation mode with >one discharge per scanned cathode at 20 pF loading. It would >scan properly down to average currents of 30 uA. Yep, we've been working in different worlds. In my world, anything under a kilowatt was a toy or a test circut. 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 May 7 15:06:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA25013; Thu, 7 May 1998 15:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:58:07 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Simon Says Science Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805071800_MC2-3C4D-B089 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"s584e3.0.k66.Y-YKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18417 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Confusion has arisen about the geometry of Case's cell. I quoted Case's statement to us: You want the temperature of the catalyst *uniform* and *appropriate* (in the correct range), and this can be difficult to achieve. Scott Little exclaimed (with exclamation points): Wait minute! Case's apparatus looks to me as if it were designed to create the maximum possible thermal gradient in the catalyst. The bottom of the pile is in direct contact with a thin steel wall that touches the heat source! The top of the pile is in contact with a conductive gas that is free to circulate around the chamber cooling itself against the unheated upper walls! In fact, between my Run 1 and Run 2, I deliberately shifted my heaters down towards the bottom of my chamber in an effort to more closely duplicate Case's gradients. I believe there may be some confusion here between Case's early calorimeters and his present configuration. The present calorimeter has a sort of electric blanket or heating pad which distributes heat fairly evenly around the vessel, although of course the heat goes out of the exposed top portion of the vessel. I am not sure of the exact geometry because I have not seen a photograph or schematic. Gene tried to send me one in .jpg format, but alas, the gap between Mac and Windows is too great, and I cannot read it. I believe -- but don't hold me to it -- that in the early calorimeters with the heater directly underneath, the catalyst was spread in a thin layer on the bottom so heating was reasonably uniform. If you heat a tall column of catalyst from the bottom there would be large thermal gradients. A pancake of catalyst heats more uniformly Of course there may be some other misunderstanding here. I do not even have the upcoming issue of Infinite Energy, so I cannot judge. . . . This confusion is a perfect illustration of the dangers of doing science by Simon Says. It is unfortunate that Little has rushed into this experiment without first learning many more details directly from Case, by reading a formal paper, and by visiting Case in a lab for formal training. We are frantically preparing as much material as we can lay hands on for publication in Infinite Energy. That's the purpose of a magazines: to disseminate accurate technical information. Little did meet with Case at ICCF7, and that's good, but it is not enough. I will bet that Little now has a long list of questions he wishes he had asked. I know I do! We have a man in Texas attempting to replicate an experiment based (partly) on statements made by a guy in Georgia relayed to him by a guy in New Hampshire who has talked to the original guy. That's absurd. Accurate and complete information will cross that channel of communication! It reminds me of "telephone game." One kid makes up a message like "the bird ate the worm" and whispers it to the next kid down the line. After six kids the original message is scrambled beyond recognition. Try it! It is good lesson in psychology. If this was a commercial venture, and Little's job was to make a second source computer chip, we would arrange a formal program of technical information transfer. We would never rely solely on e-mail messages (although e-mail is an excellent medium.) Little would learn every critical detail before setting to work. At least, he would learn every detail that Case believes is critical. Case himself might overlook an important factor. Because Little is in a rush, and because we have virtually no money in this field -- not even enough to send Scott Little to New Hampshire for a week of training -- we blunder ahead blindly, *hoping* the replications resemble the originals, rather than making certain they do, down to the last gram of catalyst, and the last millimeter in the dimensions of the cell. To my way of thinking a first stage replication should be an *exact copy* of the original with no known discrepancies. If we were replicating a tractor, a gun, a computer chip or a microwave oven we would stick to that standard. Why should a scientific experiment be any different? The free and easy standards scientists use when they "replicate" one another make no sense to me, with my background. Here is one illustration of what I mean, from the most rigorous industry on earth. When an equipment manufacturer wishes to change a part on a machine installed in an Intel fabrication plant, the manufacturer must go through a comprehensive review to prevent the change from having a deleterious effects on production. I mean any part: even the screws on the face plate of the equipment cabinet. This may seem like bureaucratic nonsense, but experience has taught these people it is necessary. Contamination from the metal in an untested screw might cause millions of dollars in waste or delay. It does not seem likely, but even the experts cannot be sure, so every precaution must be taken. The people running these factories have vast knowledge of the problems, but they must rely on black magic to fill in the gaps. Cold fusion experiments might be critical to the future of the human race, but people generally perform them with less rigor, less attention to instructions and details, and a smaller budget than the Chamblee High School Engineering Project. (Which won State Championship and came within striking distance of the National Prize last Saturday, and in my biased opinion it should have won.) In examples I have examined carefully (usually after the fact, long after it could do any good) I have discovered giant discrepancies between the original experiments and so-called replications. I am not expert enough to judge whether these discrepancies made a large difference or no difference. Nobody else is qualified to judge either. That is why cold fusion remains so difficult to replicate. Nobody knows which parameters are critical, and which can be safely ignored. Even Fleischmann cannot tell you why some replications failed. Of course he spots hundreds of details I would never see. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 15:20:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA27208; Thu, 7 May 1998 15:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:17:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 18:11:48 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Simon Says Science - korekshun Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805071814_MC2-3C4C-9532 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"rKAPy3.0.1f6.xBZKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18418 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I inadvertantly illustrated what I meant to say by counterexample. I wrote: We have a man in Texas attempting to replicate an experiment based (partly) on statements made by a guy in Georgia relayed to him by a guy in New Hampshire who has talked to the original guy. That's absurd. Accurate and complete information will cross that channel of communication! I meant to say: "Accurate and complete information will NOT cross that channel of communication!" You want to know how to do an experiment? Ask the guy who did it!!! Always, ALWAYS go to the original source of information. If he cannot or will not help, then you should not attempt to replicate. Knowledge nearly always passes from one human being to the next by teaching. It is a myth that we do science by reading papers. Papers are essential, but so is teaching. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 15:31:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA19245; Thu, 7 May 1998 15:27:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:27:17 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Simon Says Science Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 18:32:24 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd7a08$019e71d0$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"wKKIC3.0.Yi4.4LZKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18419 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: >I am not sure of the exact geometry because I have not seen a photograph or >schematic. Gene tried to send me one in .jpg format, but alas, the gap between >Mac and Windows is too great, and I cannot read it. - Hi Jed, If you email me a copy of the jpeg I have several programs that may be able to get it into the PC world. Adobe Photoshop for example seems to be functional in both worlds. - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 15:58:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA26863; Thu, 7 May 1998 15:54:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 15:54:10 -0700 Message-ID: <19980507225340.4092.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [195.50.86.210] From: "John Allan" To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: London Calling, Update Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 15:53:39 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"MvHw22.0.ZZ6.HkZKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18420 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Amendment to London Seminar Subject List: Nick Hawkins, British Cold Fusion Researcher will be talking on, Trapped Natural and Artificially Produced Abrikosov Vortices as a Means to Inducing Commercially Viable Small-scale Fusion Reactions and, The Social Implication of Energy Provision in the Development of Post-War Western Society and its Essential Part in the Moral Survival of Humanity ( There may be some relationship between the work of Abrikosov and that of Shoulders ). ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 16:25:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07659; Thu, 7 May 1998 16:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 16:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 19:19:28 -0400 From: Soo Subject: London Calling: Invitation Seminars Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805071919_MC2-3C4A-FDE9 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id QAA07638 Resent-Message-ID: <"7KVsK1.0.bt1.a8aKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18421 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John <200yd north of Piccadilly tube> Is that right or left when you emerge into daylight? I only ask because I tried to find the place last weekend, of course me being me, I didn't have the address...left it in the car in Morden of all places..... so the A-Z wasn't any help, however, I had a nice Italian ice cream in Soho Square......I knew it was some Square or other........and I found an interesting Sushi bar.....so it wasn't a totally wasted trip. I'll be able to find it with the A-Z but ancient mariners might have problems if it's as cloudy as it was last Saturday. Give precise directions......I'd do it, but I've lost my A-Z again !!!! regards Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 17:21:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14640; Thu, 7 May 1998 17:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980507191743.00806380 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 19:17:43 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4SMDF.0.Wa3.ezaKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18422 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Take a look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run3.html Executive Summary: Having the recommended catalyst made no difference at all...there is still no sign of Dr. Case's effect. I have communicated with Dr. Case and he is considering the problem. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 17:23:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA11753; Thu, 7 May 1998 17:21:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:21:05 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980507192201.00811100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 19:22:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Simon Says Science In-Reply-To: <199805071800_MC2-3C4D-B089 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"j3Rny1.0.Wt2.m_aKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18423 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:58 PM 5/7/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >It is unfortunate that Little has rushed into this experiment >without first learning many more details directly from Case... Give it a rest, Jed. I have been in close contact with Case throughout. I discussed my approach and my apparatus with him at ICCF-7 and he approved. I will continue to work closely with him until this thing is resolved one way or the other. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 17:33:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA13781; Thu, 7 May 1998 17:31:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:31:16 -0700 Message-ID: <355243E9.4AB6 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 18:29:45 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, mica@world.std.com, drom vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la@utkux.utk.edu, orian001 maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge@students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani@frascati.infn.it, opa aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak@nosc.mil, bossp nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly@mse.ogi.edu, dg cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell@lanl.gov, sphkoji sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos@juno.com, g-miley uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti@msn.com, design73 aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre@qm.sri.com, tchubb aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger@eneco-usa.com, cincygrp ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Little: Case Run 3, no effect with correct catalyst 05/07/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34DFC 098.4EB3 earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6@earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earthli nk.net> <34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6F8 AA.1837 earthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D@earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthlink! .! net> <3504077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350DA D0F.535F earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F@earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@earthl ink.net> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <351738 88.2F66 earthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B@earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@earthl! i! nk.net> <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@ea rthlink.net> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <352 D3FA7.574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@eart hlink.net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <354! 7! 586D.E74 eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> <354B3358.3FDD@ear thlink.net> <354B9371.1DB9 earthlink.net> <354BCF38.5CFB@earthlink.net> <354F1495.4471@earthlink.net> <354FEDB4.5E76@earthlink.net> <354FF100.18C@earthlink.net> <35508190.22B5@earthlink.net> <35508566.2DA4@earthlink.net> <35519D00.74DD@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"CbiTX1.0.FN3.J9bKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18424 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Case Run 3 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 19:17:43 -0500 From: Scott Little Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Take a look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run3.html Executive Summary: Having the recommended catalyst made no difference at all...there is still no sign of Dr. Case's effect. I have communicated with Dr. Case and he is considering the problem. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 18:17:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA21217; Thu, 7 May 1998 18:15:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 18:15:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 21:06:38 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Simon Says Science Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805072110_MC2-3C4F-34C2 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"w9lwe1.0.QB5.UobKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18425 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: Give it a rest, Jed. I have been in close contact with Case throughout. I discussed my approach and my apparatus with him at ICCF-7 and he approved. Good for you and good for him! You are probably the only people in the cold fusion business who are trying to do it right. I will continue to work closely with him until this thing is resolved one way or the other. You are not working closely with him. You are thousands of miles away and you have never observed his experiment first-hand. Your cell is a different shape, with less gas; you are not heating and cooling it the way he does; I believe you are you are running at a different pressure. By the standards of industry this is not close cooperation and you are not running a close replication. I have no idea whether the differences between your experiment and his make any difference. Case has no idea either, and neither do you. I would say you are working as closely as you can under the circumstances, given the constraints of money and time. It is commendable, but it may not be sufficient. It is a shame this latest experiment did not work. Anyway, I see no reason for you to rush to the next test. Case is now attempting to build a self-sustaining machine. If he fails, I will take it for granted he has made a mistake and a replication is not worth pursuing. If he succeeds it will prove the point without replications. You and fifteen thousand others will then have an opportunity to verify the effect as soon as we can fabricate and sell exact duplicates of his cell. We will have an answer one way or the other in a week. So far I would say the evidence is mixed and inconclusive. Gene is fairly convinced the effect is real, but I am not. I was not there, I didn't see it, so Gene is in a better position to evaluate than I am. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 19:03:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA27131; Thu, 7 May 1998 19:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 19:00:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 17:57:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Simon Says Science - korekshun Resent-Message-ID: <"lWmDB1.0.pd6.dScKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18426 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:11 PM 5/7/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >ALWAYS go to the original source of information. If he cannot or will not >help, then you should not attempt to replicate. Knowledge nearly always >passes from one human being to the next by teaching. Knowlege is usually created by one human being at a time. >It is a myth that we do >science by reading papers. Papers are essential, but so is teaching. Every new data point has its intrinsic value. Gosh, Jed, I can practically hear you hyperventillating from 5000 miles away! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 19:07:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA32545; Thu, 7 May 1998 19:06:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 19:06:01 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3552688F.4A01 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 19:06:07 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Simon Says Science References: <199805072110_MC2-3C4F-34C2 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"m8oBT.0.Qy7.8YcKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18427 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > So far I would say the evidence is > mixed and inconclusive. Gene is fairly convinced the effect is real, > but I am not. > > - Jed Jed, this is an amazing statement---we are actually in complete agreement on something! I also agree with you on Scott Little's recent work---its a great effort, but the sort of close cooperation needed is Scott and Case working side by side, with a working unit at arms length. I'm agreeing with Jed far too often lately, I think that is a bad sign :-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 19:12:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA28572; Thu, 7 May 1998 19:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 19:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 18:08:59 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"MrHvK3.0.I-6.-ccKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18428 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:17 PM 5/7/98, Scott Little wrote: >Take a look at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run3.html > >Executive Summary: > >Having the recommended catalyst made no difference at all...there is still >no sign of Dr. Case's effect. I have communicated with Dr. Case and he is >considering the problem. How do you account for the extended rise in Tmid after replacing D2 with H2? It looks amazingly like the rise/fall pattern in run 2. Did you shake the device at the point the extended rise drops sharply? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 21:09:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA17000; Thu, 7 May 1998 21:05:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 21:05:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980507230442.0080deb0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 23:04:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 3 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AZrmd.0.Y94.XIeKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18429 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:08 PM 5/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >How do you account for the extended rise in Tmid after replacing D2 with >H2? I'm confused. In Run3 I never replaced D2 with H2. It was three cycles of H2 followed by 2 cycles of D2. >Did you shake >the device at the point the extended rise drops sharply? Are you talking about 9.5 hours in? That sharp drop was caused by filling the evacuated chamber with D2. Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 21:26:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA07268; Thu, 7 May 1998 21:24:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 21:24:12 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980507232508.00807ae0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 23:25:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Simon Says Science In-Reply-To: <199805072110_MC2-3C4F-34C2 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Gaya33.0.Tn1.hZeKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18430 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:06 PM 5/7/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Anyway, I see no reason for you to rush to the next test. Case is now >attempting to build a self-sustaining machine. Yes, we discussed his present thrust this afternoon...and I agree with your assessment, Jed. Since Case is very close to testing a couple of self-sustaining designs, I recognize that my best course for the near future is to simply let him go after it. If he succeeds, I will humbly scramble to figure out what is wrong with my experiment. If he fails, I will offer to make a free calorimetric measurement on HIS device. If he accepts, we should be able to determine in one clean test whether or not his "excess temperature" effect is excess heat...or not. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 22:43:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA25514; Thu, 7 May 1998 22:41:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 22:41:48 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <8f941692.35529af5 aol.com> Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 01:41:08 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"i9JdJ1.0.QE6.QifKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18431 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-07 02:41:51 EDT, you write: > From: herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) > Vince, > It seems you need a way to 'strike' the arc. <> John and All, I added eight more ballast lamps today. I will add four more. That will total twenty 7.5 watt 120 volt lamps in series. The sixteen lamps worked well but they still run just a little too hot. I already lost one lamp in the original string of eight. Twenty should be about perfect. Another run tonight with H2 no K at 26.0 in Hg vacuum. Neat! The input to the HV transformer was 115 volts at 5 amps. The output goes through the ballast lamps to the tube. No problem firing up the discharge. I pumped vacuum for an hour, shut valves and sat for another hour to check for leaks. All ok there. This is a new reactor tube, 11.5 inches long overall. The lower electrode projects 1.25 inches into the tube. The upper electrode is about 6.5 inches long with a 5/8 inch stub of coiled heavy W filiment. The electrode gap is 2 inches. (I think thats right but I forgot to write it down in my notebook and am to lazy to run downstairs to check) I filled the tube with H2 to 1 atm and pumped down 5 times with the last fill to 26.0 in Hg. I then fired it up. Here are the temperature readings taken every 5 minutes for one hour: Minutes TC +/- .1 C 0 20.7 <---power on 5 165.5 <---5 amps 115 volts 10 274.5 <---5 amps 115 volts 15 289.7 <---5 amps 115 volts 20 289.7 <---5 amps 115 volts 25 291.2 <---5 amps 115 volts upper electrode yellow hot 30 293.2 <---5 amps 115 volts temp leveling 35 293.3 <---5 amps 115 volts temp start to fall 40 287.0 <---5 amps 115 volts H2 fill and pump to 26.0 in Hg 45 288.5 <---5 amps 115 volts temp climbing rapidly 50 299.0 <---5 amps 115 volts temp rise slowing 55 301.8 <---5 amps 115 volts temp steady 60 301.8 <---5 amps 115 volts temp steady as a rock End of run. Power off. Pump full vacuum. The main thing I wanted to find out was whether I could keep the upper end of the reactor tube cool enough to avoid the messy melting of seals and tygon tubing. Well, the longer tube worked like a charm. Upper end cool to the touch (room temp) at the highest temperature I got to. Yes! The upper electrode holder is fashoned from a coil of .040 ss wire to provide a long thermal path and it works great. (the old holder was a 2 inch piece of 1/8 od copper tube) The variac was at 99% of it's rated voltage feeding the HV transformer. (115 volts) The reactor tube and the 16 7.5 watt ballast lamps were pulling 5 amperes through the primary of the HV transformer. I gotta work out a way to measure tube current draw. Interesting run...the upper W electrode was running almost at white heat. Just perfect for busting up H2. Lower electrode not glowing at all. This is with lower electrode positive. If I reverse polarity the lower electrode gets really hot while the upper stays cool. I want the upper W electrode hot because thats where Mills says the most H atoms will be. I don't know what the lower electrode is made of. The W filiment gets wrapped around it when it's a heat lamp but there is hardly any left when I tear the thing apart. The heavy stub bends pretty easy so I don't think it's W. This weekend I will probably be making a H2 with K run. I will hold the input power (115 volts at 5 amps) the same as tonights run. I will not change the ballast lamp configuration until after the H2/K run. Should be interesting stuff. Updates as they happen. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 22:48:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA27485; Thu, 7 May 1998 22:46:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 22:46:17 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <828e8513.35529bfc aol.com> Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 01:45:31 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Model T ... for Vince Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"7VNBD.0.Hj6.emfKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18432 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-07 02:48:52 EDT, you write: > From: herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) > A Model T replica ignition coil ... these have their own > interrupter .. will work great for stiker. <> John, you're amazing! how did you know I have one of those things sitting on the shelf in the garage/lab? Don't think I'll need it though. Thanks. Regards, Vince From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 23:16:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01811; Thu, 7 May 1998 23:12:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:12:17 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 07:12:19 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <199805080612.HAA17792 popmail.dircon.co.uk> X-Sender: dominic popmail.dircon.co.uk X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Dominic Murphy Subject: Re: London Calling: Invitation Seminars Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA01790 Resent-Message-ID: <"iqFJH2.0.AS.09gKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18433 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John, I presume your doing it at the Internet Cafe. You can count me in. At 13:08 07/05/98 PDT, you wrote: >Please excuse the short notice and use of Vortex-L as publicity. > > >Invitation to all UK based interested parties to attend an invitation >only one day work study group on Sunday 10 May 1998 in Central London. > >For those interested in furthering the field in active experimentation , >lobbying or support. > >For further details and acceptance of invitation please contact: > >John Allan, Energy Solutions T:0181 533 5880 > > >Openmindedness and a positive attitude as equally welcome as skills and >experience. We are looking to pull together a multi-talented network to >promote ethical and environemntal solutions within the field of New >Energy. Participants will include a wide and successful variety of >disciplinesoutside of science including business, marketing, >communications and law. Associates have had hands on experiences of >most types of New Energy Technologies in the UK, US and Japan. > >An invitation has been extended on behalf of Dr Thomas Daffern to >members of the New Energy Community to contribute to a ongoing series of >seminars at the House of Lords on ethics and environment. > >If any idividuals internationally want to contribute or participate via >teleconferencing, webcasting or by email ( short papers/messages >accepted ); >please contact me via telephone or email. > >John Allan > > >>From Sustainable Development to Regerative Development > >New Energy Technologies: within an Ethical and Environmental Context > >Following on from the 2 page summary in the latest edition of Green >World Magazine, Energy Solutions will be promoting a seminar on New >Energy Technologies, the next generation of energy producing systems. > >Questions to be addressed include what is Zero Point Energy and " >over-unity " ? the Cold Fusion debate; what are Low Energy Nuclear >Reactions? the reduction of radioactive waste by elemental >transmutation, the reaction of the Green Movement to New Energy, the >sociological and anthropological implications of energy policy and >whatever happened to the water powered car? > >Speakers as confirmed to date: > >•John Allan, Energy Solutions > >Introduction, Overview of Internet Sites on the Subjects > >•Harold Aspden, Ph.D, > >Mental Inertia and its Effects on New Energy, Addressing the Anomalies >in the 2nd Law of Thermodymanics > >•Mike Fisher, Zenergy Corporation > >Cambridge Engineer, On the Work of Zenergy > >•Nick Hawkins, British Cold Fusion proponent > >Advances in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions > >•John Collins, MD, author of Bessler's Wheel > >Exploring the Archetypal Reactions of the Scientific Establishment to >New Energy within a Historical Context > >•David Bezkorawajny, BBC Tomorrow's World/Green Party Campaigner > >Reactions of the Environmental Movement to New Energy > >•Luis Jarillo > >10 years working in the British New Energy Scene > >•Ray Peto, PACE UK > >On the Work of Dr Andrew Michrowski and Planetary Association for Clean >Energy a UN-NGO > >•Nigel Foster > >Symmetry in The Mathematics of the " Stuff " of Space, Raising Questions >about the Nature of the Quantum Field > >•Xi Chan, Ph.D Phys > >Industrial Reactions, Understanding the Game of Science > >Other speakers to be confirmed: > >•Keith Hindley, Ph.D Chem, Technical Detail, York > >Anomalous Energy Devices in the UK, US, and CIS including Reference to >his Extensive Study of Chernetskii-style Devices ( video footage ) > >and others. > >evening session: > >First UK Public showing of The Race to Zero Point, US Video > >The Future: Questions & Answers, a panel discussion of other systems and >ongoing work. > > >venue: > >London's Most Upmarket Internet Cafe >Global Cafe >15 Golden Square >London W1 > >200yd north of Piccadilly tube > >1pm refreshments and buffet for 2pm to 8pm programme. > >large scale projection and web broadcasting facilities. > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > Dominic Murphy 44+ (0)181 580 2715 0973 886770 (mobile) dominic dircon.co.uk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 23:18:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA03022; Thu, 7 May 1998 23:16:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:16:02 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 02:15:20 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"hzY7G2.0.3l.XCgKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18434 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-07 14:18:16 EDT, you write: > Vince, if you are using unfiltered DC, either half wave or fullwave > rectified, the discharge goes out every time the voltage drops low enough. Mike, the microwave oven supply I rescued is 1/2 wave (single diode), with a .6 mfd oil filled 2600 volt filter cap. It is, in it's present configuration, just about perfect. > Filtered DC is so much easier. The discharge stays on steadily. You can > measure electrical power into the tube by your two meters (average > anode-cathode volts times average discharge amps, if there is enough > ballast to hold the current nearly constant). Sixteen 7.5 watt 120 volt lamps in series at last count. I gotta find a supplier of microwave oven parts. Get 4 of these diodes and another one of these capacitors and I'll be in the full wave business. > Be sure to put a bleeder resistor across the capacitor. Yup, got one of those installed. Going to add a heavy duty normally closed relay with 100 ohms as a crowbar across the .6 mfd cap. I have been bitten once by this thing and once bitten, twice shy. Thanks for the tips Mike. >Choose a time constant of, say about 10 seconds. > 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 May 7 23:24:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA05232; Thu, 7 May 1998 23:22:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:22:47 -0700 Message-ID: <3552A6F2.650A loc1.tandem.com> Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 22:32:18 -0800 From: Bob Horst Reply-To: bhorst loc1.tandem.com Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 3 References: <3.0.5.32.19980507230442.0080deb0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"d2AXP1.0.RH1.pIgKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18435 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott -- >From looking at your graphs, it looks like your temperture hovers around 120 deg C (Ttop, Tmid), and 180 C (T btm). Isn't this much lower than Case recommends? Could you run the experiment and slowly increase the heater power to see if you can find an operating temperature that shows the effect? -- Bob From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 23:33:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04560; Thu, 7 May 1998 23:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD7A9E.0D1F04C0 pc038---brendan> From: Brendan Hall To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Dr. Case: Powders and what not Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:26:16 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD7A9E.0D1F04C0" Resent-Message-ID: <"UrVP43.0.771.rQgKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18437 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7A9E.0D1F04C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Vorts: Dr. Eugene F. Mallove wrote: >Brendan Hall wrote: >> 1. The mean particle diameter is greater than 30 micron AND the=20 >>particles are inherently non-sticky. >They are like 0.25-inch chips! AND, they are NOT sticky. >> 2. The convection currents and weaknesses in the inter-particle=20 >>structure are insufficient to cause channeling. >No channeling is possible with chunks like these. >> 3. The heat transfer rate is dominated by the palladium AND this = is=20 >>sufficiently high to delocalise the reaction sites. >These thingy's look black as coal. The Pd is an invisible coating. >> 4. The entrainment rates are insufficient to interfere with the=20 >>thermocouple temperature measurements. >>(A wide particle distribution, with a significant number of small=20 >>particles, would show entrainment if channels form, so this is not = limited=20 >>to small mean particle size systems only.) >Again, there are no very small particles in the United Catalyst = material. Thanks for the information Gene. Are you or Dr. Case (or United = Catalysts) able to supply us with further information on the catalyst. = Specifically, it would be useful to know the following.=20 Are the chips plate like? What are their (approximate) dimensions and = shape? Are they uniform? Do your hands (literally) get dirty when handling the catalyst? (If so, = there are fine particles in the system.) Is the palladium coating whole chips or smaller carbon particles = compressed into chips? =20 What is the effective degradation of the catalyst in the cell? How = resistant are they to degradation due to thermal shock/thermal = expansion? Does the palladium coating increase the mechanical binding of the = catalyst chips? If so, how much would be needed to effectively enhance = this? Do you find a layer of fine particles or dust on the surface of the = catalyst bed, on the freeboard walls or on the thermocouple after the = deuterium run? =20 Further thoughts: You stated above that no channeling is possible with chips as these. = Strictly, that isn't true, as the air passes much more easily through = the interstitial gaps than through the catalyst chips themselves. Thus = convection velocities would be higher in these channels than in the gas = in the freeboard. If the thermal expansion or chemical reactions do = cause degradation of the chips, degraded particles will fall into the = interstitial gaps blocking the local flow or, if the local flow is = sufficiently strong, becoming fluidised within the structure of the = packed bed. Where blocking does occur, the gas is forced to bypass the = routes previously taken, increasing the average interstitial gas = velocity (and pressure) at other unblocked sites. It is the sites which = have the greatest local gas volume flow rate that will be the hardest to = block and therefore it is these sites that will end up being the = channels through which most of the gas passes. (This may be the cause = of the slow increase in the temperature, where channels distant to the = thermocouple are slowly blocked, redirecting more flow to the = thermocouple channel.) Thermocouples, if they penetrate significantly into the bed, create = large channels due to the chips' orientation around the thermocouple. = Vertical thermocouples would have the greatest influence on the gas = pathways, due to the vertical pressure differential, but horizontal = thermocouples would also have some influence. (This may provide a neat = and easy test: place two thermocouples at different orientations, and = different positions but measuring at the same height, into the bed and = look for differences in the measured temperatures.) Once again, my thought trains have a significant flaw - that they = totally rely on the single unknown quantity, the degradation rate of the = catalyst. The flow channel artifact cannot yet be ruled out until it = can be shown that the catalyst chips do not degrade sufficiently. If = anything, it should be realised that temperature measurement in a two = phase system can be quite difficult to interpret, especially packed = ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7A9E.0D1F04C0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhwGAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACMAAABSRTogRHIu IENhc2U6IFBvd2RlcnMgYW5kIHdoYXQgbm90AEcLAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcFAAgAEAAaABAABQAhAQEg gAMADgAAAM4HBQAIAA4ACAAUAAUAEQEBCYABACEAAABEOTk2MERGQTBEN0FCRDExOUY2RUYyMTMy NzU0Nzk0NwA+BwEDkAYAqA0AABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMA NgAAAAAAQAA5AMAbWDRKer0BHgBwAAEAAAAjAAAAUkU6IERyLiBDYXNlOiBQb3dkZXJzIGFuZCB3 aGF0IG5vdAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb16SjRYCWPQQ+ZVEdG8BQAAAAAAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAADAAAA TVMAAB4AHwwBAAAAGwAAAFdpbmRvd3MvSVQgTUFOQUdFUi9CcmVuZGFuAAADAAYQpDNsAAMABxDH EAAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAAVk9SVFM6RFJFVUdFTkVGTUFMTE9WRVdST1RFOkJSRU5EQU5IQUxMV1JP VEU6MVRIRU1FQU5QQVJUSUNMRURJQU1FVEVSSVNHUkVBVEVSVEhBTjMwTUlDUk9OQU5EVEhFUEFS VAAAAAACAQkQAQAAAA4MAAAKDAAAnRoAAExaRnU4P5Wc/wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNo CsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoMyMxMPZjQDxQIAcHJCcRIic3RlbQKAfRcKgAjPCdk7F58yNTUP AoAKgQ2xC2BuZzEwBjMUIAsDbGkxODDBAtFpLTE0NA3wDNBDHAMLWTE2IFYXQXN+OgqFCoscXBQi DAEV8G8FFnBjBUBEci4gRUR1ZwnwZSBGITBNcwdAFzB2ZQtGEvIMAWNxAEAgIHcgoh3/GyQztjYc pyLpPh+vILRCF6D0bmQDkUgiASOcJscmHxcnLyOALJIxITAgVGgPIaAHgAORCrF0aWNsfSGgZAcw B4AWcAXABAAgNQnBYS6idBHAA6AzMI8tYC4AA2ADoEFORC+B/yGgKX8qjyufLcYEIArAIaAHC4At QChRdGx5IG6NAiAtFmAuAGt5LiQOfzGvMr8gpS0xNaA00htga2khoDAuGdAtC4ARsCDTEbAFIHMh MHIsMLI6NPBOT1QgNg8xPzgfK89tI4AyLQUFoG4iQCDgaf0wUWMIcDVSNLEocCOQLYD+ayGQBBAH kQuAMLMLgC6hPi0txz3/Pw9AHxZgcnXPIOAIcCGgNNRzdQ3QLgCXCJACMC+AbztwYXUR8P87cQBw IZAbYBqgNm9GL0c/nSClTkpxSwcu0nBvBBA+aQJgIaAD8C+QO3F1bv5rBCA6kzDBEfA9f0yfTa+9 LCszLQUtQC9AL4ByAHHeZi6xVxAWcC7SZANwC4B7L0FDUGI1oDDCCrAiEGH5LlB1bTB1LuEu4VK/ U8/vVN9JuDWRO5BnO2BKYQ2w/xcwSpAbYErBMMIvIUJEAJD9FnBzS59bL1w/OZhfg0thxHknUXFv b2tYoAtgfz1ANMAEIAWgB0AhMC0yUO9DUC7hA5ELgHYEAFCDZkH/LfBLeAr7Iukkfx+fIKVa//ti zywNNC0FNWFXEAuAB4D/SjFXkjS2SbxEk1dRULUwz29tf26PINJz8XIEYAWgdfcLUFHBFoBwBJAv QEkSLXF/SbAXoHESYMd0r3W/IHgovkFQwQ2wLbpIsVCAdUJS6zwgUNNhYHFnAwBJ4QBwlQVAblmQ Yi6xb2Y9AP8AwCjhec9633vvNDd+wQhg4mxDUHNobwfgcKoGkN9K5gQgAhB3kDwgc0pwWgb/NcAF QBtgMBBYcmFfgj9sH+9KYYC0LXwAkHqNcRZTBCDzAiA1kC4pYO+Jn4qvILS8QWcLcTwjSSU1wCAi QN5yNaCAtDQ4RCVVAwBYcv5DL0AHQBZRLWAvQgcxYN//aS9qOi0wAHBRYYchREWHIntoMTBRRyGB LQEHECGgeb8IYIBwBcAhEpXASsEoBbH5lV1zKTTAUJKMInfgC1D3NaBKsFDEZghwd2KamzBR73Py SpCV5C0BU3hgSgB/ov0iEHk8IFDghOWAQJ9RDcD/hRBKUkOghXFz8gIQIhED8P9LcR5ml1Wb0qFT O5ItsAtg61exOpI/I4BXEcAFQDTSZXPxaQXAKGGfEANgeP8HcC9BnlAuUHERAJACIEMUf4VQqVCo Eqaln0F/gYcxP72W7ERKcJwRBcAvoWQEIP4oG2AuoaLCnlAhcAVALlD7ACA1oHctQAOgrgJPw6Fa 6aghKEmAkW+SqhvQIZH3lE+N5I6uSQQgWOxoFa+xvwbwpwYFsYCzLrFKkHIG4P8tqGYieFAXoEPR ZvECME9C/zuhqCGW7KhTLuFz8g3BQjL/IkBe8QnAWWCgxYCQoVpEFupjS0BsqCFIhXG5wX4R33/S qKVYwV7ivWhkClBKUi93YwdAhUI9QC/CtmV4/5eAqmOsnweRta+2szsxLyH/X4UHgEryoqJYoAuA LlBP4e++DrqGsaWFYm1I4Dtgo1f/IZAJgFiBSmG8pzWRCfAvof+/cFnzxK+cA7KxQ1B/MAtg/nmA VLK9BbHCQJYhoSV5Id5mANAhoL4OgEBkPCChJf8DUAngBuALESOQIgG3o6El/XdrYQGAL2O9In5w BnFZkfdI0MSQuu5Gn/UvkAhgXqD9Hd9ZnCHAYVhyAaAiMS+C/3/xT09QXadCZhFR5KIhfjHPIOCi 4tzjBABuJ1biClD/PCDfhDTAqRGXgEPTy3MEYP804XkBAxBYwgNg2pFESD0R/y3wwwGSYKdRL5Pk Gsm8c+L/jjBLQCJAYMAtEp9hQfnNYf9fMOVBB5GjV16CoDNR1IaI/y+TRCWSYEQH1PctAbGh1lf/ w+qcQhGwFoDIc1/2V/JKhf+9T6cFPCDyRFiBNDgD8Cjh/9LgKOG6M+Sf5aMCYMNRsGb/XyOHEKVB nEGjAb4U+Dku4fddu0ixAiBnPCCAQLmB3dL9GnB1fTBfcUNRUOGzpkjH/74Fl4A9QFiCCYAtAahQ c2L392dYENGSY0KhPCPtRIcD/79wzKNYsOKSX6QIYHGCubH7Z5AIYHPj4kOQCfCjAcdU9bBmYZOR YSFw9j5nIOnF/zWgqUBDQbmzSRGeUdIhoBP/UUD3Y1iBYITKobwXYIOvsf8uADtgEcDcs+0xLyOW Ifg0/wcDtyBZkKTx+KJXk9zj9RP/6tFz8hHBGlCWIQJS93JDI/+Sw5ohNPG8FpzhCxQOqChh/Z9Q cKOhsGfsGOQ0C3TjUN/SEr4U7VLilC0BKC0wLuH/73AHsA9FSpS+BQQQ+hLHVv9EJXg5fsGS04aX fgJ/0vXV/9acNOEZUjWRCXU8INUAr2H/QjLd4eNT+fMc77czSxOOrv8tMXeXhMH5JAeweGCy0FcB /1exf1k1kfW31DPHYqeyl5DvBgEb2MJXO3QnnEFKEpsE35eQA/AQ1HdbLQFW9nAt8f/DAXdq6lYL 35qS/GATYNMC/+z4l4B/ANWQjfDzwSi4k5H/LFQIJqoRvLE1UvbR+6F+cPvLIdhQekIAleEsr4US X1D/h4Et84eADdEvF2aAF3hOsf9nkH1B0CCy0KhyQ0F5AVjB/QyxOqdyzgKE8DSdVtEy1/8puoTB QzI7uFBB5UGqkjOy73j03dJW0rPiYQ3RqPHaof8EoiaIQyNlY5oiMta/cJTH33j1zKF4SGDAjr1P zfIF8P2Sc21YwtqDVvJJkS3kfzz1+fBhhYAt3NTBBZXh+xH/1QD7EdJGaFF90VFBpJHCIPxxdX/R B5EBFMGKV5O+Df9wNfnzG9VxsX2g0uHKIRvx/4hB0GDUEtiRfdCI0ANBrBH/faD1kVDTo6KFUv1C P5XnDb/xsYgy8+Vdq+6U7+B5ZNP/owOFUaN1DHFfYhDiP5J4T+95U7OS0CA6YnCoYBIyjfP/UvZM QGCRMsN9sIUQcri5sf9AoXGQolJKQ/64CjOAkNWQ3deCYpzRhTGN9SjyUGbQ+aqRLUZ90MBQ8IDv cBwA/55QLfPq0K/hx2DlQXJwufL/miNZz3lUiCMT1NUAubIp9P/pQBtQ7VJhBFuOcaQ4oUBy9+9w 1QCW3VHCUOUh6SA54P+oQQewAHOHs1BnjmLxAqBB/2Yxx+DGYJoVh9Gw6bSdUvP/bcOAgHNRjlHG Ad5W77GYMP5umwTCg8BQM5RxEFVVUWT/p+ADwNzFh6f7RO6YwYqH0f9hBO9wmFBKtPCPO2IEUPeY /fEydtwzuHQfQTBx15NTEv9GwsO9PRTF7G0CSDvIHdB0//M5lRH9REAQKqEWE8Yo0k+fe298dG7/ RpEX5G9wjTD/73KaJvJPpwXokdkPKzL5A74oZyX7EdAgyMDd8WaeUP+SxHZRp+BdAaOR/HCjgROh f6ElYQLTJ7+BftaPGHhyb//1IFezjrQX1eyxzbVa49M1v8GP9eTIGfE00yYzsGKegf89Bd5HyIAD 0CoU6JG/4XWR//jx0rYngO/0N+R1kcCRSEr/SpHHg5Vb9EvMws3HT39QhI+lrqXgcyBbMFxmM6PA gHMyMFxjZjG/0O0uAlXIYNxCQ4gVR7JBgv+cpAPiXVhsccJUvneVyath97vquOYJ4Xoysv2h3oDY IH/CAurQEVN+8tdov3LYlUHvwNS35LjZbqF2JkLGGM527aNmMqP4zoVCQsGWEMIgL6SQ1bCi9w/B XN3AMza/pDCxPDghJ4BQwc6Ffc6AAgC2wAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzCgVrjvNnq9AUAA CDCgVrjvNnq9AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AADMrQ== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7A9E.0D1F04C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 23:34:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04486; Thu, 7 May 1998 23:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:30:54 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <8e7d2104.3552a5f9 aol.com> Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 02:28:08 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"qQPEV3.0.061.SQgKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18436 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-07 17:35:57 EDT, you write: > I am assuming, of course, that Vince will learn to measure > power input to the discharge at the tube terminals instead of the AC > line...... > Michael J. Schaffer You assume correctly. I am starting slowly here due a fried Simpson 260 (well I havn't taken it apart yet so maybe the internal fuse blew) that was across the supply output with no load...damn! But yes, I will get there eventually. Vince From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 7 23:38:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA05523; Thu, 7 May 1998 23:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 7 May 1998 23:37:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 02:27:19 -0400 From: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> Subject: Re: London Calling: Invitation Seminars Sender: Norman Horwood <100060.173 compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Message-ID: <199805080230_MC2-3C4D-CA82 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"XHW7E.0.9M1.VWgKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18438 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Soo, >> <200yd north of Piccadilly tube> Is that right or left when you emerge into daylight? << Its on the NW side of Brewer St which is NW of Piccadilly Circus, i.e turn right along Regent St and standing in the middle of the circus with your right hand on Eros (or as close as you can get to him. Its a bit short notice for me, and we have a lousy rail service from deep Surrey. Norman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 05:07:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA24505; Fri, 8 May 1998 05:06:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:06:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980508070511.0081ab60 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 07:05:11 -0500 To: bhorst loc1.tandem.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 3 In-Reply-To: <3552A6F2.650A loc1.tandem.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980507230442.0080deb0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"W7vqf2.0.p-5.vKlKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18439 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:32 PM 5/7/98 -0800, Bob Horst wrote: >From looking at your graphs, it looks like your temperture hovers around >120 deg C (Ttop, Tmid), and 180 C (T btm). Isn't this much lower than >Case recommends? Tbtm is the only sensor in the catalyst. The other two are up in the gas above the catalyst. Case recommends 175C for the catalyst. At Gene's house last Thursday, Case ran his own apparatus at 178C, at least for the hydrogen cycle. >Could you run the experiment and slowly increase the heater power to see >if you can find an operating temperature that shows the effect? Since the apparatus is all set up and ready to go, I think I'll do just that today. 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 http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 05:11:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA11358; Fri, 8 May 1998 05:10:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:10:21 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 04:10:12 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 3 Resent-Message-ID: <"PFQ2I3.0.On2.iOlKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18440 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:04 PM 5/7/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 06:08 PM 5/7/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>How do you account for the extended rise in Tmid after replacing D2 with >>H2? > >I'm confused. In Run3 I never replaced D2 with H2. It was three cycles of >H2 followed by 2 cycles of D2. OK, it was the Tmid anomaly at time 6.2 hrs in Run 2 after fill #4 when the D2 was replaced with H2. Above, I refer to the corresponding similar Tmid anomaly at time 9.2 hrs in Run 3 after fill #4 when the D2 was replace with D2. I hadn't noticed the change in protocol in Run 3. In run 3 you state: "At 9.2 hours I vented and evacuated the chamber again. This time I left it under vacuum for about 20 minutes and then filled it with 50 psi of D2 gas. Again, nothing happened to the catalyst temperature!! At 11.1 hours, I turned off the heater power, ending the run." You go on to say: "BTW, I believe the large rise in Tmid and smaller rise in Ttop that occur when the chamber is evacuated are due to conduction of heat crom the catalyst up the stems of these temperature probes." I take it you are saying the Tmid excursion in Run 3 is due to the 20 minute hold of the vacuum? Is there any chance the vacuum was held during the Tmid anomaly in Run 2? It is probably coincidental, due to the door opening, that the room temperature drops exactly during the Tmid anomaly. The end time for the room temperture drop does not match exactly in Run 2, as Tmid drops just prior to the door closing - unless there is some lag time between door opening and the temperature change registration on your graph. You have a pressure guage on the cell. Does it measure cell pressure during the run? In other words, do you have any pressure data, or recollections of such, for the cell during the runs? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 05:20:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA26162; Fri, 8 May 1998 05:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3552F7C8.F60 math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 05:17:12 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Simon Says Science References: <3.0.5.32.19980507232508.00807ae0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"G-9jb3.0.iO6.wWlKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18441 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Since Case is very close to testing a couple of > self-sustaining designs, I recognize that my best course for the near > future is to simply let him go after it. If he succeeds, I'm a little fuzzy on what Case's "self sustaining" devices are going to "prove". Wont they simply amout to a black box that---once started---registers a certain elevated temperature reading on an internal T sensor for a long time? That would be proof of a self-sustaining T reading, but its still not calorimetry. I'd much rather see a fairly simple device register 20% excess heat in a robust, calibrated calorimeter for a couple weeks, than have a "Russian doll dewar" set-up that tells me some T_internal stays at 200 C for a couple weeks. Of course, if the whole contraption would heat up to, say, 10C above room temp, then fine---but obviosly it can't if its really only putting out 10--20 watts of excess heat. By necessity it will be so heavily insulated that the great bulk of it never gets appreciably warm, and the only indication that its makeing excess heat will again be readings on a small number of T sensors..... I think Case is pulling a "Greg Watson" on us (no offense Greg!)---i.e. he's guilty of trying to perfect his device when what he has in hand right now would more than suffice to prove something really amazing is going on, if he would just pass it on for others to investigate (now!). -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 05:31:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA27509; Fri, 8 May 1998 05:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980508072735.0080b750 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 07:27:35 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 3 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Nc9V81.0.ej6.uflKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18442 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:10 AM 5/8/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >OK, it was the Tmid anomaly at time 6.2 hrs in Run 2 after fill #4 when the >D2 was replaced with H2. Above, I refer to the corresponding similar Tmid >anomaly at time 9.2 hrs in Run 3 after fill #4 when the D2 was replace with >D2. I hadn't noticed the change in protocol in Run 3. These two events are quite different. I don't really know what happened in Run 2 at 6.2 hours. I suspect that the clumpy catalyst "coned up" (thanks Frank) onto the Tmid sensor...but I don't know why Ttop went down. Also, I cannot rule out an electrical signal problem. In Run3, stem conduction explains the observation neatly. >I take it you are saying the Tmid excursion in Run 3 is due to the 20 >minute hold of the vacuum? Is there any chance the vacuum was held during >the Tmid anomaly in Run 2? No chance. You can examine the Tbtm trace to see how long the vacuum was maintained (it's evacuated only when the Tbtm trace is depressed). >You have a pressure guage on the cell. Does it measure cell pressure during >the run? In other words, do you have any pressure data, or recollections >of such, for the cell during the runs? It's a bourdon tube type....no analog output...:( But I do look at it and record it in the notebook periodically. After the experiment has equilibrated at 20 watts, the pressure never changes. It does change on the first hydrogen cycle where there is a noticeable decrease due to chemical reaction of the hydrogen. On subsequent cycles after I fill the chamber to 50 psi and close it off, the gauge just stays on 50 psi. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 05:37:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA14893; Fri, 8 May 1998 05:36:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:36:26 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <011801bd7a7d$be383fe0$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Oops! Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:35:07 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"ck3Ue3.0.Xe3.9nlKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18444 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My address book rearranged two addresses! :-) FJS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 05:37:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA13899; Fri, 8 May 1998 05:33:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:33:09 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <010601bd7a7d$35f6a860$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Fw: Case Run 3 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:31:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"vqgxg2.0.4P3.4klKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18443 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 08, 1998 6:29 AM Subject: Re: Case Run 3 >At 04:10 AM 5/8/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>OK, it was the Tmid anomaly at time 6.2 hrs in Run 2 after fill #4 when the >>D2 was replaced with H2. Above, I refer to the corresponding similar Tmid >>anomaly at time 9.2 hrs in Run 3 after fill #4 when the D2 was replace with >>D2. I hadn't noticed the change in protocol in Run 3. > >These two events are quite different. I don't really know what happened in >Run 2 at 6.2 hours. I suspect that the clumpy catalyst "coned up" (thanks >Frank) onto the Tmid sensor...but I don't know why Ttop went down. Also, I >cannot rule out an electrical signal problem. In Run3, stem conduction >explains the observation neatly. > >>I take it you are saying the Tmid excursion in Run 3 is due to the 20 >>minute hold of the vacuum? Is there any chance the vacuum was held during >>the Tmid anomaly in Run 2? > >No chance. You can examine the Tbtm trace to see how long the vacuum was >maintained (it's evacuated only when the Tbtm trace is depressed). > >>You have a pressure guage on the cell. Does it measure cell pressure during >>the run? In other words, do you have any pressure data, or recollections >>of such, for the cell during the runs? > >It's a bourdon tube type....no analog output...:( But I do look at it and >record it in the notebook periodically. After the experiment has >equilibrated at 20 watts, the pressure never changes. It does change on the >first hydrogen cycle where there is a noticeable decrease due to chemical >reaction of the hydrogen. On subsequent cycles after I fill the chamber to >50 psi and close it off, the gauge just stays on 50 psi. > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 06:23:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA05729; Fri, 8 May 1998 06:19:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:19:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 05:17:32 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Simon Says Science Resent-Message-ID: <"3Guwt.0.RP1.vPmKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18445 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:17 AM 5/8/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >Scott Little wrote: >> >> Since Case is very close to testing a couple of >> self-sustaining designs, I recognize that my best course for the near >> future is to simply let him go after it. If he succeeds, > >I'm a little fuzzy on what Case's "self sustaining" devices >are going to "prove". Wont they simply amout to a black box >that---once started---registers a certain elevated temperature >reading on an internal T sensor for a long time? That would >be proof of a self-sustaining T reading, but its still not >calorimetry. Self sustainment of temperature is the best possible yes/no calorimetry - because it is known that the thermal resistance is low enough that the temperature will quickly drop without large heat input. The device can be made quantitative by simply making a calibration run with Joule heater and no catalyst. We have all seen the debate about calorimetry ad infinitum. A COP of infinity removes all doubt - especially when replicated. > I'd much rather see a fairly simple device >register 20% excess heat in a robust, calibrated calorimeter >for a couple weeks, than have a "Russian doll dewar" set-up >that tells me some T_internal stays at 200 C for a couple weeks. > >Of course, if the whole contraption would heat up to, say, >10C above room temp, then fine---but obviosly it can't >if its really only putting out 10--20 watts of excess heat. Not true - I got over 50 C with just 7 W in a suspended jar inside a large 3.2 liter dewar. With 500 g of catalyst, putting out 35 to 70 watts in an insulated cell indside a Dewar, Case should easily reach his 180 C - provided the cell works as Case understands it, and scales up to 500 g. >By necessity it will be so heavily insulated that the great >bulk of it never gets appreciably warm, and the only indication >that its makeing excess heat will again be readings on >a small number of T sensors..... [snip] Two sensors should be plenty, one for the catalyst for monitoring catalyst condition, and one attached externally to the steel catalyst container for calorimetry purposes. If the catalyst conducts heat well enough, only the internal sensor is required. Here is a challenge for anyone interested: Imagine and prove or create a "fake" device operating at room temperature with a sealed steel container holding 500 g of carbon plus a similar volume of H2 or D2 gas at 150 psia, held at above 150 C external cell temperature for 2 weeks with only normal insulation, fiberglass, or whatever Case uses, plus a single Dewar. No appreciable extra weight in the steel container. No highly radioactive material allowed! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 06:25:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA24387; Fri, 8 May 1998 06:24:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:24:30 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <012a01bd7a84$6e756120$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: CF, on the Bright Side Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 07:22:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"qzCY61.0.zy5.DUmKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18447 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Sun (the closest working CF device) is 1.4E9 meters in diameter and puts out 3.86E26 joule/sec (watts). With a volume of 3.93E26 meter^3, that is about ONE WATT/METER^3 or ONE MICROWATT/CM^3. It's the momentum of that 4.3 Million Tonnes of matter being annihilated EACH SECOND that runs the "Windmills" on The Earth, that keeps us going. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 06:28:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA06590; Fri, 8 May 1998 06:25:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:25:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3552F992.3F03 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 07:24:50 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Elliot B. Kennel" , Vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Murray: email EK ICCF7 Trip report? 05/08/98 References: <199805080821_MC2-3C54-3381 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-v0vq3.0.uc1.QVmKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18446 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 8, 1998 Hello Elliot, Could you post an email version of your report-- I don't have the decoder program. Thanks! Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 06:30:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA07170; Fri, 8 May 1998 06:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <355307C6.27A1341D css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 08:25:26 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Viewing JPGs References: <01bd7a08$019e71d0$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MGE57.0.sl1.kXmKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18448 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: George Holz wrote: > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > >I am not sure of the exact geometry because I have not seen a photograph or > >schematic. Gene tried to send me one in .jpg format, but alas, the gap between > >Mac and Windows is too great, and I cannot read it. > > Hi Jed, > If you email me a copy of the jpeg I have several programs > that may be able to get it into the PC world. Adobe > Photoshop for example seems to be functional in both worlds. Get it into the PC world? Hey guys, a browser is all that is needed. Just drag the JPG into your browser window. If it still can not be read, the file is corrupt. John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 06:41:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA28238; Fri, 8 May 1998 06:37:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:37:42 -0700 Message-ID: <355308D5.484 skylink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 06:29:57 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Relativistic Length Contraction: a Fiction? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eAsfB3.0.8v6.bgmKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18449 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In the most recent of editon of Apeiron there is an interesting article: "Nonconservation of Charge and Energy as Consequences of Contracted Length Noncovariance", by V.N. Streltsov. http://redshift.vif.com/current.htm Streltsov argues that the conventionally accepted idea of relativistic length contraction must be incorrect because it results in violation of charge conservation and energy conservation. Oleg Jefimenko, in his newest book, "Retardation and Relativity", beats the problem of length contraction to death in Chapter 9 - Common Misconceptions About Relativity Theory. Using similar arguments as presented in the above paper, along with other arguments, Jefimenko reaches the same conclusion. Relativistic length contraction is a misconception. Quoting Jefimenko's conclusion: "The answer is very simple: as a physical phenomenon Lorentz contraction does not exist. And the fact that the several revisions of this concept had no ill effect on relativistic electrodynamics or on any other branch of physics is an excellent indication that the concept does not represent a physical phenomenon in the conventional sense." Jefimenko has painstakingly derived electromagnetic relativity from the ground up based on retarded sources -- electric charges and currents, without resorting to any apriori assumptions or postulates. Most of his findings are identical to those of Poincare, Lorentz, and Einstein. There are also some remarkable differences, Such as Lorentz contraction (noted above), also the rate of electromagnetic clocks is sometimes the same, but not always the same as predicted by Einstein. He also finds that some of the Maxwell equations do not always transform covariantly. Jefimenko's book can be purchased from: Electret Scientific Company, PO Box 4132, Star City WV 26504. $19.95. ISBN 0-917406-21-4 Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 06:54:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA10587; Fri, 8 May 1998 06:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:52:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35530DC4.69EB interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 09:51:00 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"B7az92.0.Hb2.TumKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18450 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > > I gotta find a supplier of microwave oven parts. Get 4 of these diodes and > another one of these capacitors and I'll be in the full wave business. > Vince, when you get to this stage, get a price on the MW diodes and compare with Radio Shack's 1000 volt, 2.5 amp units. I think you would need 12 of the 1000 v, RS diodes to do the job - 3 in each leg of a full-wave bridge. You would need a small piece of perf board as a base and 12, 500,000 ohm resistors to shunt across the diodes. The shunt resistors form a voltage divider to equalize the amount of reverse voltage seen by each diode when they are cut off. I am using this exact full-wave bridge configuration to charge my capacitor bank from an 1800 volt secondary transformer. It should work fine if you bring up the variac slowly to prevent the initial surge in your discharged filter cap(s) from blowing out the diodes. I say this because sometimes the MW supply houses charge and arm and a leg for MW oven parts - but check price and then decide. The Radio amateur's HB also recommends a 0.01 mfd ceramic cap across each diode but these are harder to get and mine works OK with just the resistors. Also, you can use 300 or 400 volt electrolytic capacitors for a filter IF YOU ALSO SHUNT EACH CAP WITH A RESISTOR. The best way is to figure out what bleeder resistor you would need for the full-voltage bleeding job, and then divide by the number of series capacitors you need to supply your total voltage. Put a resistor of this size across each of the series capacitors and you wind up with a bleeder resistor PLUS voltage-equalizing resistors all in one! BTW, in "Vegas" don't you need to mount those 20 light bulbs around your front door? You might get some interesting visitors during your runs when the lights are flashing! :-) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 07:14:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA13508; Fri, 8 May 1998 07:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 07:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980508091004.00be9668 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 09:10:04 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: RE: Dr. Case: Powders and what not In-Reply-To: <01BD7A9E.0D1F04C0 pc038---brendan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ddJS43.0.yI3.SAnKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18451 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Brendan, nice meeting you at ICCF-7. Since I have some G75-E, I can answer some of your questions: At 16:26 5/8/98 +1000, Brendan Hall wrote: >Are the chips plate like? Yes. >What are their (approximate) dimensions and shape? Are they uniform? they are 2x3mm up to 4x8mm and only about .5-1mm thick, irregular shapes. >Do your hands (literally) get dirty when handling the catalyst? Yes, but the percentage of fines is very small. They just lightly coat the surface of the chips. I don't have answers to the rest of your questions...yet. 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 May 8 07:48:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA18684; Fri, 8 May 1998 07:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 07:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:35:36 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Simon Says Science Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805081038_MC2-3C5F-21ED compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"_QxB-1.0.kZ4.LgnKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18452 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman writes: I'm a little fuzzy on what Case's "self sustaining" devices are going to "prove". Wont they simply amount to a black box that---once started---registers a certain elevated temperature reading on an internal T sensor for a long time? That would be proof of a self-sustaining T reading, but its still not calorimetry. This *is* calorimetry in its most fundamental and indisputable form. This is an isoperibolic calorimeter, of the purest, simplest, most reliable designs. The problems reported with other isoperibolic calorimeters -- like thermal gradients and poor mixing close to the walls -- cannot affect this one because input power is zero. The Second Law guarantees the cell will not remain hotter than the surroundings unless there is an energy producing reaction underway inside it. Based on the mass of active material inside and the emissivity of the Dewar we can calculate how long a measurable chemical reaction would last. If heat production exceeds the limits by a factor of ten we know this is CF. The only possible error with this setup is a false reading from the internal thermocouple. It might register 200 deg C when the actual internal temperature is 20 deg C (ambient). To overcome that problem Gene hopes to use either a mercury thermometer as backup, or a Peltier device attached to the cell top (where most of the heat will come out), or possibly some kind of pyrometer to certify that the entire Dewar is warmer than the surroundings. I hope the Case device within it produces ~30 watts and that is enough to make the top of the Dewar palpably warm. I'd much rather see a fairly simple device register 20% excess heat in a robust, calibrated calorimeter for a couple weeks, than have a "Russian doll Dewar" set-up that tells me some T_internal stays at 200 C for a couple weeks. I do not understand why. The stand alone self-heating device goes to the heart of basic physics. I cannot imagine a more conclusive or well defined result. Of course, if the whole contraption would heat up to, say, 10C above room temp, then fine---but obviously it can't if its really only putting out 10--20 watts of excess heat. By necessity it will be so heavily insulated that the great bulk of it never gets appreciably warm . . . That depends on the surface area and the construction of the Dewar. As I said, most of the heat will escape out of the top, where the blanket heater power wires, sensor wires, Peltier etc., are attached. Suppose the Dewar surface is within a tenth degree C of ambient and the top alone is well above ambient, by several degrees. That will prove the point. I trust nobody will say it is a heat pump. No, on second thought I do not trust that. Pathological skeptics will claim it is a heat pump that moves energy from the Dewar walls, drags it across the 200 deg C thermal gradient to concentrate it at the core, and then spews that heat out the top. They will say the outside Dewar wall temperature is slightly lower than the surroundings, by less than 0.1 deg C, an amount too small to be measured with our equipment. Yup, that's what they will say. Okay, I trust that no rational human beings will make such claims. I think Case is pulling a "Greg Watson" on us (no offense Greg!)---i.e. he's guilty of trying to perfect his device when what he has in hand right now would more than suffice to prove something really amazing is going on, if he would just pass it on for others to investigate (now!). I see no resemblance. 1. Case already did pass it on, to Gene Mallove. He had to take it back because he needed some parts. Next week he plans to bring it again and leave it for a few days, we hope. When scientists offered to visit Watson and verify his claims, he ignored them. Case drove 30 minutes to visit *us*. When we asked Case to build us one he agreed immediately, and he said he would take the money later. Watson took the money first, never delivered, and never returned the money despite repeated requests. 2. Case has already told the world how to build one, and which parts to order. It turns out his instructions are not sufficient for Scott Little, but you cannot blame either Case or Little for this. How were they to know the description was inadequate? The only way to find out is to try it. But this may not be a fair test. There are many differences between the experiments and we have no way of knowing whether a more exact replication would work. 3. Making the present cell into a self sustainer should be a trivial matter. This is equivalent to asking Watson to link a line of his SMOT devices on a platform tilted slightly uphill, so that when the ball comes to rest it is measurably higher than when it starts out. Anyone with SMOT devices in hand can perform this experiment in a half-hour. Chris and I did it many times. You put the ramps on something like a 3' board (a Formica shelf board works well), and you make it level in both dimensions with a bubble level. Then you fold a sheet of paper eight times and wedge it under one end of the board, enough to make the bubble level register and to make a marble roll downhill. If the SMOT passes this test, it is producing energy. If it fails, it is not producing energy. This is less demanding and more definitive than the "roll-away" test, which I found fraught with uncertainly and complications. (The SMOT failed this and every other test I know of.) We are asking Case to make his device work against a slight uphill thermal gradient, an exact analogy to the SMOT test I described. It will take a few days to set up. Case has run hundreds of tests over the last five years, he can set up a new one quickly. Frankly, I cannot imagine why Case failed to do this years ago. The fact that he did not makes me wonder about his credibility. But if he pulls it off now, all will be forgiven. For that matter, I will never understand why Pons and Fleischmann did not set up a live demo during ICCF6, and invite the whole conference to their lab to observe it. People in this field seem to go out their way to hurt their own credibility. I also wonder why trained scientists like Barry Merriman and Michael Schaffer have any doubts about the operation of an isoperibolic calorimeter with zero input -- a technique that goes straight back to Lavoisier and J. P. Joule. Perhaps modern scientists have become so fond of their high-tech instruments they have lost sight of the fundamental experiments of physics, which can *and should* be done with tools and methods as ancient as civilization itself: jars, levers, the sense of touch, and so on. A flow calorimeter like Scott Little's is analogous to the roll-away test. It is fraught with unnecessary complexity, because of moving fluid, pumps, the need for both inlet and outlet thermometers and so on. I like flow calorimetry, but in this case we do not need it, and in fact we can do a better experiment without it. I like scanning electron microscopes too, but when you can learn what you need to know by examining the specimen with a magnifying glass or directly with the naked eye, you should forgo the SEM examination. When two methods are equally good, you should ALWAYS select the simpler one. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 08:20:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA24555; Fri, 8 May 1998 08:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 08:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355278C4.7E50CD7D ihug.co.nz> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 15:15:16 +1200 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Frequency - attention John Schnurer! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UlZ0V2.0.a_5.Y8oKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18453 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: What frequency should be used for the rotating magnetic field in a reproduction of Schnurer experiments? John Berry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 10:00:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA12736; Fri, 8 May 1998 09:49:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 09:49:23 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <35532528.3A1D math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 08:30:48 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Simon Says Science References: <199805081038_MC2-3C5F-21ED compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OuVJ93.0.p63.1UpKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18454 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > The stand alone self-heating device goes to the heart > of basic physics. I cannot imagine a more conclusive The only thing inconclusive is that if he simply encapsulates his existing device in a dewar and gets it to run in this mode, its not a self-"heating" device, its a self-"keeping a T = 150C reading on a thermocouple" device. That is, I'm just insisting that we focus on what is being measured, which is simply the temperature of a thermocouple junction inserted into (the reactive part) of his device. What I would like most is a system that does a demonstrable amount of work, like boiling away a certain amount of water. Barring that, I would like the system to heat a thermal reservoir (preferably a metal mass) to a measured temperature, since T measurements at a few points can fully charaterize the temp of a good conduction insulated from its surroundings....the primary steel cyclinder itself would probably serve this purpose, though aluminum would be better (better conductor). -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 10:03:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA14908; Fri, 8 May 1998 10:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD7A6A.FE9D84E0 pm3-157.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Frequency - attention John Schnurer! Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:20:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD7A6A.FEA52600" Resent-Message-ID: <"1miTF2.0.pe3.CepKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18456 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7A6A.FEA52600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: John Berry[SMTP:antigrav ihug.co.nz] Sent: Thursday, May 07, 1998 10:15 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Frequency - attention John Schnurer! >What frequency should be used for the rotating magnetic field in a >reproduction of Schnurer experiments? >John Berry Yes, I'd like to know also. John: are you interested in reproducing the Podkletnov and Schnurer superconductor experiments? It's what I'm working on trying. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7A6A.FEA52600 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjsPAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACkAAABSRTogRnJl cXVlbmN5IC0gYXR0ZW50aW9uIEpvaG4gU2NobnVyZXIhACAOAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcFAAgACgAUADkA BQA+AQEggAMADgAAAM4HBQAIAAoAEwAtAAUAMQEBCYABACEAAAA2RTVBRDlCMDU4RTZEMTExQTc1 RUU4RTAwQUMxMDAwMAAoBwEDkAYAFAQAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4A AAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AGAiquaUer0BHgBwAAEAAAApAAAAUkU6IEZyZXF1ZW5jeSAtIGF0dGVu dGlvbiBKb2huIFNjaG51cmVyIQAAAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABvXqU5qo0OsaE5lkR0ade6OAKwQAA AAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAAFwAAAHN0a0BzdW5oZXJhbGQuaW5maS5uZXQA AAMABhC4OTxSAwAHEHoBAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAtLS0tLS0tLS0tRlJPTTpKT0hOQkVSUllTTVRQ OkFOVElHUkFWQElIVUdDT05aU0VOVDpUSFVSU0RBWSxNQVkwNywxOTk4MTA6MTVQTVRPOlZPUlRF WC1MQEVTS0lNT0NPTVNVAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAdAIAAHACAAAYBQAATFpGdeQl/mH/AAoBDwIVAqQD 5AXrAoMAUBMDVAIAY2gKwHNldO4yBgAGwwKDMgPGBxMCg7ozEw19CoAIzwnZOxX/eDI1NQKACoEN sQtgbvBnMTAzFCALChQiDAEaYwBAIAqFCotsaTEEODAC0WktMTQ0zw3wDNAcwwtZMTYKoANg9nQF kAVALR7nCocdmwwwdR5mRgNhOh/uHmYMgiAoSm9oA6BCBJByeUBbU01UUDoAcHQCaQnAYXZAaWh1 hGcuBaAubnpdH4/fIJ0GYAIwIc8i21QlQBHgMGRheSwF0CpgIDBCNyqAMTk5OCsQMMA6MTUgUE0l 7yCdLFRvKC8i23YVoWV46C1sQAeQawdwJZAFoMZtK/8m/nViah6hLh+TItshgGVxClBuYyrA2C0g YQJAJ/FpAiAjlNpTEbBuCHAEkCEa7xvzbDM2HWcaOT45TR5mV08RwAVAA1A1lnNoCGBswGQgYmUg dRHwPTDzAhAFwHRoPWAecTYwC4AkZyAAwGduEgBpY/88MAiQPSELgDYgMS05zzrfZT5AZR5hZHUe sDaSb+pmNxcgMDBwBnEHgAIw/HM/N7xAH0EvOv4jqAqPmxoPSlJZB5AqgEknPTAFHCBrPWB0byBr bvZvB+AHQHMlkCOTM5AKwL09YHkIYD/BHpAWAHMekC8/s0M2PqI+ElAEcGtsaxIATaB2NiBuPTBE N3P+dUThBaBRwEORBbFEzwXAaEl0JwQgdzwCTNBt31TgBbAwoD6xNqF0JCA+oXIuN7xLeVFAB/BO IE3uYwdAHCBPgXI4Lzk+HmavWK8dZxLyWo8gFSEAXnADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAHMGBbaruU er0BQAAIMGBbaruUer0BHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAAFYh ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7A6A.FEA52600-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 10:02:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09961; Fri, 8 May 1998 09:58:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 09:58:42 -0700 Message-ID: <35532BAD.11FF earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 10:58:37 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com, js_vetrano@pnl.gov, mica world.std.com, drom@vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la utkux.utk.edu, orian001@maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti@aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani frascati.infn.it, opa@aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak nosc.mil, bossp@nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly mse.ogi.edu, dg@cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell lanl.gov, sphkoji@sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos juno.com, g-miley@uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti msn.com, design73@aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre qm.sri.com, tchubb@aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger eneco-usa.com, cincygrp@ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Blue: recent comments on CF research 05/08/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34D FC098.4EB3 earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6@earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@earth link.net> <34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F6 F8AA.1837 earthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D@earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthli! nk.! net> <3504077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <350 DAD0F.535F earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F@earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@eart hlink.net> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <3517 3888.2F66 earthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B@earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@eart! hli! nk.net> <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182@ earthlink.net> <3528718F.5388 earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> <3 52D3FA7.574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@ea rthlink.net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <3! 547! 586D.E74 eart! hlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> <354B3358.3FDD@e arthlink.net> <354B9371.1DB9 earthlink.net> <354BCF38.5CFB@earthlink.net> <354F1495.4471@earthlink.net> <354FEDB4.5E76@earthlink.net> <354FF100.18C@earthlink.net> <35508190.22B5@earthlink.net> <35508566.2DA4@earthlink.net> <35519D00.74DD@earthlink.net> <3 55243E9.4AB6 earthlink.net> <3553215A.433D@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1l-vK3.0.0R2.-cpKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18457 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Subject: Re: Rothwell: Kurtz: complexity of CF replication 05/02/98 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 10:13:58 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Jed Rothwell gives us a perfect demonstration of the degree to which "Cold Fusion" has strayed into the realm of pathological science. According to Jed all attempts at replication of CF experimental claims that fail to reproduce the claimed effect are flawed. Tom Droege, for example, not being an expert in electrochemistry could not possibly have met the requirements for successful replication while working in his basement laboratory. Never mind the fact that he demonstrated a better understanding of calorimetry and experimental science in general than 97% of those claiming CF success. Regardless, since he is not an accepted member of Jed's selected CF experts, we are ask to reject his results. In such a climate it becomes impossible for the scientific community to reach a clear resolution of any outstanding questions. There is little point for anyone to attempt to improve upon the experiments that have been presented because, according to Jed Rothwell, they must replicate in great detail the successes claimed by others. That leaves us with little to work with other than a more critical examination of what is being said by those whose techniques are certified correct by Jed Rothwell, an acknowledged expert in these matters. So consider Mike McKubre's report that he personally logged 100,000 hours of electrolysis that yielded NO excess heat. Now that is a result that has been replicated by many others that, it seems to me, Jed Rothwell must accept as valid. Ultimately Jed Rothwell's failure as a scientist stems from his lack of understanding of the significant fact that no single observation stands alone. Each result must be integrated into the existing body of knowledge. Cold fusion advocates have, in general, been profoundly unsuccessful in this regard. They simply do not make good sense when they attempt to discuss their observations in a larger context. They want to suggest that there is a real physical process that can account for their observations, but they will not be trapped into stating a testable hypothesis as to what that process may be. So we get these highly improbably multi-body reactions that can't account for any of the observations anyway. Jed's current favorites on the experimental side of CF may have expensive instruments in well equipped laboratories, but their thoughts on cold fusion continue to be laced with total absurdities. The investigators shouldn't attempt to skirt the basic facts. If there is a nuclear reaction process that accounts for 10's, 100's or even 1000's of watts of power it will be detectable by rather direct means. Since there is not one single example of a CF experiment that correctly addresses a nuclear reaction hypothesis we can pretty well reach a general negative conclusion regarding all claims in this area. Finding iron on gold electrodes following electrolysis does not constitute proof that gold has been transformed into iron. It makes no difference how skilled the testing laboratory may be that determines the presence of iron. You cannot ignore the fact that gold has a significantly higher ratio of neutrons to protons than does iron. Simply put you cannot convert gold to iron as claimed. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Mallove: Case papent application 05/12/97 05/02/98 Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 12:23:35 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net What's wrong with this picture? Plenty! First Case suggests that his results are similar to those of Yamaguchi. That is bad news for Case because the Yamaguchi claims were clearly bogus, the simple result of driving the RGA into an overload condition. It was one very clear example of someone torturing their instrument until it confessed. Of course, once Yamaguchi's data was released for all to see his employer, NTT, was embarrassed by what was revealed and Dr. Yamaguchi's CF investigations came to an end. I suspect Case's results are indeed similar to Yamaguchi's Now isn't it convenient that the sample Case sent for helium analysis was contaminated as a result of careless handling? Still we are supposed to accept the result. This process, according to Case, converts deuterium into helium. The big hitch, however, remains the claim that Case repeats that the reaction is d + d -> 4He + 24 MeV. How does Case get away with just rewriting nuclear physics to suit his fancy? The is a ton of evidence to contradict the Case assertion that the alternative branches p + tritium and n + 3He can be driven to zero with "no conflict with theory." At this point Case is blatantly misstating facts. There is a clear conflict with theory at this point and a clear conflict with valid experimental observations. What Case is overlooking is that having arrived at the outcome "4He + 24 MeV" does not end the reaction process. That 24 MeV, as he acknowledges, is a heck of a lot of energy and it permits, indeed demands, something further. That something further is not going to be just some hot gas as Case suggests. The 4He nucleus formed by fusion must deexcite. It must dump that 24 MeV by some real physical process, not just something Case dreamed up. So ultimately Case will be brought down by his own absurd claim that he has induced the "most energetic reaction ever created by man on a macroscopic scale." Dick Blue Subject: Re: Mallove: Taubes CF critique 05/05/98 Date: Wed, 6 May 1998 09:55:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Somehow, I fail to note in the Mallove commentary on Taubes as a science reporter anything to indicate that Taubes actually got the cold fusion story wrong. Things just have not been going the way Gene Mallove has repeatedly predicted. Now we can sit back to see how long the Mallove enthusiasm for the Case results lasts. Seems like this claim is being laid to rest rather quickly. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Rothwell: Case's run inside dewar 05/06/98 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:37:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > Case is now fabricating a Dewar-within-a-Dewar for his next test, kind > of like > a Russian doll-within-a-doll. He hopes this will be well enough > insulated so > that he can reduce input to zero, perhaps with a little more catalyst. > He > wants to proceed directly to a self-heating test, rather than trying to > evaluate these results, calibrating, or running a dummy with this > temporary > arrangement. I think that is a wise course of action. One could learn a > great > deal about the cell performance by "interrogating" this temporary Dewar > calorimeter with various tests. but it is more important to proceed to > the > ultimate test. The new calorimeter, looked at from inside to outside, > will > consist of: > temperature of the steel flask and carbon to ~200 deg C, how long should > it > take to cool? > > I am not sure of the mass of the steel, or the thermal mass of carbon, > but I > suppose you approximate by pretending the whole thing is 20 moles of > iron (1.1 > kg). I believe the molar heat capacity of iron is ~26 J/mole/degrees. > That is > from John Logajan's "Thermodynamic Scorecard," Revision 1.4 for Ni, and > from > the Dulong-Petit law: "the gram-atomic heat capacity (specific heat > times > atomic weight) of an element is a constant; that is, it is the same for > all > solid elements, about six calories per gram atom." (Britannica) This was > formulated in 1814 and it is now considered an approximation for > "metallic > elements at intermediately high temperatures." Anyway, to cool 20 moles > of > iron from 200 deg C to 20 deg C you have to lose ~93,600 joules. I will > not > attempt to grapple with emissivity for *two* Dewar barriers, or the > Stefan-Boltzman radiation law, or cooling curves. As a gross > approximation > let's say the thing loses 20 watts from 200 to 100 deg C. It better be > ~20 > watts or it will not work. Anyway, in that case it should cool down to > 100 deg > C, losing 52,000 joules in about . . . 43 minutes. I would say if it > stays at > 200 deg C for 24 hours we can declare victory. > > hundreds of non-performing blank runs in which H and D produced the same > temperature +/- 1 deg C. Perhaps this calorimeter is not as crude as we > think. > > - Jed > What's crude here is not just the calorimeter but rather the entire experimental design. Case is repeating many of the mistakes that have characterized far too many CF investigations when what is definitely called for are experiments that can yield more definitive results. Again we see the notion that "hundreds of non-performing blank runs" establish the basic validity of the calorimetry. All this establishes is that we have more poorly controlled experimentation contributing to the general muddle. Then there is the notion that one can begin to dial down the input heat source with the expectation that some unspecified reaction will make itself evident as the system becomes "self-sustaining." As I have pointed out before there is no evidence and no rational for even suggesting that a CF process can be made self-sustaining. All the evidence that suggests a total lack of any energetic reaction products indicates the contrary. CF advocates have actually painted themselves into a tight little box on just this question. If heat is the only output there isn't much happening to influence the reaction process to make it become "self-sustaining." Finally the notion that one "proves" a nuclear heat source by a process of elimination should be seen as a significant short coming for the design of any CF experiment. What Case is busily "proving" is that he can't do calorimetry any better than most CF experimenters. Jed Rothwell certainly shows his strips when he suggests that if this collection of junk stays hot longer than he estimates it should he will declare victory. It will be just one more very hollow victory at best. The actual test for cold fusion remains what it has always been. If you don't produce neutrons you don't have cold fusion. End of story! It's really very simple to make a definitive CF measurement. This saga of bad science began precisely at the point where the advocates decided they could select the "no radiation" option for their version of physics. As an aside, can anyone explain to me why chemists think a catalyst designed for chemistry should enhance a nuclear reaction process? The vast majority of chemical reactions don't exhibit such behavior. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 10:06:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA12821; Fri, 8 May 1998 09:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 09:49:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 08:43:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"hKZ3X2.0.A83.QUpKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18455 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: A few comments on Vince's latest; 1) ...the microwave oven supply I rescued is 1/2 wave (single diode), > with a .6 mfd oil filled 2600 volt filter cap. It is, in it's present >configuration, just about perfect. Actually for your load with all that nice resistive ballast, you should have about 5 microF of filter capacitance to bring down the ripple to the order of 5% or less. 2) ...the upper W electrode was running almost at white heat. >Just perfect for busting up H2. Lower electrode not glowing at all. This >is with lower electrode positive. If I reverse polarity the lower electrode >gets really hot while the upper stays cool. I want the upper W electrode >hot because thats where Mills says the most H atoms will be. This snip from your post illustrates that the thermal power varies greatly along the length of your tube. Where should one measure the tube wall temperature in order to get useful experimental data? Eventually you will have to get into calorimetry. 3) You probably have voltage spikes. You might have exceeded the limit of your Simpson meter when you tried to measure the tube voltage directly. The solution is to make a voltage divider. It's safer, too. If you don't know how, then we should get together off line. 4) To measure tube current, insert your ammeter between your presently grounded electrode and ground. (For safety, always insert yur ammeter in a low potential lead.) 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 May 8 10:37:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26123; Fri, 8 May 1998 10:32:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:32:37 -0700 Message-ID: <355333B2.3556 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 11:32:50 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, vortex-L@eskimo.com, js_vetrano@pnl.gov, mica world.std.com, drom@vxcern.cern.ch, cgbeaudett@aol.com, la utkux.utk.edu, orian001@maroon.tc.umn.edu, coppedge students.uiuc.edu, go4ceti@aol.com, mokuniewsk@aol.com, celani frascati.infn.it, opa@aps.org, akito@nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp, szpak nosc.mil, bossp@nosc.mil, dashj@psu4.pdx.edu, jstanly mse.ogi.edu, dg@cco.caltech.edu, collis@netcity.it, ell lanl.gov, sphkoji@sci.shizuoka.ac.jp, jdunn@ctc.org, bakealamos juno.com, g-miley@uiuc.edu, mizuno@qe.eng.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti msn.com, design73@aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mike_mckubre qm.sri.com, tchubb@aol.com, chubb@ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil, jaeger eneco-usa.com, cincygrp@ix.netcom.com, nagel@dave.nrl.navy.mil, jjones ebs330.eb.uah.edu, norm.olson@pnl.gov, miles@nhelab.iae.or.jp, z ccyber.com, ldhansen@chemdept.byu.edu, 76002.1473@compuserve.com, wolfy2 erols.com, rwall@ix.netcom.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, kirk.shanahan srs.gov, blue@pilot.msu.edu, sejones@physics1.ln.byu.edu, terry4 llnl.gov, wireless@amigo.net, ikegami@nifs.ac.jp, takahashi bnlarm.bnl.gov, kitamura@cc.kshosen.ac.jp, bressani to.infn.it, sanchez@bosque.sdi.uam.es, tsarev@x4u.lebedev.ru, msrini mAgnum.BARCT1.ERNET.IN, iwamura@atrc.mhi.co.jp, lipson lmm.phyche.msk.su, p.hodgson1@physics.oxford.ac.uk, zqwei ns.lzb.ac.cn, mac@iae.or.jp, TPASSELL@epri.com Subject: Tessein: Blue: McKubre claims rare CF heat 05/08/98 References: <34AA67B2.3230 earthlink.net> <34AC64F1.20B9@earthlink.net> <34AC6C86.6EA6@earthlink.net> <34AEFCFB.39E1@earthlink.net> <34B0F513.24A8@earthlink.net> <34B1C4B2.72F0@earthlink.net> <34B5A2F4.6506@earthlink.net> <34B65404.6276@earthlink.net> <34 BC2AB6.77F7 earthlink.net> <34BC36BC.CB5@earthlink.net> <34BCDCAF.A1B@earthlink.net> <34BD9AC3.31D4@earthlink.net> <34BEAB94.73FC@earthlink.net> <34C04660.47AF@earthlink.net> <34C04DA2.16AC@earthlink.net> <34C439DD.75C8@earthlink.net> <34C578C0.1C32@earth link.net> <34C6779A.369C earthlink.net> <34C7EAEC.AC6@earthlink.net> <34C822AB.5B9B@earthlink.net> <34C8B094.6977@earthlink.net> <34CD670D.1E0C@earthlink.net> <34CDFF1B.34D4@earthlink.net> <34CF224E.1014@earthlink.net> <34D01AC2.216A@earthlink.net> <34D31 63E.3C13 earthlink.net> <34D400B8.260@earthlink.net> <34D51CDA.4E43@earthlink.net> <34D5E39A.4B46@earthlink.net> <34D5E553.29FA@earthlink.net> <34D6A346.5E02@earthlink.net> <34D88B9E.1BAD@earthlink.net> <34D8995A.78A4@earthl! ink.net> <34D8F09C.6BDA earthlink.net> <34D9D680.4B88@earthlink.net> <34D9DF18.5206@earthlink.net> <34DA96D5.49DA@earthlink.net> <34 DFC098.4EB3 earthlink.net> <34DFCF2E.4FE6@earthlink.net> <34DFD6A4.4BCA@earthlink.net> <34E086C2.5227@earthlink.net> <34E27F36.156@earthlink.net> <34E5922F.370A@earthlink.net> <34E8CD5D.7940@earthlink.net> <34E915C4.3864@earthlink.net> <34EA1D9E.2872@eart hlink.net> <34EADEA7.1CF3 earthlink.net> <34ED1648.168C@earthlink.net> <34EDE6E0.5C23@earthlink.net> <34EE024C.3E82@earthlink.net> <34F1946E.4897@earthlink.net> <34F237E4.7DF5@earthlink.net> <34F36D92.7482@earthlink.net> <34F6F61E.7D86@earthlink.net> <34F 6F8AA.1837 earthlink.net> <34F73CC1.437D@earthlink.net> <34F73E74.655@earthlink.net> <34F8C76A.74D0@earthlink.net> <34FEFD1A.5D33@earthlink.net> <3501CB77.7E3@earthlink.net> <3501CC8C.1074@earthlink.net> <350200D5.F6E@earthl! ink.! net> <3504077! A.4714 earthlink.net> <35048733.! 2BD4 earthlink.net> <3507265A.6688@earthlink..net> <3507E849..71E9@earthlink..net> <3507F075.5FAF@earthlink.net> <3509754E.71A@earthlink.net> <350B46CB.738D@earthlink.net> <350D875E.5C59@earthlink.net> <35 0DAD0F.535F earthlink.net> <350EF2C0.638F@earthlink.net> <350F1C98.6C7C@earthlink.net> <350FE66B.74C2@earthlink.net> <3511F4E8.12B5@earthlink.net> <35129B81.6DB7@earthlink.net> <3512DE75.2B4E@earthlink.net> <3513C4D6.207D@earthlink.net> <351467AE.524F@ear thlink.net> <35146962.45DB earthlink.net> <35151676.330F@earthlink.net> <3515D3D7.4EEF@earthlink.net> <3515FDDC.3919@earthlink.net> <35166389.35FD@earthlink.net> <3516808F.7FAD@earthlink.net> <35168284.325A@earthlink.net> <35173624.F60@earthlink.net> <351 73888.2F66 earthlink.net> <3517D0D2.576B@earthlink.net> <3517D8AC.15FE@earthlink.net> <35191A32.79D0@earthlink.net> <35192280.59F7@earthlink.net> <351927C2.1C1C@earthlink.net> <35197EE9.6774@earthlink.net> <351983F1.52DC@ear! thli! nk.net> <351A! 738A.59CE earthlink.net> <351A74! 6E.67E9 earthlink.net> <351ADCAD.78D2@earthlink.net> <351BAFC3.7B8B@ea <3523C6B3.6AEA@earthlink.net> <35251068.4288@earthlink.net> <35255F6F.6217@earthlink.net> <3527D6BB.37C1@earthlink.net> <3527DFFB.2182 earthlink.net> <3528718F.5388@earthlink.net> <35295715.694D@earthlink.net> <352A2E93.17BE@earthlink.net> <352AA64B.E50@earthlink.net> <352AA9F2.EBB@earthlink.net> <352B6BEE.5F90@earthlink.net> <352B76FF.3C9C@earthlink.net> <352C5551.6DBB@earthlink.net> < 352D3FA7.574F earthlink.net> <35327BAA.2E6E@earthlink.net> <35329E68.1536@earthlink.net> <3533F74A.21BB@earthlink.net> <35357A0D.2BCC@earthlink.net> <353680E3.6267@earthlink.net> <35381CFA.4B05@earthlink.net> <353BBEA3.3243@earthlink.net> <35409075.6E1F@e arthlink.net> <3543B3C7.77C3 earthlink.net> <3543B906.AEB@earthlink.net> <35455771.16CF@earthlink.net> <3545693F.1230@earthlink.net> <35466C4B.5AE1@earthlink.net> <35474634.1CFE@earthlink.net> <35474AE6.7659@earthlink.net> <35479DAF.5C14 earthlink..net> <35487A2D.7A70@earthlink.net> <35487CEB.4BB5@earthlink.net> <3548F9AB.78DE@earthlink.net> <354947BC.5560@earthlink.net> <3549CAF4.12F3@earthlink.net> <354B0ECC.4585@earthlink.net> <354B3358.3FDD@ earthlink.net> <354B9371.1DB9 earthlink.net> <354BCF38.5CFB@earthlink.net> <354F1495.4471@earthlink.net> <354FEDB4.5E76@earthlink.net> <354FF100.18C@earthlink.net> <35508190.22B5@earthlink.net> <35508566.2DA4@earthlink.net> <35519D00.74DD@earthlink.net> < 355243E9.4AB6 earthlink.net> <3553215A.433D@earthlink.net> <35532BAD.11FF@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MczLo2.0.dN6.l6qKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18458 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [Note by Rich Murray: jagged lines in this post in Netscape 3.0 can be fixed by dragging the mail reading box wider.] Subject: Re: Blue: recent comments on CF research 05/08/98 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:23:09 -0700 From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien) To: rmforall earthlink.net CC: "Richard A Blue" So consider Mike >McKubre's report that he personally logged 100,000 hours >of electrolysis that yielded NO excess heat. Now that is >a result that has been replicated by many others that, >it seems to me, Jed Rothwell must accept as valid. Blue uses this as "evidence" in favor of the conclusion that CF does not produce reproducible results, and in support of others who try to replicate CF phenomena and fail. But, if you speak directly to McKubre, you know that along with all of those hours of failed tests, that he is absolutely convinced that many other tests DID succeed. I have spoken with him personally at SRI, so I can make this statment from first hand information. McKubre puts it very plainly and succinctly in stating that there is no doubt in his mind that there is a bonified excess heat produced in a wide number of devices, but that there are a large number of very detailed ways the electrodes must be treated and conditioned prior to any expectation of getting the CF phenomena to manifest. Thus, the fact that McKubre spent all of those hours without success on a variety of cells, is instead, proof that no individual could be reasonably expected to replicate the CF process simply by putting in a bunch of hours. To do so requires not only putting in the hours, but learning exactly how to load D into the lattice of the Pd, etc. etc. etc. It took a long time to learn how to do that, and without doing it properly a person will get nothing. But once they do it right, they get results. My objection here is in Blue using McKubre's fruitless hours as some sort of evidence "proving" that CF is bogus. All McKubres hours can be used to claim is that the odds are stacked very much against anyone who attempts to replicate CF, and thus it degrades the credibility of those who claim it doesn't work. Just the opposite of how Blue intended the usage. His claim above makes it sound as though McKubre put in all those hours and NEVER got it to work, which is incorrect. Many of McKubre's tests DID work and DID produce more heat by far, than can be accounted for via chemical reactions. To go into more detail than this opens up the entire CF controversial door, but clearly the hours spent without success are more a matter of proving that novice's in the field are less likely to succeed than those who are experienced, regardless of their care or expertise. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 10:48:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA23580; Fri, 8 May 1998 10:45:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 10:45:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:40:12 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: If it's hot it's work Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805081342_MC2-3C60-BC54 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"_XtWp1.0.Hm5.wIqKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18459 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Barry Merriman writes: The only thing inconclusive is that if he simply encapsulates his existing device in a Dewar and gets it to run in this mode, its not a self-"heating" device, it's a self-"keeping a T = 150C reading on a thermocouple" device. We will ensure that the thermocouple is reading the actual temperature with one or more of the methods I outlined earlier. A body can only maintain a higher temperature than the surroundings when it produces steady heat internally. That is, I'm just insisting that we focus on what is being measured, which is simply the temperature of a thermocouple junction inserted into (the reactive part) of his device. What I would like most is a system that does a demonstrable amount of work, like boiling away a certain amount of water. Barry, you are missing a fundamental point! If the cell stays hot, it *is* doing work. That is the First Law of Thermodynamics: "heat is work and work is heat" (S&F, 1963). The Second Law, "heat cannot of itself pass from one body to a hotter body" (S&F), assures us that the heat cannot be coming from outside the cell. I honestly think you should take a deep breath and think about the most basic scientific laws that apply to this situation. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 11:51:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02735; Fri, 8 May 1998 11:45:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 11:45:11 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: Viewing JPGs Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 14:46:12 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd7ab1$92aeef20$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"2k-k62.0.fg.qArKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18460 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Steck wrote: >Get it into the PC world? Hey guys, a browser is all that is needed. Just >drag the JPG into your browser window. If it still can not be read, the file >is corrupt. - I tend to agree with you on this, but we don't know how old the Mac software is that wrote this jpg file. Early JPEG software had many compatibility problems between programs, even on the same platform. The byte order is still a problem on tif files with different flavors on Mac and PC. - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 12:10:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06272; Fri, 8 May 1998 12:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 12:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:02:10 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Four requests for Rich Murray Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805081503_MC2-3C5F-736C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"PcdxA.0.tX1.QVrKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18461 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:rmforall earthlink.net Dear Rich, I have four requests to make of you. I have made three of them previous but you did not respond. I expect you will ignore me again, but here goes: 1. Please refrain from posting inflammatory, ad hominem attacks written by Richard Blue and others on Vortex. If Dr. Blue would like to participate in the discussions on Vortex he is welcome to post messages directly. 2. Please read the manual for your e-mail handler and eliminate the gigantic header messages showing all of the people you are sending messages to. Talbot Chubb and others have asked you to do this. You are wasting a terrific amount of bandwidth. I ask you because you have defeated my automatic filing system. My program automatically deletes Internet header information and files messages, but your headings are so long and so wide (greater than 132 characters), the program fails every time and I have to manually edit the file to fix the problem. 3. Read the manual some more and learn how to handle messages with 80 column lines. In one of your messages you mentioned something about setting a reader to stretch lines. This will not work for many people because these messages go through plain ASCII e-mail transmission. 4. If it is all the same with you, kindly refrain from cross posting my messages on sci.physics.fusion or anywhere else. People who want to know what I think are welcome to this forum, or to our web page www.infinite-energy.com, or the magazine. Those who wish to respond or dispute my assertions should come here, and they should abide by the rules of civil academic discourse. I think Blue has violated these rules. Let me illustrate with a few of the statements Blue made, which you posted here: Tom Droege, for example, not being an expert in electrochemistry could not possibly have met the requirements for successful replication while working in his basement laboratory. Never mind the fact that he demonstrated a better understanding of calorimetry and experimental science in general than 97% of those claiming CF success. Regardless, since he is not an accepted member of Jed's selected CF experts, we are ask to reject his results. This is an evasion. I made specific assertions about Droege's electrochemical technique, based upon statements made by Droege's collaborator Tibbals. Blue should address the points I made. I said that macroscopic contamination and organic foreign matter will have a large effect on any electrochemical experiment, and they will doom a cold fusion experiment. Blue should address the point or refrain from commenting. Let me add that I am pleased Blue is trying to keep the discussion quantitative, but I would like to know where he got this 97% figure. So consider Mike McKubre's report that he personally logged 100,000 hours of electrolysis that yielded NO excess heat. Now that is a result that has been replicated by many others that, it seems to me, Jed Rothwell must accept as valid. An absurd distortion. Of course I accept the fact that McKubre logged a hundred thousand hours without excess heat. He also logged hundreds of hours in more than 40 experiments that DID yield excess heat, some of it 300% excess. He characterized the heat as "neither small nor fleeting." The positive experiments should be the focus of our attention. Dick Blue pretends they do not exist. I am perfectly willing to accept a hundred thousand hours with no heat; Blue will not admit there have been 5 minutes of excess heat. Rich Murray, who posted this message on Vortex, promised that he would check messages for civility and a minimum level of content. Did he not recognize that these statements about McKubre constitute a fatuous distortion? Has Murray read anything about McKubre's work; was he under the impression that McKubre has never seen excess heat? I do not understand why anyone familiar with the CF literature would cross post these messages. I do not see how this raises the level of dialog here, or contributes to the discussion. Then there is the notion that one can begin to dial down the input heat source with the expectation that some unspecified reaction will make itself evident as the system becomes "self-sustaining." As I have pointed out before there is no evidence and no rational for even suggesting that a CF process can be made self-sustaining. There *is* evidence, and we do not need a rationale. Heat after death evidence shows that CF experiments can be self sustaining. All gas loaded cells are self sustaining by definition; the only reason we want to back off the heater power is to ensure there is no mistake in the calorimetry. The statement "no rationale for even suggesting" implies that we must have a theoretical reason before we believe experimental evidence. If Blue wishes to make this assertion he should come here and make it, and I might suggest counter-examples from the history of science. If Rich Murray wishes to assert this he should do so directly, rather than by proxy. Jed Rothwell certainly shows his strips when he suggests that if this collection of junk stays hot longer than he estimates it should he will declare victory. It will be just one more very hollow victory at best. This is inflammatory. I believe it is a violation of Laws of Thermodynamics, as I pointed out to Barry Merriman. If Dr. Blue can assemble a collection of junk that exhibits the behavior we describe, he should do so. He will win a Noble Prize for this remarkable demonstration. The actual test for cold fusion remains what it has always been. If you don't produce neutrons you don't have cold fusion. End of story! Yes, we know that is how Blue and Morrison define the issue. They do not believe aneutronic fusion is possible. Everyone knows that is their point of view, so Rich Murray should not take the trouble to inform us here. I see no point in repeating these assertions without elaboration. This is another over generalized statement, made without reference to specific theory paper by Chubb, Preparata, Hagelstein or others who have proposed mechanisms for aneutronic fusion. (Everyone also knows that I assert the "heat beyond chemistry" test is valid, so I only bring it up when the context demands, with appropriate elaboration, in direct response to specific comments, for example when Merriman and Schaffer wondered why Case it attempting a self-heater experiment. Blue's point about neutrons has never eluded me or Fleischmann or anyone else. We acknowledge it, and move on. If Merriman and Schaffer respond to me: "I understand why you think the First and Second law make this a good test, but I disagree for thus and such a reason," I will acknowledge their point of view and drop the subject. We would agree to disagree. That, I think, would be the wisest way to deal with the neutron controversy.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 13:13:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA17557; Fri, 8 May 1998 13:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 12:09:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Resent-Message-ID: <"f2uLy2.0.FI4.sRsKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18463 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:40 PM 5/8/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >Barry, you are missing a fundamental point! If the cell stays hot, it *is* >doing work. That is the First Law of Thermodynamics: "heat is work and work is >heat" (S&F, 1963). The Second Law, "heat cannot of itself pass from one body >to a hotter body" (S&F), assures us that the heat cannot be coming from >outside the cell. > >I honestly think you should take a deep breath and think about the most basic >scientific laws that apply to this situation. Amen. Jed is right beyond any reasonable doubt here. In thermodynamics heat is defined as an interaction between the system and its surroundings occuring at the boundary of the system because of a temperature difference or temperature gradient across the boundary. Heat *is* work. To demonstrate that work was not occuring in a self heating Case device with a 150 C plus internal temperature you would have to show that some part of the boundary of the device was above the internal temperature. Except for a faulty internal temperature measurement, that seems to be about the most hopeless argument imaginable. As to how much work is being done, that can be calibrated by using a Joule heater inside the steel container. Steel has about 1000 times the thermal heat conductivity (460 mw/(cm*Deg K)) compared to fiberglass (0.4 mw/(cm*Deg K)), so a thermocouple on the side of or near the steel container boundary should provide a reasonable reading provided the Joule heater is not in direct low resistance thermal contact with the steel container near the thermocouple. That is to say assuming the Joule heater is located within the steel container at the approximate location of the catalyst, and the thermocouple located outside and to the side. Regardless of the placement of the thermocouple, and the possible presence of hot spots, calibration will correlate temperature at a specific thermocouple location to heat (work, i.e. watts of electrical power). Not much accuracy is needed, because adding run time can eliminate any precision based arquments. This is basically in agreement with Barry's view of insulation effects on temperature measurement, but not his method: At 8:30 AM 5/8/98, Barry Merriman wrote: [snip] >Barring that, I would like the system to heat a thermal >reservoir (preferably a metal mass) to a measured temperature, since >T measurements at a few points can fully charaterize the temp >of a good conduction insulated from its surroundings....the >primary steel cyclinder itself would probably serve this >purpose, though aluminum would be better (better conductor). This method would cool the steel container too much for the device to work, true? The technical problem in achieving self-heating thus far has been getting the ratio of (heat producing volume)(thermal resistance)/(insulation area) high enough. Adding a non heat producing volume inside the insulation would defeat the advantage recently gained. If the device (including insulation and dewar) is produing 30 watts of heat, placing it in a calorimeter might meet Barry's objective. Sounds like a dual method calorimeter is being called for (again). Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 13:11:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA06410; Fri, 8 May 1998 13:07:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:07:09 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:02:58 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: If it's hot it's work Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805081606_MC2-3C61-B2E0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"8d73S3.0._Z1.iNsKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18462 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Barry Merriman responded to my comments. His message may have come to me via direct e-mail, but perhaps he copied it here. (My auto-file program sometimes makes it hard to tell.) Anyway there is nothing personal in it, so I'd like to quote it partially and respond. He wrote: At an arbitrarily small rate....i.e., ideally it is possible to heat up a body, insulate it perfectly, and its temperature will never drop. No work done at all after the initial heat input. Yes, of course. Ideally. But not in the real world with real materials. Everyone knows that a Dewar is not "perfect insulation." They always cool down. Scott Little was kind enough to compute how quickly this particular one is likely to cool, based on first principles and the emissivity of silver. Frankly, I do not understand why you make this statement. It is like saying, "ideally it is possible to make a perpetual motion machine, spin a wheel with a friction free bearing in a perfect vacuum." Yes, but there are no friction free bearings or perfect vacuums in the universe. In practice, heat may be lost at a rate made arbitrarily small by insulation . . . It cannot be made "arbitrarily" small with one or two Dewars! Unless you have some reliable way of estimating the thermal energy content of the device and/or the rate of heat loss . . . Let us assume the worst case and say the thermal energy content is equivalent to a kilogram of pressurized water at 200 deg C. Actually, steel and carbon hold far less energy than water. For the heat loss we will take Little's estimate based on first principles. That should be extremely reliable, albeit imprecise, unless you found a mistake in his equations. Do you dispute the Stefan-Boltzman radiation law? Actually, I know he is more or less right because I have tested Dewar vessels. Are you under the impression that a thermos of coffee remains hot for two weeks? (An old fashioned thermos bottle is a Dewar.) . . . you cannot make any rigorous statement about O/U based on observed temperature. My assertion that a thermos of coffee will cool in less than two weeks is extremely rigorous. It can be tested by anyone in any home or laboratory, including you. It proves my point *beyond any rational doubt*. Try it! Do the experiment and report back. Please do not argue with me about a phenomenon you can see for yourself in a few hours. If you believe a Dewar constitutes "perfect insulation" that allows you to "arbitrarily" set an insulation value, test this assertion and post your results here. I have tested Dewars by filling them with boiling water and measuring the heat decay curve. The best Dewar with the tightest lid will not keep a small body at 200 deg C for 2 weeks. Not even 2 days or 2 hours. Test one and you *will* see the temperature drop, I guarantee it. I fear that your are building a case for "plausible deniablilty" should the Case experiment succeed. You are ignoring the laws of thermodynamics and pretending that a thermos bottle is "perfect insulation" which can trap heat forever. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 13:16:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA08030; Fri, 8 May 1998 13:13:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:13:30 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08EA xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:12:58 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"TCncf3.0.Jz1.fTsKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18464 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert What is a muf? Is it a nanofarad? 10^-9Farads? Hank > ---------- > From: Robert I. Eachus[SMTP:eachus mitre.org] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, May 07, 1998 2:58 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > At 05:23 PM 5/7/98 -0400, George Holz wrote: > > >It must have been quite a large current in the tube. > about 150 ma. > > I have observed > >relaxation oscillations at 1 ma current all the way down to 100 pF > >parallel capacitance. > > Scaling 150 ma, you would expect oscillations at 15000 pF = .015 > muF? > Seems low to me. If you want to recommend 0.1 muF, okay, but my > experience leads me to suspect that 0.5 muF would be minimal given > Vince's > configuration. > > > The stability of a capacitively loaded > >glow discharge is extremely difficult to predict. At uA currents, > >oscillation may be present with total capacitance loading of perhaps > >10 pF. Of course, many of the tubes I have worked with have very > >small (display pixel size) discharge spaces. One tube was > >designed to self-scan in the relaxation oscillation mode with > >one discharge per scanned cathode at 20 pF loading. It would > >scan properly down to average currents of 30 uA. > > Yep, we've been working in different worlds. In my world, > anything > under a kilowatt was a toy or a test circut. > > 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 May 8 13:25:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA19672; Fri, 8 May 1998 13:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 12:21:10 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Resent-Message-ID: <"ZWIgB3.0.Ip4.wcsKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18465 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just wrote: "If the device (including insulation and dewar) is produing 30 watts of heat, placing it in a calorimeter might meet Barry's objective. Sounds like a dual method calorimeter is being called for (again)." It should have read: "If the device (including insulation and dewar) is producing 30 J of heat per second, placing it in a calorimeter might meet Barry's objective. Sounds like a dual method calorimeter is being called for (again)." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 13:41:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15888; Fri, 8 May 1998 13:38:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 13:38:34 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 12:38:29 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Resent-Message-ID: <"dMekI.0.9u3.9rsKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18466 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "Regardless of the placement of the thermocouple, and the possible presence of hot spots, calibration will correlate temperature at a specific thermocouple location to heat (work, i.e. watts of electrical power)." Sorry again, it should have said: "Regardless of the placement of the thermocouple, and the possible presence of hot spots, calibration will correlate temperature at a specific thermocouple location minus external temperature to heat (work) produced per second, i.e. to joules of heat produced per second, or to watts of power." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 14:33:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA29240; Fri, 8 May 1998 14:26:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 14:26:57 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 21:24:27 +0000 Message-ID: <19980508212424.AAA13379 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"jqCCq.0.c87.RYtKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18467 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What is the price we pay for space heroes? Is it worth $40 billion to get what probes could get easier. See Van Allen comments. http://www.ruddynews.com/apr19.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 14:57:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA04403; Fri, 8 May 1998 14:49:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 14:49:58 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08EC xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 14:49:14 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"EpCzR3.0.i41.5utKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18469 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince If you have a another meter, you can measure the resistance of the Simpson, and add a resistor in series to change its scale. Adding a resistor of the same value you measure should double the voltage range of the meter, and other values scale linearly. Hank > ---------- > From: VCockeram[SMTP:VCockeram aol.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, May 07, 1998 11:28 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > In a message dated 98-05-07 17:35:57 EDT, you write: > > I am assuming, of course, that Vince will learn to measure > > power input to the discharge at the tube terminals instead of the > AC > > line...... > > Michael J. Schaffer > > You assume correctly. I am starting slowly here due a fried Simpson > 260 > (well I havn't taken it apart yet so maybe the internal fuse blew) > that was > across the supply output with no load...damn! But yes, I will get > there > eventually. > > Vince > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 15:18:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00015; Fri, 8 May 1998 14:36:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 14:36:30 -0700 Message-ID: <35536D01.22E earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 15:37:21 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Rothwell: reposting by Murray 05/08/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XrFl9.0.q_7.RhtKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18468 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: May 8, 1998 Hello Jed Rothwell and Vortexans, I admit Jed is right about most of his points. I will be happy to respect his choice for me to never forward his posts to sci.physics.fusion or my long private lists or to anyone else, but I hope he will reconsider, because most of his posts are very cogent and useful. For instance, can I, or would Jed please forward his post to blue pilot.msu.edu? Now, Jed expresses fiercely a point of view, rational and emotional, as does Blue, and this can border on ad hominem incivility, but in the examples that Rothwell quotes, Blue is not actually over that line. He is talking from his bias, to be sure. For instance, McKubre has not proved to him that his rare heat excursions are compelling evidence for CF, a position expressed to me by other fairly objective players, which I also hold, because who knows what artifacts might rarely happen in a complex calorimeter. Of course, given unknown new physics, anything might happen, including aneutronic nuclear reactions. I have posted the idea, surely outlandish for most, that psychokinetic effects may be involved-- the openminded may want to read Dr. Dean Radin's "The Conscious Universe", for a very competent overview on the results of sober, well replicated "ESP" research. So, I don't actually agree with Blue's "no neutrons, thus no CF" line, but I am sympathetic with it, and am sure it expresses the view of probably 95% of physicists, and on that ground alone, deserves to be written and read, because that is the mindset that has not been successfully met in the past nine years. Even Fleischmann commented at ICCF-7 that the bane of CF was the lack of a replicable demonstration of any effect, heat, radiation of any kind, transmutation products, or specfic nuclear reaction processes. So, I feel no need to comment on or correct on the content of most posts, because I judge that the diverse content of the posts I forward establishes the needed balance. I am sure that civil, issue-oriented answers to biased and inflammatory challenges are more effective in increasing the credibility of the CF field. For instance, I think Horace Heffner and Jed Rothwell have won the field today, fair and square, in discussing Merriman's doubt about proving excess heat with an insulated heat source, so I combined their posts into one post. This shows to a wider and important audience, few of whom will choose to subscribe to Vortex-L, including many committed CF researchers, that civil debate on the facts and issues exists now within the core CF network. That establishes credibility! Another example, Brendan Hall, who attended ICCF-7, has advanced very civily and lucidly his powder channel hypothesis for heat artifacts that might explain the Case cell temperature readings, but not the claimed He-4 production. So, his idea may be right or wrong, but I would never have thought of it. And, as the issue is discussed, it can actually be settled one way or the other. An actual consensus can result. So I presented both sides of that debate today, knowing that anyone who really needs all the relevant posts will subscribe directly to Vortex-L or email Hall. So, I'm acting as a filter and early warning process for those who are not now willing to sort through Vortex-L and sci.physics.fusion every day. I will eliminate the long header problem for Vortex-L members, by posting separately. Jed Rothwell and a few others could eliminate the long line breakup by posting in about 60-character long lines, as most do. Does anyone know the adjustment in Netscape 3.0 that would allow copying of 80-character lines into the Notepad without messy breakups? As one, Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 15:21:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10291; Fri, 8 May 1998 15:08:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:08:17 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980508181100.00c738c0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 18:11:00 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08EA xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"_Tdog2.0.UW2.D9uKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18470 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:12 PM 5/8/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Robert > What is a muf? Is it a nanofarad? 10^-9Farads? >Hank Sorry muF (Microfarad). It has alway seemed unusual to me that capacitors come in picoFarads, microFarads, and occasionally Farads, but almost never in milliFarads or nanoFarads. (And I have bought capacitors labeled .001 microFarad, so it isn't just that they don't make capacitors in those sizes.) 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 May 8 15:35:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18383; Fri, 8 May 1998 15:32:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:32:27 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08ED xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:31:56 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"4rl632.0.7V4.wVuKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18471 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert The use of nano and milli Farads is increasing these days, especially by IC manufacturers. It is still not all that popular though. When we were kids, in the 50's we only had microfarad capacitors, and micromicro farad capacitors which evolved into picofarads, or puffs. Hank > ---------- > From: Robert I. Eachus[SMTP:eachus mitre.org] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, May 08, 1998 3:11 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > At 01:12 PM 5/8/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Robert > > What is a muf? Is it a nanofarad? 10^-9Farads? > >Hank > > Sorry muF (Microfarad). It has alway seemed unusual to me that > capacitors come in picoFarads, microFarads, and occasionally Farads, > but > almost never in milliFarads or nanoFarads. (And I have bought > capacitors > labeled .001 microFarad, so it isn't just that they don't make > capacitors > in those sizes.) > > 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 May 8 16:01:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA24897; Fri, 8 May 1998 15:59:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:59:52 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 18:53:38 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Frequency - attention John Schnurer! In-Reply-To: <355278C4.7E50CD7D ihug.co.nz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"iGopV3.0.s46.dvuKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18472 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo, Barry and Kyle, Please realize we have applied for patent and posts here constitute disclosure and impact issuance of same, particularly in Europe. I can, in open forum, "guide" you. I very much want you to be able to replicate. Understand the following is in good spirit, I do not write to 'put you down'.... I am writing about and will be illustrating in this discussion several issues, including but not limited to: a] where a lot of this information already is b] how a lot of people, at least as far as I have been able to tell, have missed the information c] some background you should have d] what you need to lead your work along. Also know I have spent a lot of time, have taken a lot of damage in this. I have seriously exhausted my finances, to the point where I am in trouble. But I want you to be able to replicate, it is important. To be able to take the extant information, plus what I add, may well steer you toward more effective realization. Other more detailed disclosure must be off line. I have given my word to others not to reveal some information conveyed to me in confidence. The main things to understand are a] that there is not not, nor ever has been, to my knowledge, a simple "cookbook" and-or "absolute answer. b] because of this and the requirement for you to have your own body of knowledge, I am going to lead you along.... SO: In good faith, and primarily as a guide; a] go to www.gravity.org and get ALL the papers by E Podkletnov and G. Modanese and do the same for the link to Pete Skeggs' site, I think it is called Cavorite, but there is link in gravity org page. b]Take the texts from all of the papers and abstract the experimental set up.... no math.... just the physical experimental set up c] same for results.... no math, just the results. d] sintered material ... cheap sintered material ... works better than melt texture high quality YBCO e] it is CHANGE in field effects which seem to make the properties obtain. f] huge fields are not required g] abrupt change works better than slow change. Let me know when you get this far.... and if you have learned anything from the 'chop-up-the-papers' exercise... I sure did! Read some regualr texts about YBCO.... plain jane YBCO ... and try to get a feel for the inter relationships between magnitude of field VS temp VS changing fields. On Fri, 8 May 1998, John Berry wrote: > What frequency should be used for the rotating magnetic field in a > reproduction of Schnurer experiments? > Under 100 revolutions per second. But this will not be of much help to you unless you perform the exercises above... or it may not be. If someone had told me this 2 years ago.... and I had not personally done the exercises .... I would have not been helped. It is a new field [ha!] ... good hunting .... but arm yourselves well as far as knowledge goes before you leave the cabin, please. JHS > > John Berry > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 16:06:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA16501; Fri, 8 May 1998 16:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 18:56:39 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"XjORi2.0.l14.N-uKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18473 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If the gizmo just sits there and 'be hot' .... to the tune of 30 watts, which one can feel with the hand.... and it keeps this up.....like for a week.... then I would say it is pretty cool.... calorimetry or not. J If you scale up to 1,000 watts, then you can put it in the fire plac in the winter.... and if you stay warm, then what more do you need? J On Fri, 8 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > I just wrote: > > "If the device (including insulation and dewar) is produing 30 watts of > heat, placing it in a calorimeter might meet Barry's objective. Sounds > like a dual method calorimeter is being called for (again)." > > It should have read: > > "If the device (including insulation and dewar) is producing 30 J of heat > per second, placing it in a calorimeter might meet Barry's objective. > Sounds like a dual method calorimeter is being called for (again)." > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 16:17:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28937; Fri, 8 May 1998 16:16:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:16:26 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980508181646.00bec9f8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 18:16:46 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"JUKt63.0.w37.99vKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18474 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Masochists are directed to: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run4.html Normal folks should just stay put and wait for further developments from Dr. Case himself. BTW, I did not speak with him today. I did FAX him the Run 4 results. 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 May 8 16:29:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA00043; Fri, 8 May 1998 16:27:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:27:54 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 19:21:43 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zdJoU1.0.b.vJvKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18475 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Don't put the meter in when you are running! J On Fri, 8 May 1998 Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > A few comments on Vince's latest; > > 1) ...the microwave oven supply I rescued is 1/2 wave (single diode), > > with a .6 mfd oil filled 2600 volt filter cap. It is, in it's present > >configuration, just about perfect. > > Actually for your load with all that nice resistive ballast, you should > have about 5 microF of filter capacitance to bring down the ripple to the > order of 5% or less. > > 2) ...the upper W electrode was running almost at white heat. > >Just perfect for busting up H2. Lower electrode not glowing at all. This > >is with lower electrode positive. If I reverse polarity the lower electrode > >gets really hot while the upper stays cool. I want the upper W electrode > >hot because thats where Mills says the most H atoms will be. > > This snip from your post illustrates that the thermal power varies greatly > along the length of your tube. Where should one measure the tube wall > temperature in order to get useful experimental data? Eventually you will > have to get into calorimetry. > > 3) You probably have voltage spikes. You might have exceeded the limit of > your Simpson meter when you tried to measure the tube voltage directly. The > solution is to make a voltage divider. It's safer, too. If you don't know > how, then we should get together off line. > > 4) To measure tube current, insert your ammeter between your presently > grounded electrode and ground. (For safety, always insert yur ammeter in a > low potential lead.) > > 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 May 8 16:35:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA20809; Fri, 8 May 1998 16:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:33:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 23:30:36 +0000 Message-ID: <19980508233034.AAA9682 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"2KY4Z2.0.u45.pOvKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18476 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In reference to Barry Merriman's objection to the subject debate, Horace wrote: >Except for >a faulty internal temperature measurement, that seems to be about the most >hopeless argument imaginable. > >As to how much work is being done, that can be calibrated by using a Joule >heater inside the steel container. Steel has about 1000 times the thermal >heat conductivity (460 mw/(cm*Deg K)) compared to fiberglass (0.4 >mw/(cm*Deg K)), so a thermocouple on the side of or near the steel >container boundary should provide a reasonable reading provided the Joule >heater is not in direct low resistance thermal contact with the steel >container near the thermocouple. That is to say assuming the Joule heater >is located within the steel container at the approximate location of the >catalyst, and the thermocouple located outside and to the side. Regardless >of the placement of the thermocouple, and the possible presence of hot >spots, calibration will correlate temperature at a specific thermocouple >location to heat (work, i.e. watts of electrical power). Not much accuracy >is needed, because adding run time can eliminate any precision based >arquments. > I agree wholeheartedly that it is obvious that if it stays hot far beyond chemical means that we are out of Kansas, Dorothy. This stuff about temperature vs. heat measurements seems like obfuscation to me. You cannot measure simple temperature in such an apparatus because heat is being shed to the environment, regardless of insulation quality. The thermocouple simply proves the existence of the temperature gradient. I do request a bit of clarification, Horace. The 'fiberglass' you refer to, is that the insulation? And this calibration run would substitute an ohmic heater (Joule heater?) for the Case reaction heat and proceed to see what input power is required to attain the same temperature gradient. Is this correct? What about putting into the metal container enough inert material of good heat conductivity to provide thermal mass roughly equivalent to the Case reactants along with the ohmic heater? This may suppress the likely arguments that Horace's calibration method is wildly inaccurate. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 16:46:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA04077; Fri, 8 May 1998 16:44:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:44:00 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD7AB0.FF7173E0 pm3-126.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: High frequency magnetic field Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 18:42:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA04049 Resent-Message-ID: <"YS0r8.0.d_._YvKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18477 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Kyle R. Mcallister [SMTP:stk sunherald.infi.net] Sent: Friday, May 08, 1998 6:37 PM To: John Schnurer Subject: High frequency magnetic field I'm sending this to everyone, not just John. If you can answer my question, please do so. Hello again John: Sorry about the question on the superconductor, I didn't realize it was confidential. My question: How can I change conventional 120VAC 60hz to a frequency of 10Mhz cheaply? Thanks, Kyle Randall Mcallister Email: stk sunherald.infi.net Phone: 228-875-0629 Fax: 228-872-5837 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 17:11:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA25048; Fri, 8 May 1998 17:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 17:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35539CD2.6863 worldnet.att.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 14:01:22 -1000 From: bill perry Reply-To: wperry3092 worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08EA xch-cpc-02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"w53nf2.0.D76.hvvKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18478 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > Robert > What is a muf? Is it a nanofarad? 10^-9Farads? > Hank > > > ---------- > > From: Robert I. Eachus[SMTP:eachus mitre.org] > > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Sent: Thursday, May 07, 1998 2:58 PM > > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > > > At 05:23 PM 5/7/98 -0400, George Holz wrote: > > > > >It must have been quite a large current in the tube. > > about 150 ma. > > > I have observed > > >relaxation oscillations at 1 ma current all the way down to 100 pF > > >parallel capacitance. > > > > Scaling 150 ma, you would expect oscillations at 15000 pF = .015 > > muF? > > Seems low to me. If you want to recommend 0.1 muF, okay, but my > > experience leads me to suspect that 0.5 muF would be minimal given > > Vince's > > configuration. > > > > > The stability of a capacitively loaded > > >glow discharge is extremely difficult to predict. At uA currents, > > >oscillation may be present with total capacitance loading of perhaps > > >10 pF. Of course, many of the tubes I have worked with have very > > >small (display pixel size) discharge spaces. One tube was > > >designed to self-scan in the relaxation oscillation mode with > > >one discharge per scanned cathode at 20 pF loading. It would > > >scan properly down to average currents of 30 uA. > > > > Yep, we've been working in different worlds. In my world, > > anything > > under a kilowatt was a toy or a test circut. > > > > Robert I. Eachus > > > > with Standard_Disclaimer; > > use Standard_Disclaimer; > > function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... > > > > a millifarad From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 17:22:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA11329; Fri, 8 May 1998 17:19:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 17:19:27 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:16:11 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Resent-Message-ID: <"1oJTT.0.wm2.E4wKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18479 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:56 PM 5/8/98, John Schnurer wrote: > If the gizmo just sits there and 'be hot' .... to the tune of 30 >watts, which one can feel with the hand.... and it keeps this up.....like >for a week.... then I would say it is pretty cool.... calorimetry or not. > > > J > > If you scale up to 1,000 watts, then you can put it in the fire >plac in the winter.... and if you stay warm, then what more do you need? > > J An insulated oven box in which to bake bread sounds good, or maybe a big hanging pot in which to boil soup. Gee, I must be hungy or something. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 17:36:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA15876; Fri, 8 May 1998 17:35:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 17:35:38 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:35:24 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 4 Resent-Message-ID: <"veC0E3.0.yt3.PJwKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18480 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:16 PM 5/8/98, Scott Little wrote: >Masochists are directed to: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run4.html > >Normal folks should just stay put and wait for further developments from >Dr. Case himself. BTW, I did not speak with him today. I did FAX him the >Run 4 results. You have really done a great job on these 4 experiments Scott. Great graphics. Assuming your pressure remained at 50 psia throughout Run 4, that seems to indicate you have no water in your device. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 17:47:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA18419; Fri, 8 May 1998 17:45:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 17:45:10 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:38:58 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"4cRRe3.0.hV4.LSwKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18481 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:35:59 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Cc: John Schnurer Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field Dear Kyle, 10 meg at what power? On Fri, 8 May 1998, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > Hello again John: > > Sorry about the question on the superconductor, I didn't realize it was confidential. My question: How can I change conventional 120VAC 60hz to a frequency of 10Mhz cheaply? a] you have to convert to DC... use power supply b] then an oscillator .... if you want power, then power amp after. Good idea to team up with electronics guy or ham radio guy if you do not personally do this sort of thing. J > > Thanks, > Kyle Randall Mcallister > Email: stk sunherald.infi.net > Phone: 228-875-0629 > Fax: 228-872-5837 > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 18:04:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA04229; Fri, 8 May 1998 18:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 18:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 16:59:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Resent-Message-ID: <"7qpfG2.0.-11.FiwKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18482 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:30 PM 5/8/98, Ed Wall wrote: [snip] > >I do request a bit of clarification, Horace. The 'fiberglass' you refer to, >is that the insulation? I don't know Case's plans, but it appears to me that *both* an insulating material and a dewar are required to be certain of self maintaining Case's operating temperatures. This is especially true is case does not use the two dewar method I mentioned earlier, i.e. use one open-mouth dewar as a lid for the other and pass the necessary wires through a central seal between the two dewars. If he does not use a dewar for the "lid" he will need some additional material. In either case he will need some material that can withstand about 200 C, and fiberglass seems to fit that bill, if a bit messy. If he uses a steel cell inside a glass dewar, he may well also need a padding material to avoid scratching the delicate implosion prone borosilicate glass that is used in cryrogenic dewars as well. > And this calibration run would substitute an ohmic >heater (Joule heater?) for the Case reaction heat and proceed to see what >input power is required to attain the same temperature gradient. Is this >correct? Yes - that's right. >What about putting into the metal container enough inert material >of good heat conductivity to provide thermal mass roughly equivalent to the >Case reactants along with the ohmic heater? Yes - that would work. However, I think thermal mass is totally immaterial, as the run and calibration run in steady state. If is only the heat flux that counts, and that is strictly a function of R and Ti - To. It is reasonable that any catalyst substitution material for the calibration run provide a thermal conductivity similar to the catalyst. However, the fact that steel has such a high thermal conductivity, with repect to fiberglass, and much more with respect to a dewar, eliminates the need to be very picky about the bottom part of the cell, assuming the cell is at most half full. >This may suppress the likely >arguments that Horace's calibration method is wildly inaccurate. > >Ed Wall It's not my method. Wish it were, but that would make me pretty old! 8^) Using Joule heaters as a substitute heat source is a standard method of calibrating various kinds of calorimeters. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 18:30:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA25737; Fri, 8 May 1998 18:27:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 18:27:59 -0700 Message-ID: <3553A357.6716 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 19:29:11 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Kurtz: Murray: Rothwell: reposting by Murray 05/08/98 References: <000801bd7ad4$7f9887c0$5665db81 kurtz-> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"u6cE8.0._H6.U4xKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18483 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 8, 1998 Hello Lynn Kurtz, I feel encouraged by your support. Well, I'm following a long-range diplomatic stategy, so I make as many concessions as possible. I can post responses to Jed Rothwell's posts, which will alert many to the very valuable thinking and reporting he is doing. I'm very pleased that there has been a great increase in civil, issue-oriented discussion on Vortex-L, and that many have wanted to be on my long private list. I like including the long list with each message, because these days most computers have enough hard drive space for it, and it facilitates people on the list getting in touch with each other. Skeptics and believers and others are all mixed together randomly. I have a second list for those who only want sporadic, important news. As my doubt about the probability of replicable CF experiments deepens, I will probably withdraw from so much detailed involvement. I'm starting to get into dialogue with "ESP" and consciousness researchers, which is my actual field. The stakes there are far higher, and the dialogues correspondingly even more stilted and polarized. However, now there are Internet ESP experiments, available to all to interact with, that generate valuable data. So, scientific experimentation, communication, and, shall we say, subjective verification, are available in brand new ways. Here is a lead by Jack Sarfatti, a noted rogue physicist: [quote of Rich Murray] > I was astonished and pleased to read Dean I. Radin's "The Conscious > Universe" (1997), which made me aware of the impressive extent of > competent replication of key "ESP" results. I want to offer suggestions > to extend the "Unconscious Precognition" work, inadvertently started in > the early 1980s by Holger Klintman of the Department of Psychology at > the Lund University, Sweden [pages 116-124]. > > He proved in five experiments that people have unconscious body > reponses, automatically and continuously recorded, a few seconds > before, as well as during and afterwards, viewing violent or erotic > photos randomly mixed in with serene photos. Radin replicated this > "presentiment effect" in a series of experiments at his Consciousness > Research Laboratory, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, reported in > August, 1996. Prof. Dick Bierman, a psychologist at the University of > Amsterdam, replicated Radin's work. With two dozen or more subjects, > highly significant results are achieved. The results are robust. > > This work could be extended to the Internet, by utilizing a Java applet > to precisely monitor the speed of mouse clicking for a few seconds > before viewing a randonly presented color photo. [comment by Jack Sarfatti] Perhaps John Walker could add this to his retro-PK type WEB experiment? John has a very good quantum random source running on the WEB already that could be used in your experiment. Go to http://www.stardrive.org to find the links. As one, Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 19:07:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA31775; Fri, 8 May 1998 19:04:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 19:04:18 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <9ebeee29.3553b976 aol.com> Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 22:03:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"RMZ4d.0.Dm7.WcxKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18484 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-05 12:53:44 EDT, you write: > From: Schaffer gav.gat.com > Re Vince's request for suggestions to clean W off SiO2: > > Tungsten oxidizes fairly quickly in air at high enough temperature. Then > you can dissolve the W oxide away with just about any acid. I don't know > what a good minimum temperature is. Ahh yes...thanks. The answer was staring me in the face. This is a quartz tube, really thermally strong. Just support the tube and heat the area I wish to clean with a propane torch until red hot. The W will oxidize at this temperature. Cool down and soak in HCI. Gonna go try that right now. Thanks. Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 19:12:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00284; Fri, 8 May 1998 19:10:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 19:10:55 -0700 Posted-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 05:05:28 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3553BAD4.9D3D5599 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 05:09:24 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: JJAP CF like paper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"loEgA.0.M4.lixKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18485 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi, I found an old paper on JJAP archive. I did not posted the abstract because it may already well known. Otherwise Anybody could post it from this link. BTW, JJAPP articles is fully online now, and could be accessed freely. Regards, hamdi ucar http://jjap.kopas.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle?magazine=JJAP&volume=35&number=2R&page=738-747 Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. Vol.35(1996) pp.738-747 Part 1, No. 2A, 15 February 1996 Anomalous Heat Evolution of Deuteron-Implanted Al upon Electron Bombardment Kohji Kamada, Hiroshi Kinoshita1 and Heishitiro Takahashi1 National Institute for Fusion Science, Nagoya 464-01, Japan 1Center of Advanced Research Energy Technology, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 062, Japan (Received December 7, 1994 ; accepted for publication November 6, 1995 ) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 20:14:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA07869; Fri, 8 May 1998 20:12:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:12:21 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980508221323.00813750 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 22:13:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 4 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"CByVl2.0.ow1.KcyKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18488 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:35 PM 5/8/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >You have really done a great job on these 4 experiments Scott. Great graphics. Thanks, Horace. Good old QuickBasic. It's clunky but reliable. >Assuming your pressure remained at 50 psia throughout Run 4, that seems to >indicate you have no water in your device. I forgot to mention the pressure. This AM, with the chamber cold, it was 33 psi. After heating up to around 180C, it was almost back to 50 psi....maybe 48...indicating very little leakage. However, once I got up to the higher power levels in Run4, with the catalyst hotter than it had ever been before, the pressure definitely went down a little...to about 45 psi. Maybe the higher temperature promoted further reaction of the deuterium with something in/on the catalyst. BTW, today I ordered some pressure sensors that cover this range and will provide an analog signal for my data acq system. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 20:40:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA10999; Fri, 8 May 1998 20:28:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:28:59 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980508222455.0080b100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 22:24:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <9ebeee29.3553b976 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4wp1-2.0.nh2.xryKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18489 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:03 PM 5/8/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >Ahh yes...thanks. The answer was staring me in the face. This is a quartz >tube, really thermally strong. Just support the tube and heat the area >I wish to clean with a propane torch until red hot. Sounds good, but stay below "orange hot", Vince. Quartz will oxidize rapidly in air if heated too hot. This oxidation is signified by a sudden, copious emission of white smoke (SiO2), which is probably bad to breathe. You may not have to worry about it with a propane torch...but with oxyacetylene you can overheat quartz easily. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 20:46:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA22659; Fri, 8 May 1998 20:33:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:33:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3553C042.69E1 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 21:32:34 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Kamada: heat from e- on D implanted Al 05/08/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"v1x9d1.0.zX5.4wyKr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18490 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: http://jjap.kopas.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle?magazine=JJAP&volume=35&number=2R&page=738-747 Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. Vol.35(1996) pp.738-747 Part 1, No. 2A, 15 February 1996 Anomalous Heat Evolution of Deuteron-Implanted Al upon Electron Bombardment Kohji Kamada, Hiroshi Kinoshita1 and Heishitiro Takahashi1 National Institute for Fusion Science, Nagoya 464-01, Japan 1Center of Advanced Research Energy Technology, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 062, Japan (Received December 7, 1994; accepted for publication November 6, 1995) Abstract: Anomalous heat evolution was observed for the first time in deuteron-implanted Al foils upon 175 keV electron bombardment. Local regions with linear dimension of more than 100 nm showed simultaneous transformation from single-crystalline to polycrystalline structure within roughly one minute during the electron bombardment, indicating a temperature rise to above the melting point of Al from room temperature. The amount of energy evolved was estimated to be typically 160 MeV for each transformed region. The transformation was never observed in proton-implanted Al foils. Microstructures in the subsurface layer of the implanted Al, investigated by elastic recoil detection (ERD) method and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), were presented for numerical discussions of the experimental results. Possible causes of the surface melting, such as the heating effect of the electron beam, size effect of the melting point, difference in the implanted depth profiles between hydrogen and deuterium, and possible chemical reactions due to the electron bombardment in D2 collections, were investigated. We consider that some kind of nuclear reaction occurring in the D2 collections is the only explanation for the observed melting. The reaction was estimated to continue only for a short time, presumably less than 10-10 s, and the energy gain, which is defined as the ratio between the amount of energy evolved and the energy loss of the impinging electros through the Al specimen, amounts to more than 1× 105. Keywords: deuteron implantation, electron bombardment, melting [Table of Contents] [ARCHIVES] [SEARCH] [REGISTRATION] [JJAP ONLINE] [JJAP HOME] Copyright (C) 1996 Publication Board, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics Contact E-Mail : www jjap.or.jp From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 20:48:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA03406; Fri, 8 May 1998 19:22:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 19:22:37 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 18:22:12 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"Nvn5c.0.nq.dtxKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18487 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:03 PM 5/8/98, VCockeram wrote: >In a message dated 98-05-05 12:53:44 EDT, you write: >> From: Schaffer gav.gat.com >> Re Vince's request for suggestions to clean W off SiO2: >> >> Tungsten oxidizes fairly quickly in air at high enough temperature. Then >> you can dissolve the W oxide away with just about any acid. I don't know >> what a good minimum temperature is. > >Ahh yes...thanks. The answer was staring me in the face. This is a quartz >tube, really thermally strong. Just support the tube and heat the area >I wish to clean with a propane torch until red hot. The W will oxidize at >this temperature. Cool down and soak in HCI. >Gonna go try that right now. Thanks. > >Vince >Las Vegas CRC Handbook does show WO2 soluble in acid, but WO3 soluble in HF, but not soluble in HCl. It shows WO3 soluble in hot alkali. Try hot Red Devil lye or Draino if HCl doesn't work completely. Between the two, everything should go! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 21:15:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA19023; Fri, 8 May 1998 21:13:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 21:13:19 -0700 Message-ID: <3553C9E7.730B earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 22:13:43 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Britz: Kamada: heat from e- on D implanted in Al 05/08/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EUKHX2.0.2f4.PVzKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18491 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From Britz's Bibliography: http://kemi.aau.dk/~db/fusion/Papers_K [note by Rich Murray: if the lines are jagged in Netscape 3.0, drag the mail viewing window wider.] Kamada K, Kinoshita H, Takahashi H; Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 35 (1996) 738. "Anomalous heat evolution of deuterium-implanted Al upon electron bombardment". ** Experimental, Al, electron beam, excess heat, res+ An Al sample is first bombarded with either a proton beam or a deuteron beam, at 25 keV and a "fluence" of 5*10^17 ions/cm^2 (/s is probably meant), and then looked at with a transmission electron microscope, itself using a beam of electrons at 175 keV and various fluences. The prominent finding is that for the deuteron-implanted sample, but not for the proton-implanted one, TEM sees a speckled structure, which is concluded to arise from a change of the Al surface layers to the polycrystalline form; this can only come about by melting and recrystallisation. Where is the heat coming from, then? The authors look at 4 conventional possible causes, but these are insufficient to explain the heat, which they calculate to be roughly 260 MeV. Thus, they consider an anomalous nuclear cause. They postulate, as an example, the d-d fusion reaction, and calculate the fraction of the local population of d's that must fuse to produce the required energy. It is quite small (between about 10^-5 and 10^-3), so the postulate is considered reasonable. More work needs now to be done. Dec-94/Feb-96 # Kamada K; Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 31 (1992) L1287 (Part 2, no. 9A). "Electron impact H-H and D-D fusions in molecules embedded in Al. 1. Experimental results". ** Hydrogen and deuterium were embedded into Al and then bombarded by electron beams of 200 keV and 400 keV. Fusion events during the bombardment were detected by a CR39 polymer film, as charged particles. Fusion was detected for both hydrogen and deuterium in the Al, not strongly dependent on the energy of the electrons. The author is able to differentiate the rates of fusion not due to and due to electron-hydrogen/deuterium collisions and concludes that most of the fusion is not due to such collisions. May-92/Sep-92 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 21:27:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA22534; Fri, 8 May 1998 21:25:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 21:25:20 -0700 Message-ID: <3553CCDD.286E earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 22:26:21 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Britz: Mengoli: boiling D2O/PD cell 05/08/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4nvBP1.0.xV5.kgzKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18492 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >From Britz Bibliography: http://kemi.aau.dk/~db/fusion/Recent_Additions [Note by Rich Murray: if the lines are jagged in Netscape 3.0, drag the viewing window wider.] Mengoli G, Bernardini M, Manduchi C, Zannoni G; J. Electroanal. Chem. 444 (1998) 155. "Calorimetry close to the boiling temperature of the D2O/Pd electrolytic system". ** Experimental, excess heat, calorimetry, res+ This team of electrochemists and physicists decided that a hot near-boiling electrolyte might be the secret of reproducibility for excess heat, and tested the idea. Their cells operated at about 95C and due consideration was given to the heat of evaporation of the water etc. The calorimeter was kept at the operating temperature by additional heating with a heating coil, whose power was adjusted so as to keep the temperature constant. They also - emulating the F&P "heat after death" report - checked the effect of cutting the current. Constant current was used, and the cathodes were platelets and 4mm rods of Pd. The electrolyte was K2CO3, the reasoning being that alkali would attack the glass; so no Li was present in these experiments. Nor were there any high D/Pd loadings. In most runs, excess heat was found and found to go on after the current was cut. Rods were less effective than plates, due perhaps to their smaller surface/volume ratio. Jan-96/Mar-98 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 21:34:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA24634; Fri, 8 May 1998 21:33:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 21:33:23 -0700 Message-ID: <3553DEDD.177E loc1.tandem.com> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 20:43:09 -0800 From: Bob Horst Reply-To: bhorst loc1.tandem.com Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 4 References: <3.0.1.32.19980508181646.00bec9f8 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4rFj93.0.c06.IozKr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18493 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott -- Glad to see that you tried the different temperatures, but too bad about the results. Case said that temperature excursions beyond 250 C destroyed the catalyst. You might ask him if there is a way to know if a batch has been ruined this way. If there is some way to tell, say by visual inspection, you could check out the material from your Runs 3-4 to see if it got too hot at some point. (Maybe your T probe is located at a cooler location in the catalyst, or it is not reading correctly.) Of course, I hope you have been storing the jar of catalyst in the fridge. I hear Texas gets pretty hot this time of year :>). -- Bob From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 22:00:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA03734; Fri, 8 May 1998 21:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 21:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3553E3D2.9FB loc1.tandem.com> Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 21:04:18 -0800 From: Bob Horst Reply-To: bhorst loc1.tandem.com Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Frequency - attention John Schnurer! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"N_N9u.0.Bw.68-Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18494 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > > > Please realize we have applied for patent and posts here > constitute disclosure and impact issuance of same, particularly in Europe. > John -- Once a patent application is submitted, subsequent disclosure does not impact issuance in the country where it was filed. That is the reason that governments issue patents -- so that people will be free to discuss their inventions instead of keeping them quiet. If you have filed in Europe, your patent will be public knowledge within 6 months of filing anyway. Maybe you were saying that you have filed in the US, but not in Europe yet. Then it is true that any public disclosure will cause you to forfeit your foreign rights. If it does not issue in the US, you also have the option of keeping it a trade secret. But holding "just" the US rights to a working antigravity device should make you rich enough that you do not have to worry too much about the other countries. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 23:19:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA00847 for billb eskimo.com; Fri, 8 May 1998 23:19:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 23:19:18 -0700 Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 23:19:18 -0700 X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 23:19:16 1998 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3553E73F.F29 bellsouth.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Old-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:18:51 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: NASA Seeks Podkletnov's Help on AG Resent-Message-ID: <"QpcN63.0._C.aL_Kr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18496 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com X-Diagnostic: /usr/sbin/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: Terry - > "We've sold materials to NASA and a number > of credible people," Gaines said. "But we've > also sold it to every kook in the world." New phone books are coming out here soon. Can't wait to get one and look up my name like Steve Martin did in "The Jerk". "Rick Monteverde,1013 Kook Street, Loon Lake, HI .....555-JERK" Oh well, it seemed like a good idea to try it at the time. At least they were very polite to me at Superconductive Components when I called and spent money. I'm glad to hear that Pod's here in the US and back in the loop. This could really make a difference in resolving this mystery. By the way, those interested in this kind of thing and any real prospects for success should also check out Pete Skegg's info on James Woodward at: http://www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/woodward.html This isn't quite what I thought when I first heard about it. I've been talking to someone who has had some contact with Woodward in this regard, and there seems to be good reasons for optimism for his approach. If it proves out to be real, it's something very much easier to replicate than the Podkletnov device. Relatively small money and good quality amateur level construction skill might yield measurable results. I'm interested in comments by Vortexians who have looked over the materials on the sites listed at the link above, particularly Woodward's own site at Cal State Fullerton. Anyone seen any of the Foundations of Physics Letters papers listed? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 8 23:22:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA09084; Fri, 8 May 1998 23:20:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 23:20:39 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 02:17:47 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"bcTeu2.0.sD2.rM_Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18495 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-08 23:40:39 EDT, you write: > Sounds good, but stay below "orange hot", Vince. Quartz will oxidize > rapidly in air if heated too hot. > Scott Little It worked fine. Heated to dull red and squirted a little O2 into the tube. All that silver turned to gold...err...well yellow stuff, which washed clean with an HCI bath. Another problem solved....and another problem rears it's ugly head; The small spring that holds the bronze shoe that has the thermocouple embedded in it loses tension at high temps, which then causes the shoe to shift on the tube wall which in turn screws up the temperature measurments. These small problems are a pain. I will make a shoe tomorrow with a better system for securing it to the tube. Which, of course means I must do several H2 no K runs again to establish a baseline reading for no K. I may try your idea from a while back, use fine ss wire to tie the shoe to the tube wall. The spring worked fine at the low temperatures with the old power supply but it can't take 280+ C. Also the epoxy cementing the bead thermocouple into the bronze shoe gave up. I have some spackle (plaster of paris) handy. That might work. No way I can find high temp cement over the weekend. Even with the problems, this is fun. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 00:02:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA11191; Fri, 8 May 1998 23:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 23:54:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 20:51:08 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"FKA_n.0.nk2.Ss_Kr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18497 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince - > No way I can find high temp cement over the > weekend. Even with the problems, this is fun. If you've got a Pep Boys or NAPA open on weekends near you, you've got access to some high temp cement. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 02:59:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA13952; Sat, 9 May 1998 02:58:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 02:58:52 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 01:58:50 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 4 Resent-Message-ID: <"MVaNj.0.rP3.RZ2Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18498 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:13 PM 5/8/98, Scott Little wrote: [snip] >I forgot to mention the pressure. This AM, with the chamber cold, it was >33 psi. After heating up to around 180C, it was almost back to 50 >psi....maybe 48...indicating very little leakage. However, once I got up >to the higher power levels in Run4, with the catalyst hotter than it had >ever been before, the pressure definitely went down a little...to about 45 >psi. Maybe the higher temperature promoted further reaction of the >deuterium with something in/on the catalyst. Would be interesting to see if pressure is still in 50-48 range at 180 C, i.e. if reaction is one-way. > >BTW, today I ordered some pressure sensors that cover this range and will >provide an analog signal for my data acq system. First class! BTW, the Case temp range mentioned earlier was 150-250. Maybe you could go into the higher range if you try it again? Or is about 200 as high as you can push it? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 03:05:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA14623; Sat, 9 May 1998 03:02:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 03:02:23 -0700 X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 01:58:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Kamada et al experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"S08Nt3.0.Pa3.kc2Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18499 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here is some old background on a couple of the Kamada et al experiments which I posted on sci.physics.fusion in April and May 1996, in response to a request from Adu Pilt for an unusual or unconventional (nuclear) reaction he and Dick Blue could take to the lab. In return for the trouble I got into a quibbling debate with Dick Blue about it. I still have much of text of that debate handy. Below follow the more informative posts of mine regarding Kamada, sans debate: Keep in mind that there were two experiments referenced. (There may be others published but I am not aware of them.) Here are the recipies: The 1992 (Kamada) results showed 1.3 MeV or greater 4He (about 80 percent) and 0.4 MeV or greater P (about 20 percent) tracks using Al loaded with *either* H or D. The electron beam energy used was 200 and 400 keV. H3+ or D3+ ions were implanted with an energy of 90 keV into Al films. The implantation was done at a fluence of 10^17 (H+ or D+)/cm^2 using a Cockcroft Walton type accelerator. The Al foil used was would pass 200 keV electrons. It was bombarded in a HITACHI HU-500 with a beam current of 300 to 400 nA with a beam size of roughly 4x10^-5 cm^2, or (4-6)x1016 e/cm^2/s flux electron beam. The area the beam passedthrough was roughly 2x10^-3 cm^2. Total bombarding time was 40 m. The Al target was a 5 mm dia. disk 1 mm thick, but chemically thinned. The particle detectors were 10 mm x 15 mm x 1 mm CR-39 polymer plastic detectors supplied by Tokuyama Soda Co. Ltd. Great care was taken to avoid radon gas exposure. Detectors were set horizontally on either side of the beam 20 mm above the target and two were set vertically one above the other 20 mm to the side of the target but starting at the elevation of the target and going upward (beam source upward from target). The detectors were etched with 6N KOH at 70 deg. C for 2 h. at a rate of 2.7 um/h. Energies and species were determined by comparison of traces by optical microscope with traces of known origin. Traces on the backsides of the detectors were found to be at background level. Background was determined by runing the experiment with Al films not loaded with H or D. Four succesive repititions of the experiment at the 200 keV level were run to confirm the reproducibiliy of the experiment. There was a roughly 100 count above background in each detector, or 1340 total estimated per run for the H-H reaction. A slightly higher rate was indicated for the D-D reaction. This is a rate of 5x10-15 events per electron, or 2x10^14 electrons per event. However, the fusion events per hydrogen pair in the target is 2.8x10^12 events/H-H pair. The events per collision based on the stimulation energy was calculated to be 10-12 to 10-26 times less than the observed events. The 1996 results (Kamada, Kinoshita, Takahashi) involved similar proceedures but bombardment was at 175 keV using a TEM which simulataneously was used for taking images of the target. Transformed (melted) regions with linear dimensions of about 100 nm were observed that indicated heat evolvement of 160 MeV for each transformed region. The (energy evolved) / (beam energy) for each region is about 10^5. Implantation of H was done at 25 keV to a depth of about 100 nm. at a fluence of 5x10^17 H+/cm^2. Bubbles of "molecular coagulations" of H were formed at pressures of 7 GPa. At a depth of 60 nm H density was measured by ERD to be 2x10^22 atoms/cm^3. Immediately after implantation molecular density was 1x10^22 mol./cm^3, Molar volume was 60 cm^3/mol and pressure 54.5 MPa. The targets were 5 mm dia 0.1mm thick polished using a TENUPOLE chemical polishing machine to a thickness of 1 uM over an area of 1 mm and a small hole of 0.1 mm dia. in the central part. A HITACHI H-700 TEM was used. The beam was 50 nA on an area of about 1 um dia. giving flux of 4x10^19 e/(cm^2*s). The area is first examined with the beam not fully focused and the spots are not there. The beam is focused and the spots appear (photographed) within about 10 s. for D2, not at all with H2. The experiment was repeated over 30 times!. To reliably reproduce the result two conditions must be met: (1) The microstructure must be optimum, meaning there must be a minimum of tunnel structures connecting the implanted bubbles. (This is insured by limiting the fluence of the implanting beam to 5x10^17 H+/cm^2.) (2) The intensity of the electron beam must be roughly 1x10^19 electrons/(cm^2*s). - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - My posting on this subject was in response to a request for unconventional reactions to study. However, since I somehow got dragged into a discussion of the subject results, hopefully some good will come of it one way or another. I am posting the following summary to clear up any misstatements or misunderstandings I may have created by discussing both Kamada experiments simultaneously or by using approximate numbers. Hopefully I havn't made any typos or errors here, which is always a risk from second hand data like this. Following the brief summaries will be a discussion of a possible source of error in the Kamada calculations. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1992 Article: Kamada states the H-H fusion reaction was observed based on beta disintegration of proton upon high energy electron capture, which does not need tunneling 1 event per 2x10^14 electrons 200 KeV and 400 keV beam energies were used. implantation fluence > 1x10^17 H+ or D+/cm^2 using Cockcroft Walton type acceleration (voltage not mentioned) >1.3 MeV alphas (80%) and >0.4 MeV protons (20%) emitted from *both* H2 and >D2 implanted targets Beam density must be greater than 3x10^16 electrons/cm/s to get high energy particles emitted. From this I calculate the minimum flux to be 4.8 mA/cm^2. Beam used was 300 to 400 nA with beam size 4x10-5 cm^2. Flux actually used was 4-6x10^16 electrons/cm^2/s. Area through which beam was passed was 2x10^-3 cm^2. Time beam on target was 40 minutes. Tunnel like structures (between the bubble structures) *must be formed* to get the high energy particle emissions. They occupy roughly 60 percent of the sub-surface layer with about 50 nm depth. Molar volume of hydrogen = 10 cm^3/mol. Density of hydrogen molecues exposed to beam = 6x10^22/cm^2. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1996 Article: experiment repeated 30 times Positive results with D, negative results with H. No effort was made to count particles. 175 keV electron beam energy was used to avoid radiation damage to the Al 25 keV implantation at fluence of less than 5x10^17 H+/cm^2 was used. This is 12.5 keV per H atom implanted. The maximum retained hydrogen fluence (determined by ERD) after implantation was 1x10^17 atoms/cm^2, and density 2x10^17 H/cm^3. The density in the D2 collections was estimated at 1x10^22 D2/cm^3. Loading fluence 5x10^17 D+/cm^2 was chosen to *avoid forming bubble structures* and to form as many tunnel structures as possible. At a lower fluence only bubble structures are formed. When tunnel structures form between the bubbles, the bubbles empty out into the tunnel structures. At higher fluences, the bubble structures start to form again. Hydrogen bubble pressure estimated at 7 GPa. Average implantation depth about 60 nm., max depth about 90 nm. Estimated heat out to beam energy absorbed (per spot) was 6x10^5. Estimated heat out to beam energy absorbed (total surface) was 1x10^5. Degree of focusing was 50 nA on 1x10^-6 m diameter. Flux used was 4x10^19 electrons/cm^2/s. I calculate 6.41 A/cm^2. Flux must be over 1x10^19 electrons/cm^2/s to get the effect. I caculate the minimum flux to be 1.6 A/cm^2. Melting was observed in small transformed regions of about 1x10^-9 cm^2. Using a depth of 90 nm this gives 6.1x10-12 cal. per melted region, or 159 MeV per transformed region. The melting occurred in less than 10 seconds and the pools solidified in about one minute into the polycrystalline form. The thickness of the aluminum target was 8x10^-5 cm. The electron stopping power |dE/dt| of Al used is 0.07eV/Angstrom. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In the 1996 paper, Kamada goes through some very lengthy and complicated calculations involving energy absobtion rates in AL of the various conventional D-D fusion products to show conventional fusion is a valid possible explanation. The calculations for the fusion products don't raise any special doubt. However, for each of the products he calculates a rho_m, the diameter of a cylinder about which heat is directly transferred. If I understand correctly, this is the radius of a cylinder about which the particle energy is immediatly transferred due to stopping power. Beyond that radius, heat is transferred via conduction in time tau = ((rho_m^2)/4)*D, whith D=0.78 cm^2/s, the mean thermal diffusion constant for Al at room temperature. >From this he calculates a reaction time (to produce the melted pool) equal to tau*N, where N is the total number of particles. This number is about 10^-10 s, depending on the particle. Somehow this looks all fine and good applied to the reaction products to come up with the total energy E of the reaction required to melt the pool of Al. Now, here is where it begins to be suspicious. The formula used to calculate delta E, the energy imparted by electrons to the pool is: delta E = |dE/dt|*t*m*phi_e*(tau*N) where: |dE/dt| = 0.07eV/Angstrom = 7x10^6 eV/cm (the stopping power of Al) t = 8x10-5 cm (thickness of target) m = 10^-9 cm^2 (area of pool) phi_e = 1x10^19 electrons/cm^2/s (electron flux) tau*N = 10^-10 s (reaction time) Plugging in the numbers I get 560 eV for delta E per the above. For E he uses 320 MeV because it is assumed an equivalent Al pool is created on the far side of the H tunnel system. >From this he gets g = E/(delta E) = 6x10^5 as the ratio of energy gain. Now it seems to me the really strange thing is applying the tau*N reaction time to the electron beam. The same factor was used in the reaction, but it makes sense there. It dosn't make sense applied to a beam that continues operation. Looking at it another way, each electron loses 7x10^6 eV/cm * 1x10^-5 cm = 560 eV going through the target. The number of electrons through the pool area each second is (10^19 electrons/cm^3/s)*(10^-9 cm^2) = 10^10 electrons/s. Therefore, the energy flux should be (10^10 electrons/s)*(560 eV/electron) = 5.6x10^12 eV/s. Now, unless I erred, that is a phenominal energy flux. I don't understand why the target didn't vaporize, and why the H2 target didn't react the same way - instead it didn't melt at all. What am I missing? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I received the following helpful, informative and self explanatory correspondence regarding the Kamada experiments from John Vetrano, Senior Research Scientist, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, so here it is: X-POP3-Rcpt: hheffner anc From: js_vetrano ccmail.pnl.gov Date: Mon, 06 May 1996 09:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: s.p.f. To: hheffner anc.ak.net MIME-version: 1.0 Hi Horace, For some reason my posts rarely show up on s.p.f so I gave up trying and e-mail directly. This is in response to the discussion of fusion in an electron microscope. First off, I don't have access to these articles so I can only comment on what I have seen discussed in the newsgroup. However, I can tell you that a single crystal can easily transform into a polycrystal without melting. A single crystal is unstable and difficult to grow. A small amount of deformation at an elevated temperature (remember the the electrons are heating the sample) can easily break the single crystal structure into smaller grains. Now, there are two sources of defects into the material. Both of these create visible defects, called dislocations, in the structure (visible with an electron microscope, anyway). The implantation of H or D introduces damage by knocking atoms off of their lattice sites. D, being twice as heavy, does much more damage. In addition, the electrons can introduce the same type of damage. Normally 175 keV is below the damage threshold for aluminum, but the presence of H (or D) has been shown to reduce the damage threshold to about 80-100 keV. This is strictly from collisional physics. The efficiency of energy transfer is a function of how close in mass the two objects are. It was shown (G.M. Bond et al., Philosophical Magazine, A55,(1987) pp 669-681) that a two stage transfer of energy from electrons to hydrogen to aluminum atoms was much more efficient that electrons to aluminum atoms. I don't know, based on what has been discussed in s.p.f., why there is such an incredible difference in what is observed with D and H (though I must admit that I'm not sure quite what the differences observed were). The energy measurements and particle detection are out of my field so I won't comment. I just wanted to give you some information about radiation damage and aluminum metallurgy that are not, apparently, discussed in the text. One more item. There is a Dept. of Energy user facility at Argonne National Laboratory which has an electron microscope with a beam line running into the sample area. You could conceivably do these types of experiments there and do various controls with different implanting species and different electron energies. They select from submitted proposals for research and it is carried out at no cost to you (well, through your taxes). You don't even have to be a microscopist (I don't believe), but you need to supply appropriate samples and outline the conditions. It would help if you either had, or hooked up with someone who had, some relevant experience. You can contact Ed Ryan or Mark Kirk at ANL for more information. Mark is an expert on radiation damage. I don't have their e-mail addresses handy but the WWW page for ANL should contain appropriate information. I think the facility has it's own Web page. Feel free to post any or all of this on the newsgroup. Let me know if you have any questions and I'll do my best to answer. Cheers, John Vetrano Senior Research Scientist Pacific Northwest National Laboratory js_vetrano pnl.gov - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 03:45:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA20781; Sat, 9 May 1998 03:44:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 03:44:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008701bd7b36$f9445f60$478cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 04:40:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"cMsdn3.0.d45.tD3Lr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18500 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Stuff Needed: 3,280 feet of 18 gauge magnet wire(about 20 lbs,and about 23 ohms. Cardboard Drum about 2 ft dia x 3 ft tall. MOSFET transistor, 75 VDC at 3 amperes minimum. 75 volt, 5 ampere,(D.C.) battery pack. Variable Resistor-Capacitor (RC)pulse circuit for firing the MOSFET at 5 to 15 pulses/second. Neatly wind the magnet wire around the cardboard barrel. Apply pulses to the windings and shoot for about 8.5 pulses/second. It MAY or MAY NOT give about 70 pounds of lift. :-) WITH SAFETY DISCLAIMER! Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 05:26:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA27249; Sat, 9 May 1998 05:25:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 05:25:55 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD7B1B.733309A0 pm3-132.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: NASA Seeks Podkletnov's Help on AG Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 07:22:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id FAA27227 Resent-Message-ID: <"dzIav3.0.ff6.Ij4Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18501 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- From: Terry Blanton[SMTP:commengr bellsouth.net] Sent: Saturday, May 09, 1998 12:18 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: NASA Seeks Podkletnov's Help on AG >But there is a problem. No other scientist has been able to replicate >the Russian's results, and Podkletnov has yet to publish his work in a >science journal. Hmmm...sounds like the writer didn't know about John Schnurer. Or the others who report positive results. I don't have alot of money, but I am willing to give it a try. I even have a new setup in mind. Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 08:45:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA10778; Sat, 9 May 1998 08:43:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 08:43:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <9ebeee29.3553b976 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 08:42:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"y22ph3.0.Ie2.xc7Lr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18502 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, I'm glad it worked! Just a caution. Quartz withstands high temperatures and thermal gradients better than borosilicate (Pyrex) glass. However, it still has its limits. Don't heat or cool it too rapidly or too locally, or even quartz will crack. Scott, You said, "Quartz will oxidize rapidly in air if heated too hot." I don't get it; quartz (SiO2) is already an oxide. 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 Sat May 9 09:24:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA19449; Sat, 9 May 1998 09:22:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:22:37 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 08:22:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"cnXdd.0.pl4.DB8Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18503 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:40 AM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Stuff Needed: > >3,280 feet of 18 gauge magnet wire(about 20 lbs,and about 23 ohms. > >Cardboard Drum about 2 ft dia x 3 ft tall. > >MOSFET transistor, 75 VDC at 3 amperes minimum. > >75 volt, 5 ampere,(D.C.) battery pack. > >Variable Resistor-Capacitor (RC)pulse circuit >for firing the MOSFET at 5 to 15 pulses/second. > >Neatly wind the magnet wire around the cardboard barrel. > >Apply pulses to the windings and shoot for about 8.5 pulses/second. > >It MAY or MAY NOT give about 70 pounds of lift. :-) > >WITH SAFETY DISCLAIMER! If that is the case, then a smaller version should also give lift, right? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 09:48:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23070; Sat, 9 May 1998 09:46:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 09:46:04 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 08:46:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: To Rich Murray about line width Resent-Message-ID: <"fK3eg3.0.Je5.BX8Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18504 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:37 PM 5/8/98, Rich Murray wrote: >May 8, 1998 > >Hello Jed Rothwell and Vortexans, > >I admit Jed is right about most of his points. [snip] Rich, The maximum line width is set by vortex and by the fusion digest list servers. these insert the carriage returns in lines beyond 80 characters. I and others who use one of the most common email programs, Eudora, post without carriage returns except for paragraphs and forced new lines, and quoted material. If you continue cross-fertilizing news lists, I suggest you try Eudora for that purpose, as it provides convenient nickname lists, archiving, archive searching, and cutting and pasting. You can even import archives to it, like the vortex archives. Eudora light is free. Eudora pro costs about $90 I think. Eudora pro provides spell checking and lots of other goodies, but I've been too cheap to buy it so far. I guess that's easy to tell from my spelling! Just about every spare dime I have had has gone to experimental stuff. If you do a search on "Eudora" you should find a download site. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 10:27:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA19844; Sat, 9 May 1998 10:21:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 10:21:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35548FE2.F71CDC94 ro.com> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 12:18:26 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" Organization: NASA Volunteer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <01BD7AB0.FF7173E0 pm3-126.gpt.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KFiw_2.0.-r4.329Lr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18505 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Kyle R. Mcallister [SMTP:stk sunherald.infi.net] > Sent: Friday, May 08, 1998 6:37 PM > To: John Schnurer > Subject: High frequency magnetic field > > I'm sending this to everyone, not just John. If you can answer my > question, please do so. > > Hello again John: > > Sorry about the question on the superconductor, I didn't realize it > was confidential. My question: How can I change conventional 120VAC > 60hz to a frequency of 10Mhz cheaply? > > Thanks, > Kyle Randall Mcallister > Email: stk sunherald.infi.net > Phone: 228-875-0629 > Fax: 228-872-5837 Kyle, I built a function generator in a few hours (maybe ten altogether, including etching the pc board) using the MAX038 chip from Maxim Semiconductors. It requires very little support circuitry and can generate highly symmetrical sine, triangle,square, and sawtooth waves from .1 Hz to better than 20 Mhz. (I've a gotten as much as 63 MHz, but the device gets very flaky beyond ~25 Mhz). Although the output is only 2 volts peak-to-peak, it is a simple matter to build an amplifier to boost this level. The really handy thing is that it requires only plus and minus 5 volts to operate so it can be battery driven! For a data sheet, see http://209.1.238.250/arpdf/1257.pdf good luck! -- Patrick V. Reavis Student at Large /\ / \ / G \ ~~~~~~~~ DELTA-G From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 10:57:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA00377; Sat, 9 May 1998 10:54:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 10:54:08 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00b801bd7b73$3ca8e8c0$478cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 11:52:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"mzzz6.0.o5._W9Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18506 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 09, 1998 10:23 AM Subject: Re: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment >At 4:40 AM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>Stuff Needed: >> >>3,280 feet of 18 gauge magnet wire(about 20 lbs,and about 23 ohms. >> >>Cardboard Drum about 2 ft dia x 3 ft tall. >> >>MOSFET transistor, 75 VDC at 3 amperes minimum. >> >>75 volt, 5 ampere,(D.C.) battery pack. >> >>Variable Resistor-Capacitor (RC)pulse circuit >>for firing the MOSFET at 5 to 15 pulses/second. >> >>Neatly wind the magnet wire around the cardboard barrel. >> >>Apply pulses to the windings and shoot for about 8.5 pulses/second. >> >>It MAY or MAY NOT give about 70 pounds of lift. :-) >> >>WITH SAFETY DISCLAIMER! > > >If that is the case, then a smaller version should also give lift, right? Right, or bigger. :-) Maximum theoretical, 0.023 lbs/Ampere-Meter. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 11:13:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24716; Sat, 9 May 1998 11:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 11:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 13:09:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805091809.NAA13652 dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: Re: Kamada et al experiments To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"N91hy.0.626.Rn9Lr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18507 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 9, 1998 To Vortex, Kamada did submit an abstract to the ICCF-7 indicating furthur work on the subject presumably to appear on the forthcoming Proceedings of the ICCF-7. His contact address (Courtesy of the ICCF-7 Participant's List): Prof. Kohji Kamada The Energy Research Center Wakasa Bay Tohyoh Cho, Tsurga Hukui, 914 Japan tel: 81-0770-24-2300 fax: 81-0770-24-2303 no e-mail address (yet) -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 11:28:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA25970; Sat, 9 May 1998 11:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 11:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35549F9B.32F1 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 14:25:31 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"29p3K2.0.eL6.p_9Lr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18508 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > You said, "Quartz will oxidize rapidly in air if heated too hot." I don't > get it; quartz (SiO2) is already an oxide. Gee, Mike, you're right! I'll bet Scott was thinking of some sort of destructive recrystalization from glass-state to crystal? Guessing, always guessing -- Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 11:30:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04636; Sat, 9 May 1998 11:27:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 11:27:21 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00d001bd7b77$ea62a560$478cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Calculations Relating to Anti_Grav Experiment Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 12:25:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00CD_01BD7B45.829C8EA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Xb3k-2.0.L81.80ALr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18509 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00CD_01BD7B45.829C8EA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Comes out on Word 95. ------=_NextPart_000_00CD_01BD7B45.829C8EA0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Gravity.doc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Gravity.doc" 0M8R4KGxGuEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPgADAP7/CQAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAA EAAAAgAAAAEAAAD+////AAAAAAAAAAD///////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////9 /////v////7///8EAAAABQAAAP7////+////////////////////CwAAAAwAAAANAAAADgAAAA8A AAAQAAAAEQAAABIAAAADAAAA//////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////1IA bwBvAHQAIABFAG4AdAByAHkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAWAAUA//////////8BAAAAAAkCAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKDp7r2zeb0B BgAAAIAAAAAAAAAAVwBvAHIAZABEAG8AYwB1AG0AZQBuAHQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABoAAgECAAAA//////////8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKAAAAAhcAAAAAAAABAEMAbwBtAHAATwBiAGoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEgACAP///////////////wAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA//////// ////////AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAA AP7///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////wAgAA UAMAAFEDAABMBAAATQQAANwEAADdBAAAJQUAACYFAACXBQAAmAUAAPkFAAD6BQAAXAYAAF0GAACJ BgAAigYAAJkGAACaBgAArwYAALAGAADhBgAA4gYAAJkIAACaCAAA+gAAAAAAAPUAAAAAAADwAAAA AAAA6wAAAAAAAOYAAAAAAADhAAAAAAAA3AAAAAAAANcAAAAAAADSAAAAAAAAzQAAAAAAAMgAAAAA AADDAAAAAAAAvgAAAAAAALkAAAAAAAC0AAAAAAAArwAAAAAAAKoAAAAAAAClAAAAAAAAoAAAAAAA AJsAAAAAAACWAAAAAAAAkQAAAAAAAIwAAAAAAACHAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAA AAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAA AQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAA FPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAA BAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAAGJoIAAD/ CAAAUwkAAFQJAACGCQAAhwkAABQKAAAVCgAAeQoAAOAKAAAPCwAAbQsAAG4LAACqCwAAqwsAADsM AAA8DAAAfAwAAH0MAADJDAAA+gAAAAAAAPUAAAAAAADwAAAAAAAA6wAAAAAAAOYAAAAAAADhAAAA AAAA3AAAAAAAANcAAAAAAADSAAAAAAAAzQAAAAAAAMgAAAAAAADDAAAAAAAAvgAAAAAAALkAAAAA AAC0AAAAAAAArwAAAAAAAKoAAAAAAAClAAAAAAAAoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AAB AAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU 8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAE AAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAQAABTwAAEAAAAEAAAU8AABAAAABAAAFPAAAQAAAAAT8AIAAMkM AAAHAPACAADJDAAACQAAAAAA2QkAAAAA/////wAA/////zgTAAAOAA8ACAABAEsADwAAAAAAGgAA QPH/AgAaAAZOb3JtYWwAAgAAAAMAYQkEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIAQUDy/6EAIgAWRGVm YXVsdCBQYXJhZ3JhcGggRm9udAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAA0AIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAD/QBQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAP7/AwoA AP////8ACQIAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGHAAAAE1pY3Jvc29mdCBXb3JkIDYuMCBEb2N1bWVudAAKAAAA TVNXb3JkRG9jABAAAABXb3JkLkRvY3VtZW50LjYA9DmycQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACB0aGV5IGFj dCBzb21ld2hhdCBuZXV0cmFsIHRvd2FyZCByZWd1bGFyIHBhcnRpY2xlcyBhbmQgdG93YXJkIGFu eSBlbGVjdHJvc3RhdGljIG9yIG1hZ25ldGljIGZpZWxkcyBjcmVhdGVkIGZyb20gIHJlZ3VsYXIg cGFydGljbGUgY2hhcmdlIGNvbmNlbnRyYXRpb24uDQ1UaGUgIm1hZ25ldGljIG1vbWVudCIgQW1w ZXJlLU1ldGVycyA9ICBpKiAyKHBpKVIgPSAgNC44RS0xMSBBbXBlcmUtTWV0ZXJzLCBhIGNvbnN0 YW50IGZvciBhbnkgcXVhcmsuDSAgICAgICAgICBGQUNUT1JJTkcgICJHIiAgKDYuNjdFLTExKSB0 byBBTVBFUkUtTUVURVJTL0tHICBhbmQgICBHUkFWSVRZLUFOVElHUkFWSVRZDQ0oNi42N0UtMTEv MS4wRS03KV4xLzIgID0gMC4wMjU4MyBBbXBlcmUtTWV0ZXJzL0tnDQ1UaGUgZWxlY3Ryb24sIDku MUUtMzEgS2cgKiAwLjAyNTgzICkgID0gMi4zNUUtMzIgQW1wZXJlLU1ldGVycywgYnV0LCB0aGlz IG11c3QgYmUgYSByZWxhdGl2aXN0aWMgdGltZSBkaWxhdGlvbiBvZjogNC44RS0xMS8yLjM1RS0z MiA9IDIuMEUyMQ0NRnJvbSB0aGlzIHRoZSBsb29wIGN1cnJlbnQgcSpmICA9IDEuNkUtMTkqMS43 RTIyICA9IDIuNzE3RTMgYW1wZXJlcyBvZiB0aGUgZWxlY3Ryb24sIGlzIGRpbGF0ZWQgdG86DTIu NzE3RTMvMi4wRTIxID0gMS4zNThFLTE4IGFtcGVyZXMgb3IgdGhlIGZyZXF1ZW5jeSBmIGlzIGRp bGF0ZWQsIDEuN0UyMi8yRTIxID0gOC41IEhlcnR6LiBGb3IgUHJvdG9ucw1hbmQgb3RoZXIgaGVh dmllciBwYXJ0aWNsZXMsIGYgPSAzLjE2RTYgSGVydHouDUZyb20gdGhpcyB0aGUgZ3Jhdml0YXRp b25hbCBmb3JjZSBleGVydGVkIG9uIGEgMS4wIEFtcGVyZS1NZXRlciBjdXJyZW50IGxvb3AgYnkg dGhlIGVhcnRoIGlzOg0NRmcgPSAgMS4wRS03ICogMC4wMjU4Myo1Ljk4RTI0Lyg2LjM4RTYpXjIg PSAgMzgwICAobmV3dG9ucykNDUZvciBncmF2aXR5LWFudGlncmF2aXR5ICJzeW5jaHJvbml6YXRp b24iIHRoZSAxLjAgYW1wZXJlLW1ldGVyIGN1cnJlbnQgbG9vcCBtdXN0IGJlIHNwZWVkLW9mLWxp Z2h0IHB1bHNlcyBvbiB0aGUgbG9vcCBhdCB0aGUgcHJvcGVyIHB1bHNlIHJhdGUuDQ1fX3xfX3xf X3xfX3xfX3xfX3xfX3xfX3xfX3xfX3xfXyAgICAoZWFydGggY3VycmVudCBsb29wIHB1bHNlcykN DS0tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLV8tLS0gICAgKHN5bmNocm9uaXplZCBj dXJyZW50IGxvb3AgcHVsc2VzKQ0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANylZQAjwAkEAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPACAADJDAAAAhcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADZCQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAsFgAAbAAAACwWAABsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUFgAAFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAFgAACgAAAAoWAAAKAAAAAAAAAAAAAACqAgAARgAAACgWAAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADsFgAAAgAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJgWAABUAAAA7hYAABQAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAkAAgACAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABGABMAAAAAAE1TIFNh bnMgU2VyaWYADAAAAAIAU3ltYm9sAAwgAAAAAFN5c3RlbQAVAAAAAABUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4A ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgU1RSSU5HLUNJUkNMRSBQQVJUSUNMRSBFUVVBVElP TlMgICAgICBNYXkgNSwgMTk5OCAgICAgRi5KLiAgIFNwYXJiZXINDUJhc2VkIG9uIHRoZSB0aGVv cnkgdGhhdCB0aGUgZnVuZGFtZW50YWwgcGFydGljbGVzIG9yICJxdWFya3MiIGFyZSBvbmUtZGlt ZW5zaW9uYWwgbGVuZ3RoLW9ubHkgb3NjaWxsYXRpbmcgc3RyaW5ncyBvZiBsZW5ndGggIDIocGkp UiBpbiBzcGFjZSBoYXZpbmcgcGVybWl0dGl2aXR5IG9yIENhcGFjaXRhbmNlIGVvID0gOC44NEUt MTIgZmFyYWQvbWV0ZXIgb3IgQ291bG9tYnMvbmV3dG9uLW1eMiBvciBDb3Vsb21icy9qb3VsZS1t ZXRlci4NDTEsIHEgPSAgQypWICA9ICAoKy8tKSAxLjYwMkUtMTkgIENvdWxvbWJzIGEgY29uc3Rh bnQgZm9yIGFueSBwYXJ0aWNsZSBvciBxdWFyay4gVGhlIHNpZ24gKCsvLSkgb2YgdGhlIGNoYXJn ZSBpcyBhIDE4MCBkZWdyZWUgcGhhc2UgZGlmZmVyZW5jZS4NDTIsIEUgPSAwLjUgQypWXjIgPSAw LjUqcV4yL0MgPSAwLjUqcV4yLzIocGkpUiplbyAgPSBrKnFeMi9SICAgIChqb3VsZXMpDQ0zLCBS ID0ga3FeMi9FICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA0LCBDID0gMihwaSlSKmVvICAgIDUsIEwgPSAy KHBpKVIqIHVvICAgICAgICAgICAgICA2LCBWID0gKDJFL0MpXjEvMiAgICAodm9sdHMpDQ03LCBJ ID0gKDJFL0wpXjEvMiAgKGRpc3BsYWNlbWVudCBjdXJyZW50IGFtcGVyZXMpICAgICAgIDgsIGYg PSAxLyhMKkMpXjEvMiA9ICBjLzIocGkpUiAgIChoZXJ0eikNDTksICBpID0gcSpmICAgKGxvb3Ag Y3VycmVudCBhbXBlcmVzKSAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgMTAsICAoTC9D KV4xLzIgPSAgMzc3ICAob2htcykNDUluIGFueSBudWNsZXVzIHRoZXJlIGFyZSA1QSAtIDJaICAi cXVhcmtzIjoNDTJBICJ1cCIgb3IgKCspDQ0yQSAtIFogImRvd24iIG9yICgtKQ0NQSAtIFogICAg bmV1dHJpbm9zLCAgIGFuZCAgWiBleHRlcm5hbCBlbGVjdHJvbnMuDQ1UaGUgbmV1dHJpbm9zIGFy ZSBiZWxpZXZlZCB0byBiZSBjcmVhdGVkIGluIHBhaXJzIGFsc28sIGFuZCBoYXZlIGEgcmVzdCBt YXNzLWVuZXJneSBvZiAgMC41IHRvIDEuNyBldiBhbmQgYSBjaGFyZ2UgcScgPSAgKCsvLSkgMS42 MDJFLTE5IENvdWxvbWJzID0gIEMqViwgYnV0LCBhcmUgcGhhc2Ugc2hpZnRlZCA5MCBkZWdyZWVz IGZyb20gb3RoZXIgIFN0cmluZy1DaXJjbGVzLCBpZS4sIHkgPSBjb3NpbmUgeCBhcyBvcHBvc2Vk IHRvIHkgPSBzaW4geCwgaW4gdGhlIG90aGVyICJxdWFya3MiLCB0aHVzIHRoZXkgYWN0IHNvbWV3 aGF0IG5ldXRyYWwgdG93YXJkIHJlZ3VsYXIgcGFydGljbGVzIGFuZCB0b3dhcmQgYW55IGVsZWN0 cm9zdGF0aWMgb3IgbWFnbmV0aWMgZmllbGRzIGNyZWF0ZWQgZnJvbSAgcmVndWxhciBwYXJ0aWNs ZSBjaGFyZ2UgY29uY2VudHJhdGlvbi4NDVRoZSAibWFnbmV0aWMgbW9tZW50IiBBbXBlcmUtTWV0 ZXJzID0gIGkqIDIocGkpUiA9ICA0LjhFLTExIEFtcGVyZS1NZXRlcnMsIGEgY29uc3RhbnQgZm9y IGFueSBxdWFyay4NICAgICAgICAgIEZBQ1RPUklORyAgIkciICAoNi42N0UtMTEpIHRvIEFNUEVS RS1NRVRFUlMvS0cgIGFuZCAgIEdSQVZJVFktQU5USUdSQVZJVFkNDSg2LjY3RS0xMS8xLjBFLTcp XjEvMiAgPSAwLjAyNTgzIEFtcGVyZS1NZXRlcnMvS2cNDVRoZSBlbGVjdHJvbiwgOS4xRS0zMSBL ZyAqIDAuMDI1ODMgKSAgPSAyLjM1RS0zMiBBbXBlcmUtTWV0ZXJzLCBidXQsIHRoaXMgbXVzdCBi ZSBhIHJlbGF0aXZpc3RpYyB0aW1lIGRpbGF0aW9uIG9mOiA0LjhFLTExLzIuMzVFLTMyID0gMi4w RTIxDQ1Gcm9tIHRoaXMgdGhlIGxvb3AgY3VycmVudCBxKmYgID0gMS42RS0xOSoxLjdFMjIgID0g Mi43MTdFMyBhbXBlcmVzIG9mIHRoZSBlbGVjdHJvbiwgaXMgZGlsYXRlZCB0bzoNMi43MTdFMy8y LjBFMjEgPSAxLjM1OEUtMTggYW1wZXJlcyBvciB0aGUgZnJlcXVlbmN5IGYgaXMgZGlsYXRlZCwg MS43RTIyLzJFMjEgPSA4LjUgSGVydHouIEZvciBQcm90b25zDWFuZCBvdGhlciBoZWF2aWVyIHBh cnRpY2xlcywgZiA9IDMuMTZFNiBIZXJ0ei4NRnJvbSB0aGlzIHRoZSBncmF2aXRhdGlvbmFsIGZv cmNlIGV4ZXJ0ZWQgb24gYSAxLjAgQW1wZXJlLU1ldGVyIGN1cnJlbnQgbG9vcCBieSB0aGUgZWFy dGggaXM6DQ1GZyA9ICAxLjBFLTcgKiAwLjAyNTgzKjUuOThFMjQvKDYuMzhFNileMiA9ICAzODAg IChuZXd0b25zKQ0NRm9yIGdyYXZpdHktYW50aWdyYXZpdHkgInN5bmNocm9uaXphdGlvbiIgdGhl IDEuMCBhbXBlcmUtbWV0ZXIgY3VycmVudCBsb29wIG11c3QgYmUgc3BlZWQtb2YtbGlnaHQgcHVs c2VzIG9uIHRoZSBsb29wIGF0IHRoZSBwcm9wZXIgcHVsc2UgcmF0ZS4NDV9ffF9ffF9ffF9ffF9f fF9ffF9ffF9ffF9ffF9ffF9fICAgIChlYXJ0aCBjdXJyZW50IGxvb3AgcHVsc2VzKQ0NLS0tXy0t Xy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tXy0tLSAgICAoc3luY2hyb25pemVkIGN1cnJlbnQg bG9vcCBwdWxzZXMpDQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8AIAAE8DAABQAwAAUQMAAEsE AABMBAAATQQAANsEAADcBAAA3QQAACQFAAAlBQAAJgUAAJYFAACXBQAAmAUAAPgFAAD5BQAA+gUA AFsGAABcBgAAXQYAAIgGAACJBgAAigYAAJgGAACZBgAAmgYAAK4GAACvBgAAsAYAAOAGAADhBgAA 4gYAAJgIAACZCAAAmggAAP4IAAD/CAAAUgkAAFMJAABUCQAAhQkAAIYJAACHCQAAEwoAABQKAAAV CgAAeAoAAHkKAADfCgAA4AoAAA4LAAAPCwAAbAsAAG0LAABuCwAA/fv59/Xz8e/t6+nn5ePh393b 2dfV09HPzcvJx8XDwb+9u7m3tbOxr62rqaelo6GfnZuZl5WTkY8AAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwAD XQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANd AwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10D AANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMA A10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAADhuCwAAqQsAAKoLAACrCwAAOgwA ADsMAAA8DAAAewwAAHwMAAB9DAAAyAwAAMkMAAD9+/n39fPx7+3r6QAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA10DAANdAwAD XQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwADXQMAA10DAANdAwAACw== ------=_NextPart_000_00CD_01BD7B45.829C8EA0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 14:31:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA28248; Sat, 9 May 1998 14:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 14:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 13:22:23 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"pqx0r3.0.Iv6.1hCLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18510 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:52 AM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>If that is the case, then a smaller version should also give lift, right? > >Right, or bigger. :-) > >Maximum theoretical, 0.023 lbs/Ampere-Meter. How does it know which way is up? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 14:39:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00351; Sat, 9 May 1998 14:37:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 14:37:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 13:30:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Calculations Relating to Anti_Grav Experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"xB--71.0.M5.coCLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18511 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:25 PM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Comes out on Word 95. > >Attachment converted: Hard Disk:Gravity.doc 1 (WDBN/MSWD) (0000C4BE) I thought this was an email list, not a microsoft list. %^{ Frustration! Let's all post in the original Mac Write. It requires a Mac classic, or less, but what the heck they are now cheaper than word. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 14:54:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03161; Sat, 9 May 1998 14:52:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 14:52:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Chuck Davis To: Horace Heffner Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 14:44:14 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: Calculations Relating to Anti_Grav Experiment MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"OnM32.0.7n.40DLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18512 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 09-May-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 12:25 PM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>Comes out on Word 95. >> >>Attachment converted: Hard Disk:Gravity.doc 1 (WDBN/MSWD) (0000C4BE) >I thought this was an email list, not a microsoft list. %^{ >Frustration! Let's all post in the original Mac Write. It requires a Mac >classic, or less, but what the heck they are now cheaper than word. Whatever happened to plain old ASCII? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 15:32:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10243; Sat, 9 May 1998 15:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 15:20:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002b01bd7b98$20c3f300$388cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 16:16:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"f9cKq3.0.wV2.WQDLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18513 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 09, 1998 3:29 PM Subject: Re: Levitating Barrel Anti-Grav Experiment >At 11:52 AM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > >>>If that is the case, then a smaller version should also give lift, right? >> >>Right, or bigger. :-) >> >>Maximum theoretical, 0.023 lbs/Ampere-Meter. > > >How does it know which way is up? IF IT WORKS it doesn't, then you have to reverse polarity or turn it upside down. :-) Then it should try to flip over to attract the Earth. This is where you have to install a vertical axis gyro. Then as you try to tilt the gyro it will maneuver laterally. IF you can get Frank Stenger to sit in a good chair on casters on a smooth level cement floor like in his garage (next to the piano)and hold his router motor whilst it is spinning at 24,000 RPM or so, he should maneuver literally/laterally around his shop until he runs out of extension cord. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 15:35:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA13815; Sat, 9 May 1998 15:34:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 15:34:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980509172301.0080d8c0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 17:23:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: References: <9ebeee29.3553b976 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"fsqFg3.0.hN3.YdDLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18514 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:42 AM 5/9/98 -0800, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >Scott, > >You said, "Quartz will oxidize rapidly in air if heated too hot." I don't >get it; quartz (SiO2) is already an oxide. Wow...you're right, Michael. "Oxidize" is obviously not the right word. "Vaporize" is probably what happens. The only thing I'm really certain of is that quartz, when heated way above red heat, will reach a point where a lot of white smoke suddenly comes off it. I spent quite some time a couple of years ago fusing quartz rods together for a suspension system and I observed this phenomenon firsthand. Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 15:48:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA16194; Sat, 9 May 1998 15:45:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 15:45:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003d01bd7b9b$187c7980$388cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Warp Drive When? (http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/warp.htm) Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 16:37:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0024_01BD7B68.C47418C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"03sUy.0.yy3.NoDLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18515 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01BD7B68.C47418C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Same way as One Bev Protons get accelerated to a trillion Bev (cosmic rays) by induced vortex tunneling? Thus Warp 137, or better and travel back in Time? :-) http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/warp.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01BD7B68.C47418C0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Warp Drive When.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Warp Drive When.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/warp.htm Modified=A04CE5449A7BBD01E8 ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01BD7B68.C47418C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 15:59:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA17723; Sat, 9 May 1998 15:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 15:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980509171655.00819160 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 17:16:55 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 4 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"R33AT3.0.gK4.WuDLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18516 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:58 AM 5/9/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >BTW, the Case temp range mentioned earlier was 150-250. Maybe you could go >into the higher range if you try it again? Or is about 200 as high as you >can push it? I can go up to at least 300 (maybe even 400). However, I got to 230 in Run 4...and that was in the center of the catalyst bed. That seems close enuf to the max temp to me. Case says the catalyst sinters at 250. I expect to find some evidence of this occuring near the walls where the heaters are located when I disassemble the chamber. Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 15:59:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18947; Sat, 9 May 1998 15:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 15:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD7BA5.32244520 ppp61.enterprise.net> From: Mike Butcher To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: London Conference Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 23:49:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id PAA18837 Resent-Message-ID: <"goX781.0.ud4.CzDLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18517 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Could anyone give me details of the London conference on the 10 May, I've just lost all my past email addresses, posts etc. due to hard disk problem and I had intended dropping in ? Thanks, Mike Butcher From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 17:02:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA04894; Sat, 9 May 1998 17:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 17:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 10:46:21 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: Re: London Conference In-Reply-To: <01BD7BA5.32244520 ppp61.enterprise.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ABK5M3.0.CC1.VuELr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18518 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 9 May 1998, Mike Butcher wrote: >I've just lost all my past email addresses, posts etc. due to hard disk >problem and I had intended dropping in ? > > Thanks, > > > Mike Butcher Do you run Windoze? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 17:32:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA09201; Sat, 9 May 1998 17:18:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 17:18:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 16:11:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 4 Resent-Message-ID: <"-3CLn3.0.fF2.c9FLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18519 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:16 PM 5/9/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 01:58 AM 5/9/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>BTW, the Case temp range mentioned earlier was 150-250. Maybe you could go >>into the higher range if you try it again? Or is about 200 as high as you >>can push it? > >I can go up to at least 300 (maybe even 400). However, I got to 230 in Run >4...and that was in the center of the catalyst bed. That seems close enuf >to the max temp to me. [snip] OH, OK. I need to read more carefully. It says so right on your web page for Run 4. Looks like the bases are covered - unless you feel like intentionally adding some D2O. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 17:59:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA16976; Sat, 9 May 1998 17:57:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 17:57:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <009f01bd7bad$6bdc4bc0$388cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Case Run 4 Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 18:48:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"TQxz-.0.894._jFLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18520 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 09, 1998 6:29 PM Subject: Re: Case Run 4 >At 5:16 PM 5/9/98, Scott Little wrote: >>At 01:58 AM 5/9/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >> >>>BTW, the Case temp range mentioned earlier was 150-250. Maybe you could go >>>into the higher range if you try it again? Or is about 200 as high as you >>>can push it? >> >>I can go up to at least 300 (maybe even 400). However, I got to 230 in Run >>4...and that was in the center of the catalyst bed. That seems close enuf >>to the max temp to me. >[snip] > >OH, OK. I need to read more carefully. It says so right on your web page >for Run 4. Looks like the bases are covered - unless you feel like >intentionally adding some D2O. 8^) You might add a little more D-O-U-G-H2-Oh! :-) Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 19:56:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA11288; Sat, 9 May 1998 19:49:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 19:49:34 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <444de9fc.35551366 aol.com> Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 22:39:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"Auol23.0.Dm2.tMHLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18521 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, Here follows all the raw data from this afternoons run with H2 no K A new thermocouple bronze shoe was used with high temperature cement from Pep Boys Auto. (Thanks Rick) This data I pasted in from the Lotus worksheet in text format so all can read. Anyone with Lotus or Excell and wants the Lotus file (about 10k) let me know and I will upload it to you. Not attaching to this Vortex post to save bandwidth M=minutes TC=temperature C +/- 0.1C DCV=dc volts across tube PA=hv transformer primary amps PV=hv transformer volts GAS=tube vacuum in inches Hg M__TC__DCV_PA_PV__GAS___________ 0 28.5 H2 fill to 26.0 1 149.2 1000 4 107 26 2 287.7 980 4 107 26 3 343.3 950 4 107 26 4 364.9 930 4 107 26 5 371.8 900 4 107 26 6 371.2 900 4 107 26 7 368.2 900 4 106 26 8 364.6 900 4 106 26 9 362.6 850 4 106 26 10 359.9 H2 fill to 1 atm then pump to 26.0 11 358.4 950 4 107 26 12 363.1 980 4 107 26 13 365.3 965 4 107 26 14 365.6 950 4 107 26 15 361.8 950 4 107 26 16 358.2 950 4 107 26 17 355.3 950 4 107 26 18 354.7 950 4 107 26 19 354.3 950 4 107 26 20 354.5 950 4 107 26 21 354.7 950 4 107 26 22 354.9 950 4 107 26 23 355.9 950 4 107 26 24 356.6 950 4 107 26 25 357.4 950 4 107 26 26 358.5 950 4 107 26 27 357.2 950 4 107 26 28 356.1 950 4 107 26 29 357.6 950 4 107 26 30 357.9 950 4 107 26 31 358 950 4 107 26 32 358.1 950 4 107 26 33 359.1 950 4 107 26 34 358.5 950 4 107 26 35 354.6 950 4 107 26 36 353.9 940 4 107 26 37 353.4 940 4 107 26 38 352.6 930 4 107 26 39 354.5 960 4 107 26 40 356.2 970 4 107 26 41 358 970 4 107 26 42 361.4 950 4 107 26 43 360.2 930 4 107 26 44 355.4 930 4 107 26 45 352.7 930 4 107 26 46 352.8 950 4 107 26 47 352.6 940 4 107 26 48 353.1 940 4 107 26 49 354.8 960 4 107 26 50 358 960 4 107 26 51 360.3 970 4 107 26 52 361.4 970 4 107 26 53 358 950 4 107 26 54 354.4 950 4 107 26 55 352.2 Power Off 26 56 285.1 57 204.1 58 152.9 59 118 60 95.7 61 80 62 68.4 63 60.7 64 54.5 65 50 66 46.4 End of Run Vince Cockeram 05-09-98 1700 pdt This was a baseline run at a fixed power input in preparation for tomorrows H2 with K run. The new thermocouple shoe worked very well even though I did exceed the T max specs for the glue. Other than the H2 refill at minute 10, I did not touch any controls during the run, just sat there and recorded data once a minute. One of the smoothest runs so far. I am using my old Graylab darkroom timer as the run timer. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 20:27:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA18433; Sat, 9 May 1998 20:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 20:25:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35551CA1.63E3 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 23:18:57 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: <444de9fc.35551366 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_DuOp1.0.nV4.ouHLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18522 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > > All, > Here follows all the raw data from this afternoons run with H2 no K Good stuff, Vince! Waiting for the K results. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 20:33:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA20033; Sat, 9 May 1998 20:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 20:31:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Geosas Message-ID: <6119b015.35551efd aol.com> Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 23:29:00 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Hans Coler's OU device Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.i for Windows sub 164 Resent-Message-ID: <"c0NJ22.0.xu4.Q-HLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18523 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This was mentioned in the recent issue of Fortean Times. The device was invented by Hans Coler in Germany in the 1930's, using coils and magnets, and evidently produces excess electrical energy. It was investigated by the German Navy, and after the war the British arranged for Coler to rebuild a device, which did produce some power. His originals were destroyed in the hostilities, but positive reports of leading German scientists survived. The British report, recently declassified, is to be found at http://www.algonet.se/~johnnyfg/hcoler/hcoler1.htm I have looked at this and it seems that they were definitely getting something. Hope this is of interest to Vortexians, George. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 21:02:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA25039; Sat, 9 May 1998 21:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 21:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355525E5.1FE9 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 20:58:29 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work References: <199805081342_MC2-3C60-BC54 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iQ9Um3.0.576.PPILr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18524 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I honestly think you should take a deep breath and think > about the most basic scientific laws that apply to this situation. The fine points of measurment come down to making a clear distinction between what you want to measure, and what you intrumentation is actually measuring. This is often not an issue of practical importance, but when your measurements seem to indicate fantastic new phenomena, it deserves the most careful consideration. As far of "self-sustainers" go, my favorite is the "Drinking Bird Toy". By the loose criteria evidenced in recent emails, I'm surprised it is not considered as an O/U demonstration...I mean, it exibits large scale motion for weeks on end, fueled by a glass of water... In fact, I challenge folks here to devise an experiment that would clearly demostrate that the drinking bird is not O/U. I think it would be rather nontrivial effort, if one insisted on experimental verification. What do you think Scott---how hard would it be for you to design such an experiment? It would be a good mental exercise for someone in your line of work... -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 21:11:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA16733; Sat, 9 May 1998 21:08:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 21:08:54 -0700 Message-ID: <35552671.6C41 skylink.net> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 21:00:49 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculations Relating to Anti_Grav Experiment References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"AIEnl.0.u44.FXILr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18525 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chuck Davis wrote: > Whatever happened to plain old ASCII? Here it is in ASCII. STRING-CIRCLE PARTICLE EQUATIONS May 5, 1998 F.J. Sparber Based on the theory that the fundamental particles or "quarks" are one-dimensional length-only oscillating strings of length 2(pi)R in space having permittivity or Capacitance eo = 8.84E-12 farad/meter or Coulombs/newton-m^2 or Coulombs/joule-meter. 1, q = C*V = (+/-) 1.602E-19 Coulombs a constant for any particle or quark. The sign (+/-) of the charge is a 180 degree phase difference. 2, E = 0.5 C*V^2 = 0.5*q^2/C = 0.5*q^2/2(pi)R*eo = k*q^2/R (joules) 3, R = kq^2/E 4, C = 2(pi)R*eo 5, L = 2(pi)R* uo 6, V = (2E/C)^1/2 (volts) 7, I = (2E/L)^1/2 (displacement current amperes) 8, f = 1/(L*C)^1/2 = c/2(pi)R (hertz) 9, i = q*f (loop current amperes) 10, (L/C)^1/2 = 377 (ohms) In any nucleus there are 5A - 2Z "quarks": 2A "up" or (+) 2A - Z "down" or (-) A - Z neutrinos, and Z external electrons. The neutrinos are believed to be created in pairs also, and have a rest mass-energy of 0.5 to 1.7 ev and a charge q' = (+/-) 1.602E-19 Coulombs = C*V, but, are phase shifted 90 degrees from other String-Circles, ie., y = cosine x as opposed to y = sin x, in the other "quarks", thus they act somewhat neutral toward regular particles and toward any electrostatic or magnetic fields created from regular particle charge concentration. The "magnetic moment" Ampere-Meters = i* 2(pi)R = 4.8E-11 Ampere-Meters, a constant for any quark. FACTORING "G" (6.67E-11) to AMPERE-METERS/KG and GRAVITY-ANTIGRAVITY (6.67E-11/1.0E-7)^1/2 = 0.02583 Ampere-Meters/Kg The electron, 9.1E-31 Kg * 0.02583 ) = 2.35E-32 Ampere-Meters, but, this must be a relativistic time dilation of: 4.8E-11/2.35E-32 = 2.0E21 >From this the loop current q*f = 1.6E-19*1.7E22 = 2.717E3 amperes of the electron, is dilated to: 2.717E3/2.0E21 = 1.358E-18 amperes or the frequency f is dilated, 1.7E22/2E21 = 8.5 Hertz. For Protons and other heavier particles, f = 3.16E6 Hertz. >From this the gravitational force exerted on a 1.0 Ampere-Meter current loop by the earth is: Fg = 1.0E-7 * 0.02583*5.98E24/(6.38E6)^2 = 380 (newtons) For gravity-antigravity "synchronization" the 1.0 ampere-meter current loop must be speed-of-light pulses on the loop at the proper pulse rate. __|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__ (earth current loop pulses) ---_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--_--- (synchronized current loop pulses) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 21:15:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA19136; Sat, 9 May 1998 21:13:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 21:13:30 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980509231424.0081c8f0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 23:14:24 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work In-Reply-To: <355525E5.1FE9 math.ucla.edu> References: <199805081342_MC2-3C60-BC54 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4oii21.0.hg4.ebILr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18526 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:58 PM 5/9/98 -0700, Barry Merriman wrote: >As far of "self-sustainers" go, my favorite is the >"Drinking Bird Toy". By the loose criteria evidenced >in recent emails, I'm surprised it is not considered as >an O/U demonstration...I mean, it exibits large scale >motion for weeks on end, fueled by a glass of water... >In fact, I challenge folks here >to devise an experiment that would clearly demostrate >that the drinking bird is not O/U. Simple. Place the bird+glass in a smallish sealed box. It will quit running rather quickly because the air inside the box reaches saturation humidity which stifles the dunking bird effect. Only when the bird+glass is out in the open where the fuzz-covered head of the bird can continuously evaporate H2O into the surrounding air...and derive the cooling effect therefrom...will it run. Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 21:33:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA02132; Sat, 9 May 1998 21:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 21:30:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980509232946.008109d0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 23:29:46 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: dunking bird Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"YsAjT3.0.EX.-rILr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18527 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The dunking bird does make us face some interesting thermodynamics. Consider a closed, thermally isolated (adiabatic) system containing at time t=0 a pan of water and dry air that are at the same temperature. As time passes, evaporation will deliver water vapor to the air and cause the remaining water in the pan to cool off! However, since the system is closed, the air will eventually reach saturation humidity and the remaining water in the pan will not be cooled any more. Assuming zero heat flow thru the system walls, what will the final temperature of this system be? Cooler than the starting temperature? Scott Little & Stephanie Eyres Little 1406 Old Wagon Road Austin TX 78746 512-328-4071 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 21:55:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA05700; Sat, 9 May 1998 21:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 21:53:42 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <35553260.3426 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 21:51:44 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work References: <199805081342_MC2-3C60-BC54 compuserve.com> <3.0.5.32.19980509231424.0081c8f0@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PJIkz1.0.yO1.KBJLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18528 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > At 08:58 PM 5/9/98 -0700, Barry Merriman wrote: > > >I challenge folks here > >to devise an experiment that would clearly demostrate > >that the drinking bird is not O/U. > > Simple. Place the bird+glass in a smallish sealed box. > It will quit running rather quickly because the air inside the > box reaches saturation humidity which stifles the > dunking bird effect. > Sorry Scott...all your experiment demonstrates is that the crude testing methods employed at EarthTech destroy the delicate conditions required for the O/U Drinking Bird to function properly. I'm not interested in your theoretical obsfuscations. Experiment is the only means by which we can decide the reality of this effect, and the mere fact that your poorly designed experiment failed tells us nothing. Your approach is no doubt rooted in your pathological skepticism and your blind adherence to the scientific orthodoxy---although I'm not sure whether you are consciously trying to suppress study of DBP (Drinking Bird Power) or whether you are just too incompetent to replicate the effect. Of course, the latter would come as no surprise! You certainly could not build a nuclear power plant, or a B-1 stealth bomber, or Pentium II processor (with MMX!)---so what makes you think you should be able to build and operate a Drinking Bird! Its design and operation have been tuned and perfected through thousands of product generations and manufacturing cycles. Thousands of Drinking Bird Power units are shipped each year, and there are many satisfied customers attesting to their amazing performance. Your asserions to to contrary, based on your supposed "replication", carry no weight. In particular, it is clearly stated by the manufacturer that the DBP unit must be operated in the open air, and at low humidity. Your experiment obviously did not satisfy these conditions, and so it comes as no surpise that you saw no O/U effect! Replication requires the utmost attention to details, and your experiment does not even come close! If you want to seriously investiaget DWP, you have to design an experiment that allows the device to operate in its O/U condition, and measure power in and out by unobtrusive means. I'm amazed that I have to explain this to trained scinetists and engineers, but apparently their ignorance of the scientific method runs deep. So, Scott---can you do beter than your first pitiful experimental protocol. :-) ;-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 22:46:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA06280; Sat, 9 May 1998 22:44:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 22:44:03 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <35553EAD.43DB math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 22:44:13 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: dunking bird References: <3.0.5.32.19980509232946.008109d0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VVtoE2.0.2Y1.YwJLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > The dunking bird does make us face some > interesting thermodynamics....what will the final temperature > of this system be? Scott, I'm glad you are displaying publicly your ignorance of Drinking Bird physics. It makes it quite clear that you are not qualified to experimentally investigate the effect. Your level of ignorance is incredible, but that is excusable---you are simply outside your area of expertise. The inventor of the Drinking Bird had 50 years experience working with evaporating liquids, during his years operating a still in the Ozark mountains, starting during the Prohibition. He knows things about evaporation that one cannot expect to find in books or papers, or to learn on ones own with a few days, weeks, or even years of trial and error. He has spent hundreds of thousands of hours learning how to enhance evaporative effects, painstaking preparing, distilling, and drinking thousands of experimental recipes. It is pointless for you to try and duplicate his efforts! Your recent pathetic attempt to investigate the Drinking Bird O/U effect is an appaling afront to real science---you devise an experiment bound to fail---which you don't even carry out!---and then simply fall back on theoretical prejudices to affirm your imaginary results! Evidently, you find the prospect of Drinking Bird Power to great a threat to your current cozy existence, and will use any means necessary to discredit it, to the point of completely fabricating experimental results! This is worse than the great MIT Drinking Bird scandal, in which they subtracted off the molecular bonding energy stored in the birds glass skeleton in order to make they final results come out under unity! I cannot sit by any longer, allowing this travesty to continue. Millions of people are dying unecessarily each day that this technology is delayed. So, I am formally announcing that I'm launching a new magazine, call "Infinite Drinking", which will be a vehicle for spreading information about Drinking Birds, and related devices that bob incessantly. Also, I'm incorporating my own comapany, Drinking Bird Power (DBP), to begin selling demostration kits and raising capital to construct a 20 KW prototype Drinking Bird Power plant. The design for this plant is completed, and we are currently partnering with companies that can supply us with a 300 meter long glass tube and 100,000 gallons of red liquid. We are still seeking a vendor who can supply us with a size 10,000 fuzzy red tophat and a giant red feather. Our research group is also making incredbile strides. Good Morning America's science editor Dr. Michael Guillen recently visited our research lab in the Ozark mountains, where he observed our latest breakthrough: it appears that if the red liquid in the bird is spiked with radioactive isotopes, the radiation is completely remediated after roughly 1000 bobs. A complete technical demonstration will be appearing on Good Morning America in the near future. The time to develop Drinking Bird Power is now. I can clearly see the day when fields of great crystalline birds, their red hats bobbing in unison, their red liquid cores rising and falling like the tides, provides for all the worlds energy. Astride every water heater, and under every hood, a silent chorus of Drinking Birds will power our lives. And they will dance silently upon the graves of the patholigical skeptics and scietific welfare queens who denied and feared their reality. Here's to "Infinite Drinking!" ;-) ;-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 23:45:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA13578; Sat, 9 May 1998 23:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 23:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 22:40:49 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird Resent-Message-ID: <"BKLUL2.0.3K3.0oKLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 9:51 PM 5/9/98, Barry Merriman wrote: > >Your approach is no doubt rooted in your pathological >skepticism and your blind adherence to the scientific >orthodoxy---although I'm not sure whether you are consciously >trying to suppress study of DBP (Drinking Bird Power) or >whether you are just too incompetent to replicate the effect. [snip] Is that "Drinking Bird" or "Dunking Bird" Power? Surely a drinking bird would not be ou due to its water consumption, but a dunking bird, consuming nothing, would have an infinite COP. Let's be sure we are talking about the same animal! Don't blame Scott, his problem is clearly genetic. The anomalies which occur when he opens the lab door are not due to the door, or cold air, etc., but to Scott's presence. After years of negative results, it is clear that Scott's aura suppresses ou activities, and creates other experimental anomalies in their place, which increase with his proximity. Getting more serious, 8^) it seems we have (1) a lack data concerning exactly how long either a drinking bird or dunking bird runs on a known quantity of water, and (2) a lack of calibration data in terms of watts/DBP for any of the birds in question. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 9 23:57:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA16155; Sat, 9 May 1998 23:54:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 23:54:21 -0700 Message-ID: <35554DFB.50AB worldnet.att.net> Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 20:49:31 -1000 From: bill perry Reply-To: wperry3092 worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: bridge rec o/u Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aWOMb2.0.Ky3.SyKLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18531 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tonite I applied 3v from 2 aa batteries, in parall to 2 bridge rectifiers, rated at 250v and 6A from radio shack. the outputs of the rectifiers were hooked in series to each other and a resistor was placed in line. I took a voltage reading and got .3V. I had planned for it to raise the voltage to 6V (probably halve the current) but why such the low E reading? is it the voltage drop across 4 diodes at any given point in time? BillP From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 00:05:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA17555; Sun, 10 May 1998 00:04:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:04:17 -0700 Message-ID: <355550B7.7AEC keelynet.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:01:11 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: dunking bird References: <3.0.5.32.19980509232946.008109d0 mail.eden.com> <35553EAD.43DB@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Cknhl2.0.DI4.m5LLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts Barry et al! That was the most hilarious thing I've read in months....your best work to date...thanks for sharing it!!!! Where can I invest since that was the only thing you left out?????? ;-) -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 00:10:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA14573; Sun, 10 May 1998 00:03:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:03:34 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355550D2.4853 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:01:38 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ggq_Y1.0.ZZ3.55LLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 9:51 PM 5/9/98, Barry Merriman wrote: > > > Is that "Drinking Bird" or "Dunking Bird" Power? > Surely a drinking bird would not be ou due to its water > consumption, but a dunking bird, consuming > nothing, would have an infinite COP. > Let's be sure we are talking about the same animal! > Horace, you are playing the same semantic games that all the rest of the pathological skeptics and Department of Energy welfare queens in white lab coats have used to attempt to discredit DBP. Small minded societal parasites such as yourself all spout the refrain: "its drinking, so its not O/U". This is just an attempt to descredit the technology in the popular media. Look: that statement is based on a theoretical *model* of drinking versus dunking. In all honesty, I don't know whether the Bird is drinking or merely dunking, and I don't care. All the matters is that it works, and is a self-sustaining demonstration of O/U. Perhaps the bird will force us to re-think our fundamental theories of drinking. Thats all over my head; what matters is that the effect is real and has been validated beyond any reasonable scientific doubt. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 00:15:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA18808; Sun, 10 May 1998 00:14:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:14:08 -0700 Message-ID: <35555306.4C76 keelynet.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:11:02 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: dunking bird References: <3.0.5.32.19980509232946.008109d0 mail.eden.com> <35553EAD.43DB@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YxibG2.0.ib4._ELLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts! Well, now that you mention it, I know a guy who says he met a fellow out north of Dallas, don't remember the town but I can get him to write the story up....he says he and this fellow got to talking about o/u type experiments and the very common anecdotal tales...the guy told my friend his father had a very large row of these drinking bird type devices all connected to together and just kept a tank full...he said they were timed and produced enough energy to run the lights on his farm... I asked is he'd ever seen this but he said no, the guy was paranoid about it, said they were in a barn and the temperature and humidity were kept constant so the evaporation rate was predictable....never took much stock in the story but it was always an interesting idea, much like the wave motion tapping of the ocean.... I'll see if he'll write up whatever details he remembers.... -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 00:25:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA20747; Sun, 10 May 1998 00:21:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:21:58 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355555A2.4186 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:22:10 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3m1nq2.0.545.LMLLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > it seems we have (1) a lack data concerning > exactly how long either a drinking bird or dunking bird > runs on a known quantity of water Horace, you are just displaying your ignorance of the vast literature on this subject. Or perhaps you are just unwilling to admit this literature exists, since it threatens your entire system of values. I have observed first hand a Drinking Bird undergoing self-sustained bobbing for over a day, and that experiment ended only because my wife was thirsty and drank the remainder of the Bird's glass of water. > a lack of calibration data in terms of watts/DBP > for any of the birds in question. This has all been done, of course Horace. For example, my company Drinking Bird Power (DWP) was for a time in negotiations with Coca-Cola for the rights to manufacture the the birds, and as part of the negotiation their engineers carried out an extensive set of independent studies in their labs. They observed outputs of hundreds of watts from our protype Bird, and they even saw an incredible display of "Drinking After Death", in which the Bird kept bobbing a full 16 hours after its glass had run dry! Unfortunately, we cannot disseminate this data due to our non-disclosure agreements and our need to protect our patent rights. (As a side note, the deal fell through---Coca-Cola offered us $100 million for the manufacturing rights, but only if we would modifying the glass form of the bird to resemble the Classic Coke bottle, and use a brown carbonated liquid instead of the standard red fluid. That was unaceptable to our board of directors, so we have decided to maintain the entire operation in our root cellar in the Ozarks.) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 01:03:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA24172; Sun, 10 May 1998 00:57:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:57:09 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <35555DE2.52FA math.ucla.edu> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 00:57:22 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_bDuY3.0.bv5.LtLLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > a dunking bird, consuming nothing, would have an infinite COP. Horace, this is another example of the logical distortions used by the patholigical skeptics in their desparate attempts to discredit Drinking Bird Power. The self-appointed experts from the scientific establishment insist that since the Bird consumes nothing, it cannot work. We do not claim that the Bird consumes nothing. We do not know what the Bird consumes. But, for example, at least one Nobel prize winner has put forth the theory that the bobbing motion of the bird is in a subharmonic resonance with the zero point fluctuations in the electromagnetic field, and thereby directly taps Zero Point Energy. Other theories suggest that the bobbing motion causes the sloshing red fluid to undergo micro-cavitiations, which in turn lead to sono-fusion reactions when these voids collapse against the glass walls. Indeed, recent mass-spectroscopy results of glass from Birds that have undergone thousands of bobs shows a broad spectrum of elements besides silicon, supporting these theories that the glass walls play a role, and the glass itslef is apparently being transmuted to power the Bird. In any case, many physicists have come forth with possible theories to explain the Birds O/U performance. These theories are all over my head, but they demonstrate the point that even our present theories are not necessarily in contradiction to Drinking Bird Power. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 01:23:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA19185; Sun, 10 May 1998 01:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 01:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:17:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird In-Reply-To: <35555DE2.52FA math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aucZy2.0.fh4.6EMLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 10 May 1998, Barry Merriman wrote: Horace Heffner wrote: > a dunking bird, consuming nothing, would have an infinite COP. Hey, This is Great! Keep it up, (all sides) but "Watch Your Manners" :)) ------- Great insight to what we lurkers will/might have to deal with! perfect & appropriate to this group .. (within dose(s)) -=se=- steve (b.m. are you selling stock?) ekwall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 02:11:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA21378; Sun, 10 May 1998 02:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <35556E7B.14C4 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 02:08:11 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Feynman and ZPE References: <35555DE2.52FA@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EQxVD2.0.vD5.kxMLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18538 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I happened to be sitting next to our Dean, who is a physicist, at a UCLA shin-dig last week, and he in turn was talking to a science reporter who said she was off to cover a workshop on the Quantum Vacuum at Fermilab this week. She mentioned Zero Point Energy, and the Dean said he had been talking to Feynman once about ZPE, and Feynman said.... Just then I was interrupted by and urgent request, and by the time I got my attention back to the Dean, he had just delivered some punchline that set him to chuckling. But, I never got to hear what he said Feynman told him acout the Vacuum! Does anyone out there know what Feynman thought about ZPE? -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 03:46:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA25834; Sun, 10 May 1998 03:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 03:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <35552E5A.7575834B mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 04:34:34 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Calculations Relating to Anti_Grav Experiment References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hIw7f.0.ZJ6.vKOLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18539 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:25 PM 5/9/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: Comes out on Word 95. ... Whatever happened to plain old ASCII? -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- To those who may be interested, I always delete without making any attmept to read if it's not ascii. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 04:04:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA26978; Sun, 10 May 1998 04:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 04:03:16 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <35553271.11DBC3A0 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 04:52:01 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work References: <199805081342_MC2-3C60-BC54 compuserve.com> <355525E5.1FE9@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tpHwd1.0.Sb6.obOLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: ... As far of "self-sustainers" go, my favorite is the "Drinking Bird Toy". By the loose criteria evidenced in recent emails, I'm surprised it is not considered as an O/U demonstration... Hi Barry, Doesn't OU mean merely that the source of the energy is not known? For a while Pierre Curie considered radioactivity OU: perhaps the pitchblende was warm because of energy emanating from the stars. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 04:37:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA13473; Sun, 10 May 1998 04:35:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 04:35:59 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <35553AC4.5818B292 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 05:27:32 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird References: <35555DE2.52FA@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3etD5.0.RI3.V4PLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18541 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: ... and the glass itself is apparently being TRANSMUTED to power the Bird. ... Hey Jerry, Here is our investment opportunity! The drinking bird has really made my Sunday morning. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 04:47:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA14973; Sun, 10 May 1998 04:46:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 04:46:22 -0700 From: JNaudin509 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 07:46:00 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: How to build a cheap Van de Graaf generator.... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 116 Resent-Message-ID: <"EoGvm.0.nf3.DEPLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18542 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Hi All, I have built successfully a Van de Graaf generator for improving lab equipement, this generator is able to produce up to 250kV in dry air, the material used is common and cheap ( about 50 US$ (300 French Francs) without the DC motor ). This is a wonderfull tool for exploring electrodynamics and electrogravitics domains. You will find all pictures and diagram for building this Van de Graaf generator at : http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jlnaudin/html/jlnvdg.htm I hope that this will interest you. Sincerely, Jean-Louis Naudin (France) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 04:57:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA01612; Sun, 10 May 1998 04:56:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 04:56:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000001bd7c0a$180c0500$4d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re; Barry's Drinking-Dunking Bird Psychosis Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 05:47:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"10C4z2.0.6P.ONPLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex It will pass, the Full Moon occurs at 8:29 AM on the 11th day of May. It is especially effective in Southern California this time of the year. :-) Meanwhile, let's lay our Hot Fusion-Cold Fusion cards on the table. IMHO, both sides of the issue are trying to out-do "Old Sol" who musters about a Joule/cm^3/sec (1 watt/cm^3) if the "nuclear reaction zone" is one-millionth of the Sun's volume. The CF folks believe that you can get commercially interesting quantities of heat from various and sundry catalysts if you load them meticulously for several months, or cavitate water,or tap ZPE etc. The HF folks have tried to get commercially interesting quantities of heat by squeezing plasmas, or zapping fuel pellets with particle and laser beams, etc. I think both are right and both are wrong, but HF is still on the Gravy Train for public funding because of the promise of so-called Quantum Mechanical Tunneling. Interesting Geographic effect here. The HF CTR work started at Los Alamos which is nearly 8,000 feet above sea level. The CTR work was terminated in 1992 and moved to the Princeton labs where the elevation is nearly at sea level. That was canceled, now the main thrust is at CERN where they are Tunneling between Switzerland and France so that the Tunneling effect can be maximized. Expect BROKE-EVEN anytime in the next 30 years, and commercially interesting heat (from the taxpayers) sometime after that. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 06:33:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA26496; Sun, 10 May 1998 06:32:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 06:32:48 -0700 Message-ID: <3555ABC9.91B keelynet.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 08:29:45 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird References: <35555DE2.52FA@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7IPbc3.0.rT6._nQLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts Barry! You gotta write this up as a spoof story for Infinite Energy, it would be hilarious as it is here!!!!!!! We need more of this to goad us into reality checks...geez, listen to me, one of the biggest 'believers' there is....but tightening up, we're all 'burnin daylight'..... -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 06:35:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA26581; Sun, 10 May 1998 06:33:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 06:33:28 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980510092658.00711df8 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 09:26:58 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: dunking bird In-Reply-To: <35553EAD.43DB math.ucla.edu> References: <3.0.5.32.19980509232946.008109d0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"C0n-D2.0.FV6.eoQLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:44 PM 5/9/98 -0700, Barry Merriman wrote: >Scott Little wrote: >> >> The dunking bird does make us face some >> interesting thermodynamics....what will the final temperature >> of this system be? > Barry: >Scott, I'm glad you are displaying publicly your ignorance >of Drinking Bird physics. It makes it quite clear that >you are not qualified to experimentally investigate the effect. Before the West Coast hot fusion crowd now abandons both hot fusion and its transmutation studies, to move on toward the Ozarks there to further work on Barry's purported o/u and 'dunking-after-death' (really? where is the data?) drinking-(good point Horace)-bird , consider, The scientific issues include: What is the load (impedance) on the device? Increase it [as should be done for other o/u devices]. When will thermometry be turned into calorimetry? Measure the HEAT generated by the bird, and of the system, including in the locked [non-oscillating] position. It is clearly not o/u, and a serious calorimetric system should be able prove it, and to obtain a measurement. Mitchell Swartz (mica world.std.com) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 06:41:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA07887; Sun, 10 May 1998 06:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 06:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3555ACE3.2F47 keelynet.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 08:34:27 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird References: <35555DE2.52FA@math.ucla.edu> <35553AC4.5818B292@mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SPwjK2.0.9x1.PuQLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts Jack, Barry, et al! Barry Merriman wrote: ... and the glass itself is apparently being TRANSMUTED to power the Bird. ... ---------------- Hey Jerry, Here is our investment opportunity! The drinking bird has really made my Sunday morning. Jack Smith --------------------- You know, this arena is REPLETE with con artists who WOULD surely try to make money off of this, so let's watch Merriman and see that he stays a Merri-man and doesn't wind up as bunkmate with Joe....I gotta say, I'd never believed Barry had a sense of humor, especially one this finely honed....amazing, he has to be on medication or one of his electro-chemical experiment went awry...spread that stuff around Barry! -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 08:08:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA07591; Sun, 10 May 1998 08:07:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 08:07:09 -0700 Message-ID: <3555B4DA.6D60 earthlink.net> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 09:08:26 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Tim: free energy device sites 05/09/98 Content-Type: message/news Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"rGrHn3.0.Ws1.RASLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Path: nntp.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!feeder.qis.net!btnet-peer!btnet!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!server6.netnews.ja.net!news.york.ac.uk!not-for-mail From: Tim Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy.hydrogen Subject: Re: Decker's SLANDER Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 15:40:12 +0100 Organization: University of York Sender: tjh103 york.ac.uk Message-ID: <35546ACC.A6BA1043 doesnotexist.com> References: <01bd6421$56b2d1e0$9ef610d1 deanmachine> <01bd6a5c$e3e038a0$fdf510d1@deanmachine> <353B44C1.62A4EF8B@pclink.com> <353B7614.B0881C62 rt66.com> <353CED00.D2AC8CF2@pclink.com> <353E2F26.5EF99D7A@rt66.com> <3551A00D.52CF@cyberportal.net> <3551E0AA.39DC@cyberportal.net> <355310B B.B1110C8C home.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: cst219.york.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.energy:58819 sci.physics.fusion:21883 sci.energy.hydrogen:12022 What fascinates me about the 'free energy,' scene is that everyone thinks their device is the one that works, and that everyone else is a fraud. I am afraid I have to see the humor in the situation. As far as I can make out it comes down to this. The CETI device works, Perrealult radient energy works, the Adams over-unity design works, 2 japanese over-unity motors work, the Johnson over-unity motor works, the Swiss TESTATIKA generator works, Hamel effect works but needs precise geometry, as does another design on Naudin's site, Schauberger water turbines are 10x more efficient than coventional designs, Hans Coler's device worked, Farnsworth hot fusion works, and 200 mpg Pogue carburetors work. Thats about it, although that does not imply any assertion on my part that any other claims are false, after all, I don't want to be accussed of slander. I provide my take on what the best 'free energy,' sites are on my web page -- http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/4871/freelinks.html If none of these sites impress you, then probably 'free energy,' is a mere pipe dream. I wish I had the time, lab space etc, to try a couple of these ideas out.... Tim. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 08:36:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA11532; Sun, 10 May 1998 08:30:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 08:30:10 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 15:29:50 +0000 Message-ID: <19980510152948.AAA23968 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"PH6sD3.0.1q2.1WSLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts Barry, >Sorry Scott...all your experiment demonstrates is that >the crude testing methods employed at EarthTech >destroy the delicate conditions >required for the O/U Drinking Bird to function properly. I'm >not interested in your theoretical obsfuscations. Experiment >is the only means by which we can decide the reality of >this effect, and the mere fact that your poorly designed >experiment failed tells us nothing. > >Your approach is no doubt rooted in your pathological >skepticism and your blind adherence to the scientific >orthodoxy---although I'm not sure whether you are consciously >trying to suppress study of DBP (Drinking Bird Power) or >whether you are just too incompetent to replicate the effect. >Of course, the latter would come as no surprise! You certainly >could not build a nuclear power plant, or a B-1 stealth >bomber, or Pentium II processor (with MMX!)---so what makes >you think you should be able to build and operate a Drinking Bird! >Its design and operation have been tuned and perfected >through thousands of product generations and manufacturing >cycles. Thousands of Drinking Bird Power units are shipped >each year, and there are many satisfied customers attesting >to their amazing performance. Your asserions to to contrary, >based on your supposed "replication", carry no weight. > >In particular, it is clearly stated by the manufacturer that >the DBP unit must be operated in the open air, and at >low humidity. Your experiment obviously did not satisfy >these conditions, and so it comes as no surpise that you >saw no O/U effect! Replication requires the utmost attention >to details, and your experiment does not even come close! > >If you want to seriously investiaget DWP, you have to >design an experiment that allows the device to operate >in its O/U condition, and measure power in and out by unobtrusive >means. I'm amazed that I have to explain this to trained >scinetists and engineers, but apparently their ignorance >of the scientific method runs deep. > >So, Scott---can you do beter than your first pitiful >experimental protocol. > >:-) >;-) Barry, perhaps your sense of humor represents a form of overunity (since it kept me chuckling long after I read it), but more likely you have just stored up energy in the form of frustration and it has been slowly released through normal humorous (chemical) means, simply appearing to be anomalous, not unlike the famous Johnny Carson monologue, which, for a time, was thought to be inspired by supernatural entities, until it was discovered that he was transmuting the souls of his ex-wives into social lubricant. I trust that you do not consider your light-hearted ridicule to be an adequate response to the assertion that a self-heating apparatus is truly anomalous. You cannot defend the notion that insulation could be arbitrarily effective and ignore calibration data. We would like to see somebody in your position firmly rooting some goal-posts. Surely, your mastery of physics would allow you to do that! Consider for a moment how any highly trained physicist would respond if he had been shipwrecked (incommunicado) and given up for dead for nine years. If he were rescued by Gene Mallove, by the time they reached San Diego, he would be convinced with voluminous documentation from credible sources beyond reasonable doubt that anomalous energy devices were being slowly teased from nature. On the other hand, if Gary Taubes had found him, he would have heard stories about something called pathological science that had caused a malignant offshoot from the normal discourse of science to absurdly proclaim that nuclear physics was all wrong. So, given the tendency to believe what we are led to believe, what should we do? Support your local empiricist! Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 09:27:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23139; Sun, 10 May 1998 09:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 09:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:17:15 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"6K0Kx2.0.Sf5.zJTLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Barry and Vo., Barry has brought forth one of the single most important examples of what many look for. Personally if there is some effect or process, if possible I want to be able to see it go, under my own two hands. There are others who share this, including Scott, Hamdi, Greg, Steve and the list goes on. SO: Get out of the arm chair and go to the knick knack shop or specialty mail order catalog and buy your bird. Test and report. I personally have seen the bird work. AND: Thanks again to Barry for the spin, I would like to ask his permission to publish this.... How about it? J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 10:00:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA26891; Sun, 10 May 1998 09:58:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 09:58:16 -0700 Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:54:02 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Reposting by Murray 05/08/98 Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805101257_MC2-3C87-B04F compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"ezsZc3.0.5a6.doTLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:rmforall earthlink.net Rich Murray writes: I will be happy to respect his choice for me to never forward his posts to sci.physics.fusion or my long private lists or to anyone else . . . Good. Thanks. For instance, can I, or would Jed please forward his post to blue pilot.msu.edu? Please don't! He is the last person I want to communicate with. These messages are not copyright so you can do whatever you like with them, but I would prefer to keep them away from Blue. McKubre has not proved to him [Blue] that his rare heat excursions are compelling evidence for CF, a position expressed to me by other fairly objective players, which I also hold, because who knows what artifacts might rarely happen in a complex calorimeter. The calorimeter is fundamentally simple, the heat excursions are not rare, and there are no artifacts. You and Blue cannot say what imaginary artifacts might be. You cannot give a single technical reason to support your claims, so these claims are empty. Waving your hand talking about "who knows what" artifact doesn't count. The instrument is fundamentally simple, and the added complexity only serves to increase credibility and boost the S/N ratio. Nothing will convince you or Blue. Not even six out of six positive runs at Mitsubishi, or 13 out of 14 at the French AEC. You will be convinced when the establishment endorses CF. I have posted the idea, surely outlandish for most, that psychokinetic effects may be involved-- the openminded may want to read Dr. Dean Radin's "The Conscious Universe", for a very competent overview on the results of sober, well replicated "ESP" research. You believe ESP results are robust and replicated. And you apparently believe the you found a problem in spectroscopy performed at U. Illinois by Miley et al. You are *not* convinced by McKubre's 90 sigma calorimetry, but you *are* convinced by ESP experiments. Very interesting! I think your scientific judgement is flawed, and I am glad you do not endorse cold fusion. I cannot judge your critiques of Miley's spectroscopy, but experts who can have told me you are completely wrong. I can judge your earlier claims about calorimetry and I know that you do not have a clue about that subject. I will eliminate the long header problem for Vortex-L members, by posting separately. That's helpful. Jed Rothwell and a few others could eliminate the long line breakup by posting in about 60-character long lines, as most do. Since you have agreed not to repost my messages, this is not an issue. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 10:11:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26684; Sun, 10 May 1998 10:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 10:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3555DEA1.C7E22EED ro.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:06:41 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" Organization: NASA Volunteer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Kyle R. Mcallister" , vortex-l Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <01BD7B62.9E2CF5C0 pm3-142.gpt.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PTbH13.0.qW6.3zTLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18551 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > ---------- > From: Patrick V. Reavis[SMTP:preavis ro.com] > Sent: Saturday, May 09, 1998 12:18 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field > > >Kyle, > >I built a function generator in a few hours (maybe ten altogether, > >including etching the pc board) using the MAX038 chip from Maxim > >Semiconductors. It requires very little support circuitry and can > >generate highly symmetrical sine, triangle,square, and sawtooth waves > > >from .1 Hz to better than 20 Mhz. (I've a gotten as much as 63 MHz, > but > >the device gets very flaky beyond ~25 Mhz). Although the output is > only > >2 volts peak-to-peak, it is a simple matter to build an amplifier to > >boost this level. The really handy thing is that it requires only > plus > >and minus 5 volts to operate so it can be battery driven! For a data > >sheet, see http://209.1.238.250/arpdf/1257.pdf good luck! > > How could I amplify this to about 40V at 2 amps? I need that kind of > power for my experiment. > > Thanks, > Kyle R. Mcallister Kyle,If you possess basic electronics skills (i.e. can you reproduce a circuit from a schematic) the circuit is relatively simple. Any electronics store should have either a kit from which to build an amplifier, or a data book showing not only the layout of the components, but their values as well. It will require a power supply rated for your application ( I X V= P, 2A x 40V = 80 Watts ) so be sure to use a supply that is about 1.5 times that capacity. You can build the power supply yourself, or purchase one. A switching power supply from a computer is cheap and available from many sources, but since the output is +/- 5 volts and +/- 12 volts, you will be limited to 24 volts peak to peak. It will be rated at 180 to 300 watts, so power will not be a problem. If all else fails, go to your nearest community college or technical college, and enlist the aid of a student for the designing and building of the final device; they often have projects along these lines that will give them classroom credit or at least some real-world experience. Also, I had the privilege of attending a meeting with Dr. Podkletnov a NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center last week, and I took a few notes. I'd be glad to share the information with anyone interested. -- Patrick V. Reavis Student at Large /\ / \ / G \ ~~~~~~~~ DELTA-G From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 11:25:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04552; Sun, 10 May 1998 11:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 11:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805101821.OAA19960 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird Date: Sun, 10 May 98 14:22:56 -0000 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"gowNh2.0.x61.73VLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: >In any case, many physicists have come forth with possible >theories to explain the Birds O/U performance. These theories >are all over my head, but they demonstrate the point that >even our present theories are not necessarily in contradiction >to Drinking Bird Power. I think Barry is just giving us the bird, so to speak! Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 11:39:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA06444; Sun, 10 May 1998 11:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 11:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3555F23E.586DF9E9 ro.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 13:30:22 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" Organization: NASA Volunteer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: wperry3092 worldnet.att.net, vortex-l Subject: Re: bridge rec o/u X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <35554DFB.50AB worldnet.att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"WE9Ty1.0.ba1.fBVLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18553 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: bill perry wrote: > Tonite I applied 3v from 2 aa batteries, in parall to 2 bridge > rectifiers, rated at 250v and 6A from radio shack. the outputs of the > rectifiers were hooked in series to each other and a resistor was > placed > in line. I took a voltage reading and got .3V. I had planned for it to > > raise the voltage to 6V (probably halve the current) but why such the > low E reading? is it the voltage drop across 4 diodes at any given > point > in time? > BillP Bill, a typical silicon diode will drop 700 millivolts (.7 v) when forward biased. So 4 x .7v = 2.8v, 3v - 2.8v = .2v . No anomaly here... -- Patrick V. Reavis Student at Large /\ / \ / G \ ~~~~~~~~ DELTA-G From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 11:59:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA10866; Sun, 10 May 1998 11:55:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 11:55:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006201bd7c44$b704b000$4d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: The Beauty of The Saha and Gamow Equations Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:51:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"kWEnT1.0.cf2.gWVLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Classical Saha equation: Log Ni^2/No = -5040*Vi/T + Log T + 15.385 where Ni is the number of ions in a gas at a given Temperature and Pressure and the number No of neutral atoms/molecules and Vi is the ionization energy in ev. By the same token, dissociation of H2 or D2 to 2 H or 2 D can be substituted: Log (N 2H)^2/(N)H2 = -5040*Vd/T + LogT + 15.385 Using this equation in a simple computer program will show much more effectively than rhetoric and hand-waving, just where one must be with any of the Hot or Cold Fusion devices if one expects to get any O/U heat (about 2 Kev/reaction) from Hydrino-Deutrino, Quasi-neutron-Quasi-DiNeutron formation ,or whatever. For the D-D reactions that follow any O/U heat output, the Gamow reaction cross-section equation might apply: Cross-section D-D = (288/W)e^-45.8*W^-1/2 *E-24 cm^2. Where W is in Kev. If this doesn't suit, look at the neutron absorption-reaction cross section for Deuterium or Hydrogen which should be the same for a Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutron. I Think. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 12:12:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA14346; Sun, 10 May 1998 12:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 11:08:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird Resent-Message-ID: <"7TKso3.0.4W3.ukVLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:01 AM 5/10/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> >> At 9:51 PM 5/9/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >> >> >> Is that "Drinking Bird" or "Dunking Bird" Power? >> Surely a drinking bird would not be ou due to its water >> consumption, but a dunking bird, consuming >> nothing, would have an infinite COP. >> Let's be sure we are talking about the same animal! >> > >Horace, you are playing the same semantic games that >all the rest of the pathological skeptics and >Department of Energy welfare queens in white lab coats have >used to attempt to discredit DBP. Any fool can see by the brighness and whiteness of my lab coat that I am no welfare queen! I have been involved for some time now in a market research test of an experimental lab coat detergent created by a secret Japanese lab, funded by billions from MITI. There were mostly unnoticed leaks concerning this secret detergent at ICCF6, but fortunately no one has discovered that CF research is really just a front for this lab, which has been kept secret from Procter & Gamble for years. The US now lags years behind this effort, which has produced lab coats with an albedo of 1.5. I disclose all this now to demonstrate that I am not a patahological skptic, but maintain an open mind. That said, it is still essential that we get our terminology straight and then get approval from the DOE subcommitte on subcomittees and committees before spending of even one thin dime of funding for DBP research. Speeking of committees, how's Joe C. doing? > >Small minded societal parasites such as yourself all spout the >refrain: "its drinking, so its not O/U". This is >just an attempt to descredit the technology in the >popular media. Look: that statement is >based on a theoretical *model* of drinking versus dunking. Model shmodel. If there is no quantitative theory of DBP, which in particular demands a supra-eleven-dimensional theory in agreement with QM, GR, and BVD's, and suitable for the engineering of devices, it is clear the existence of DBP must be highly questioned. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof! >In all honesty, I don't know whether the Bird is drinking or >merely dunking, and I don't care. Truly amateur approach. >All the matters is that it >works, and is a self-sustaining demonstration of O/U. Perhaps >the bird will force us to re-think our fundamental theories >of drinking. Thats all over my head; what matters is that >the effect is real and has been validated beyond any >reasonable scientific doubt. What realy matters is the flow of money from the gullible into DBP stock. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 12:27:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA16955; Sun, 10 May 1998 12:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 11:22:15 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird Resent-Message-ID: <"eIAEC.0.o84.oxVLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:22 AM 5/10/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> >> it seems we have (1) a lack data concerning >> exactly how long either a drinking bird or dunking bird >> runs on a known quantity of water > >Horace, you are just displaying your ignorance of the >vast literature on this subject. Or perhaps you are >just unwilling to admit this literature exists, since >it threatens your entire system of values. It can't possibly threaten my values, which are all relative. However, er.., um.., the misleading bru-haha over theses non-issues are putting an unwarranted amount of congressional scrutiny on funding for the quasi-matter superinjector for the tokamak lab, and an ever increasing bird dogging of our lab coat detergent budget. [snip wife's and Coke's anecdotal evidence] >(As a side note, the deal fell through---Coca-Cola >offered us $100 million for the manufacturing rights, but only >if we would modifying the glass form of the bird >to resemble the Classic Coke bottle, and use a brown >carbonated liquid instead of the standard red fluid. >That was unaceptable to our board of directors, so we >have decided to maintain the entire operation in our >root cellar in the Ozarks.) This is a sure sign of DBP joining the ranks of the undead. It is now clearly furtile territory for sociologic study, and fodder for some determined and unabashed PhD candidate's dissertation. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 12:45:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA20756; Sun, 10 May 1998 12:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:42:38 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 22:35:00 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35560257.C609C18 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 22:39:03 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field References: <01BD7B62.9E2CF5C0 pm3-142.gpt.infi.net> <3555DEA1.C7E22EED@ro.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xzzbH3.0.B45.hCWLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Patrick V. Reavis wrote: > [snip] > Also, I had the privilege of attending a meeting with Dr. Podkletnov a > NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center last week, and I took a few notes. > I'd be glad to share the information with anyone interested. > > -- > Patrick V. Reavis > Student at Large > /\ > / \ > / G \ > ~~~~~~~~ > DELTA-G Hi Patrick, In am very interested with your meeting. I will be pleased if you share your notes with me. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 13:09:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA26799; Sun, 10 May 1998 13:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 13:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980510185739.00695b68 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: Sun, 10 May 1998 14:57:39 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Kurt Johmann Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird Resent-Message-ID: <"X2q7M2.0.WY6.gXWLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:01 AM 5/10/98 -0700, Barry Merriman wrote: >In all honesty, I don't know whether the Bird is drinking or >merely dunking, and I don't care. A typical Jedism, and your spoof is littered with them. Nicely done. Kurt Johmann -- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 13:13:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA27425; Sun, 10 May 1998 13:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 13:07:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 13:09:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: VORTEX Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird In-Reply-To: <199805101821.OAA19960 mercury.mv.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"7AkU1.0.Ri6.eZWLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18559 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sirs ;-) Add to the DATA stack, that indeed these Dunking/Drinking birds appear to BE O/U the fact that my elderly little ol~ lady neighbor has been faithly feeding 'her bird' daily for years. She says it really isn't much of a bother and has even given it the name "BOB". Note: she admitted however that she feather-duster bathes him at least once a month (ahhh) but I suspect that just adds a needed electro-static charge for continued operation. While it APPEARS O/U I'm sure its got a Battery hidden in its base or support bars. Note how cleverly the bird has two (2) supports... hummm one POSITIVE one NEGATIVE. I'd bet other people who have 'long-running' units add this same charge! -------------- In pursuit of pure science she kindly said I could borrow it (if i was careful with ~little precious bob~).. 1. It can NOT be OU (of course) 2. So, it must have a hidden chamber ----- 3. (sigh) NO HIDDEN CHAMBER in base, and the support arms `were' solid ----- Say does anyone have the URL for the Original Schematics of how this was suppose to be put together? Also would alcohol restore the red feather dye in case someone happened to dip the top half into some unkown liquid?? Airplane Glue MELTS the support arm material REAL WELL. The precision of construction of this unit is amazing. I would suggest using only the best lab facilities for further research, maybe a clean room. finally, you don't think it needs ALL that liquid to work do you? what if just a little was missing? Glass repair is a bear. steve (where can i get those little hats too?) ekwall steve (i need a drink - she wants bob back NOW) ekwall :-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 14:38:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16438; Sun, 10 May 1998 14:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 14:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 12:00:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird Resent-Message-ID: <"EZjhR.0.e04.WqXLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:57 AM 5/10/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> > >> a dunking bird, consuming nothing, would have an infinite COP. > >Horace, this is another example of the logical distortions >used by the patholigical skeptics in their desparate >attempts to discredit Drinking Bird Power. Aha, I thought so! You don't even have a dunking bird and you knew it all along! Clear exaggeration, wishful thinking, and marketing hype. "Hyperbole" would be too charitable. [snip wild-eyed hypotheses thinly veiled as "theories".] > Indeed, recent mass-spectroscopy >results of glass from Birds that have undergone thousands >of bobs shows a broad spectrum of elements besides silicon, >supporting these theories that the glass walls play a role, >and the glass itslef is apparently being transmuted to power >the Bird. This needs to be studied by a reputable academic organization like TAMU, which does "pure" research now that the fly by night Bockris has retired from TAMU on the royalties on his tome of wishful thinking: "Modern Electrochemistry," and others of similar ilk have been expunged or hounded to death. Someone on the TAMU faculty probably will entertain such a debunking, since debunking even high school science fair projects is fair game. What we need here is a rigorous determination of wheter the bird is really drinking, i.e. loading water, or not. Such a study should, at minimum, determine the amont of loading by measuring the bird's resistance. Since the bird appears to be non-conductive, a high voltage sample pulse will be required. Since DOE will not fund anything less than gigajoule pulse generators, due to a sudden surplus of outdated Starwars pulse generators in the Southwest, a rather large sample pulse will be necessary, but think of jobs it will supply for the research, and faculty positions for the lucky host university Since the birds each will become crispy gasseous critters in the course of producing a single data point, volume purchasing will be required, and to rigorous government standards. At $10,000 a bird, and a staff of 100 to run the pulse generator, there is a high motivation to obtain a significant amount of research funding by the Senator from the great drinking bird state. If the bird is clearly ou, especially over the high background signal, there are obviouos defense implications. So, after careful consideration, I think this bird may fly after all. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 16:02:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05446; Sun, 10 May 1998 16:00:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:00:34 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00bd01bd7c61$87f08240$4d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: AN1546 (http://mot2.indirect.com/lit/html/an1546.html) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:18:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B6_01BD7C2F.363B3940" Resent-Message-ID: <"7ZBJz1.0.BK1.A6ZLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00B6_01BD7C2F.363B3940 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Higher Voltage, Motorola Electronic Ballast Circuit Designs. http://mot2.indirect.com/lit/html/an1546.html ------=_NextPart_000_00B6_01BD7C2F.363B3940 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="AN1546.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="AN1546.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://mot2.indirect.com/lit/html/an1546.html Modified=00151B89607CBD0153 ------=_NextPart_000_00B6_01BD7C2F.363B3940-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 16:02:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05683; Sun, 10 May 1998 16:01:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:01:04 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00bc01bd7c61$86c26280$4d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: AN1543 (http://motserv.indirect.com/lit/html/an1543.html) Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:16:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_009B_01BD7C2E.FCCEE800" Resent-Message-ID: <"R_Ryb3.0.PO1.c6ZLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_009B_01BD7C2E.FCCEE800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For those Interested in Electronic Ballast Design for Gas Discharge Devices Like Vince's Hydrogen-Potassium Electrode. Motorola Circuit Design 32 pages or more with adobe reader. FJS http://motserv.indirect.com/lit/html/an1543.html ------=_NextPart_000_009B_01BD7C2E.FCCEE800 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="AN1543.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="AN1543.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://motserv.indirect.com/lit/html/an1543.html Modified=00B056A8607CBD0148 ------=_NextPart_000_009B_01BD7C2E.FCCEE800-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 16:12:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA11434; Sun, 10 May 1998 16:10:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:10:41 -0700 From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <23cc6e37.355633d7 aol.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 19:10:14 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, editor@infinite-energy.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: ans meeting Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"byZtd2.0.ao2.mFZLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Who knows the when and where of the next ANS meeting this summer. I would like to go. Who from the CF community is going to be there? Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 16:30:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA16627; Sun, 10 May 1998 16:27:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:27:56 -0700 Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:27:33 -0700 Message-Id: <199805102327.AA08212 lafn.org> From: ad368 lafn.org (Jim Day) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Drinking Bird Reply-To: ad368 lafn.org Resent-Message-ID: <"QI9Dj3.0.e34.xVZLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts, As Professor Merriman wrote in a recent posting, there is a vast body of literature dealing with the Drinking Bird. However, much of this literature is highly classified for reasons of national security, especially the data dealing with birds modified to run on heavy water. Some years ago, Scientific American published an article about scaling up the Drinking Bird to perform useful work such as pumping water in arid regions. It was soon realized that the principle of Conservation of Water limited the output and a Drinking Bird large enough to pump significant amounts of water would evaporate more water than it could pump. Some have speculated that quantum fluctuations of the water table might replenish the supply, but this has yet to be demonstrated. An unconfirmed report claims that the bird can be converted to operate on solar power by painting the body black (but not the head). Care should be used to avoid an explosion due to excess energy. Regards, Jim Day ------------------------------------------------------------------ RECENT UNCLASSIFIED PAPERS Gesser, H.D., "The bobbing (drinking) bird," in Journal of Chemical Education, v 73 n 4 (Apr. 1, 1996): 355. Ng, L.M. and Y.S. Ng, "The thermodynamics of the drinking bird toy," in Physics Education, v 28 n 5 (Sep. 1, 1993): 320. Mentzer, Robert, "The drinking bird--the little heat engine that could," in The Physics Teacher, v 31 n 2 (Feb. 1, 1993): 126. Vemulapalli, G.K., "A discourse on the drinking bird," in Journal of Chemical Education, v 67 n 6 (Jun. 1, 1990): 457. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 16:49:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA20979; Sun, 10 May 1998 16:47:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 16:47:20 -0700 Message-ID: <355666DD.3412 bellsouth.net> Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 19:47:57 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Tribute to the Bird Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"E_diU2.0.j75.7oZLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A fitting tribute to the DB: http://www.graceland.edu/~elroyomj/bird.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 18:04:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA22241; Sun, 10 May 1998 17:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 17:58:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <011f01bd7c77$632eb600$4d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: H2-Potassium-Hydrino Photo Power Source for Anti-Grav Vehicle Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 18:54:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"TPq8i.0.RR5.PqaLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex As soon as Vince gets O/U from the H2-K Hydrino Generator, the unit can be used as a high or low pressure O/U light source using electronic pulse circuitry. This will run an array of Photo-Voltaic cells surrounding the UV-EUV fluorescent light source in a partial power feedback arrangement. Refer to the Motorola AN1543 and AN1546 design data (links posted earlier)for details. Is this the reason for the "lights", Terry? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 10 21:44:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA13484; Sun, 10 May 1998 21:41:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 21:41:51 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <3b0df38e.35567f8e aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 00:33:16 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"h9a3d3.0.ZI3.D6eLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, Here follows the raw data from an H2 with K run Sunday afternoon 5-10-98 Bottom line: Best temperature (479.3 C) was at a vacuum of 24.0 in Hg with 850 volts across the tube. At that time the PRIMARY of the high voltage transformer was pulling 5.1 amps at 118vac. The SECONDARY output DC was through 16 7.5 watt lamps in series. The lamps appeared to be at full brightness. Compare this with Saturdays H2 no K run best temperature of 365.6 C with 850 volts across the tube. Do I need to insert an additional series resistor so as to measure current? An ammeter?...Or what? Here is the data as recorded in my lab notebook: Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada M=Minutes TC= Degrees C +/- 0.1 C DCV=Voltage measured across glow tube M____TC__DCV_____Comments_______________ 0 23.3 500 H2 fill to 26.0 in Hg 1 116.6 500 2 211.6 500 3 261.9 400 4 286.0 350 5 290.5 350 6 292.0 350 7 292.5 350 8 293.1 350 9 293.5 350 10 293.5 350 H2 fill to 1atm pump down to 26.0 11 276.1 300 12 277.1 300 13 286.0 350 14 290.0 350 15 292.0 350 16 291.9 350 17 291.4 350 18 290.9 350 19 290.8 350 20 290.8 350 21 291.3 350 22 291.5 350 23 289.9 350 24 284.1 300 25 280.9 300 26 279.7 325 27 279.3 325 28 279.5 325 29 279.3 325 30 279.5 300 31 283.3 300 32 292.1 300 33 294.7 300 34 296.5 300 Cant get tube voltage above 300v at full power!? 35 297.5 300 pump down to 26.8 36 298.8 300 H2 fill to 23.0 37 325.8 650 38 379.7 635 39 406.1 600 40 416.8 600 41 420.0 600 42 421.0 600 43 420.5 600 44 419.4 600 45 418.6 600 46 418.1 600 47 417.8 600 48 417.7 600 49 418.0 600 Vacuum at 23.0 50 418.4 600 Reversed polarity. Upper electrode now is +. 51 351.5 600 52 312.4 600 Pump down to 25.0 53 352.2 600 54 357.6 600 55 364.4 600 56 383.8 600 57 390.4 600 58 393.4 600 59 396.6 600 60 397.9 600 61 399.6 600 62 400.7 600 63 402.5 600 64 404.1 650 65 405.5 635 66 406.1 625 67 406.8 625 68 407.8 625 69 408.7 625 70 410.2 625 71 411.4 625 72 412.4 625 73 414.2 620 74 415.1 620 75 416.9 620 76 418.7 625 77 420.5 635 78 422.0 650 79 424.2 650 80 425.8 650 81 427.0 650 82 427.0 650 83 427.3 650 84 428.0 650 85 428.5 650 86 428.6 650 87 429.0 650 88 428.3 650 89 428.7 650 90 428.5 650 H2 fill to 24.0 in Hg 91 421.1 800 92 444.3 800 93 456.2 800 94 459.7 800 95 462.3 800 96 463.6 800 97 464.5 800 98 464.7 800 99 465.5 800 100 465.8 800 101 466.1 800 102 466.5 800 103 467.1 800 104 467.2 800 105 467.8 800 106 468.1 800 107 468.6 800 108 469.2 800 109 469.5 800 110 469.6 800 111 469.8 800 112 469.8 800 113 470.2 800 114 470.4 800 115 471.1 800 116 471.6 800 117 471.9 800 118 472 800 119 472.1 800 120 472.9 800 121 473.3 800 122 474.1 800 123 474.5 800 124 474.9 800 125 475.3 800 126 475.7 800 127 476.2 800 128 477 800 129 477.1 800 130 477.3 800 131 477.8 800 132 478.2 800 133 477.8 850 134 477.3 850 135 478.1 850 136 477.7 850 137 478 850 138 478.6 850 139 478.6 850 140 478.5 850 141 478.5 850 Vacuum at 24.0 142 479.3 850 Max Temp Reached Here 143 479.1 850 144 479.3 850 145 479.3 850 146 479.2 850 147 479.1 850 148 479 850 149 479 850 150 479.2 850 151 478.7 850 152 478.6 850 153 478.5 850 154 478.8 850 Vacuum at 24.0 155 478.3 Power Off. Pull full vacuum 156 350.8 157 239.8 158 174 159 135.1 160 107.8 161 89.1 162 75.9 163 65.5 164 59 165 53.3 End of Run 05-10-98 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 00:42:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA17034; Mon, 11 May 1998 00:40:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 00:40:09 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 10 May 1998 23:40:06 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Silicon Resent-Message-ID: <"epCBP2.0.u94.OjgLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18568 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:25 PM 5/9/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >> > >> You said, "Quartz will oxidize rapidly in air if heated too hot." I don't >> get it; quartz (SiO2) is already an oxide. > >Gee, Mike, you're right! I'll bet Scott was thinking of some sort of >destructive recrystalization from glass-state to crystal? >Guessing, always guessing -- Frank Stenger The CRC shows 5 different forms of SiO2. Since Si is valence 4, like carbon, it seems (to me) like there should be complex forms of Si, including 6-ring forms, buckyballs, and nano-tubes. There is probably a lot of good science to be done with vaporized silicon compounds. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 01:24:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA20160; Mon, 11 May 1998 01:21:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 01:21:26 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 00:21:30 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: High frequency magnetic field Resent-Message-ID: <"Je73A1.0.vw4.6KhLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18569 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:39 PM 5/10/98, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Patrick V. Reavis wrote: >> >[snip] >> Also, I had the privilege of attending a meeting with Dr. Podkletnov a >> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center last week, and I took a few notes. >> I'd be glad to share the information with anyone interested. [snip] >In am very interested with your meeting. I will be pleased if you share >your notes with me. Yes, please post your notes. Thanks! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 03:26:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA26785; Mon, 11 May 1998 03:24:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 03:24:22 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000d01bd7cc6$b68e7480$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hydrogen, Helium, and Lithium Electrode- Discharge Source Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 04:21:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"AUyuO.0.PY6.L7jLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex With a range of 122 ev EUV to 40,000+ Angstrom (0.3 ev) infrared, without a lot of spectral "noise", a mix of Hydrogen and Helium with a Lithium cathode would be a good choice for generating Hydrinos or Quasi-Neutrons with simultaneous generation of photons to power Photo-Voltaic cells. The Potassium spectra by comparison looks like it wastes a lot of good ultraviolet photo-conversion energy closer to the infrared (heat) region. Besides, if there are any Hydrogen + Lithium ---> 2 He4 + 17.3 Mev reactions they will build up the Helium in the discharge device also. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 04:19:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA31086; Mon, 11 May 1998 04:17:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 04:17:30 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001701bd7cce$210ab920$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Summing it Up Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 05:14:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"0nymc1.0.eb7.9vjLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Employing the H2-Helium-Lithium Electrode discharge in a quartz tube,(with or without a phosphor)and using a Photo-Voltaic power converter looks like an extended R&D effort. The Electronic Driver for the discharge tube as presented in the Motorola Application Notes; AN1543 and 1546 look like good science for getting the most out of the discharge "tube". The 32 pages of Motorola AN1543 and 4 pages of AN1546 look well worth studying. The electrically conductive Lithium Hydride (melting point 680 deg C) should pose no big problems in the discharge tube. The high photon efficiency attained using discharge frequencies in the megahertz range at high or low H2-He gas pressure looks interesting also. A computer program to optimize Ionization potential, 2 H/H2 dissociation and gas pressure (No)using the Saha equation: Log (Ni)^2/No = -5040*Vi/T + LogT + 13.85 and Log (N-2H)^2/(N)H2 = -5040*Vd/T + LogT + 15.385 at a dissociation potential Vd (about 4.5 ev for H2)should get at the best operating pressure also. Can we get Scott to establish the experimental protocol? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 06:13:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA10500; Mon, 11 May 1998 06:11:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 06:11:20 -0700 Message-Id: <199805111311.JAA09006 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Physics high priests are at it again! Date: Mon, 11 May 98 09:14:10 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id GAA10470 Resent-Message-ID: <"rXRm-1.0.vZ2.tZlLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians: Well, well, well, the APS high priests are at it again.. trying to tell us and everyone else what is and is not science. They especially fear that youth will be corrupted, that "pseudoscience" may be "causing confusion among science students." And what is this psuedoscience? Well, of course, such highly disturbing stuff as "cold fusion." And, horrors of horrors‹ "alternative medicine." Has anybody reminded these jerks (in the APS and in Nature) that a lot of effective medicine started as "alternative" -- alternative to pain and death -- and that lots of what medicine knows today was empirically derived from forest explorers and "medicine men"? It pleases me that the APS is crusin' for a brusin' on the matter of CF. The sooner the better. Of course, they'll mostly run madly for CF funding once they learn the score... We should be happy, I suppose, that they included the part: "an attitude of scepticism about its own tenets". IF THEY ONLY PRACTICED WHAT THEY PREACHED! MY favorite definition of science I found on Prof. Peter Hagelstein's door at MIT. It is said to be from Kurt Vonnegut -- though I was never able to locate in which book or writing of his he said it -- even after contacting his literary agent. I quoted it in Fire from Ice: SCIENCE IS MAGIC THAT WORKS. -- Kurt Vonnegut Best, Gene NATURE Vpl.392, 30 April 1998 Physicists seek definition of 'science' [Washington] The governing council of the American Physical Society (APS) has rejected the first draft of a statement defining science for the public, which the society's public affairs panel has been preparing for three years. According to an official fa miliar with the discussion, some members were concerned by a proposed reference to "other approaches" to understanding nature. Others are said to have been worried about public misunderstanding of the statement's references to "falsifiability" The authors of the draft 200-word statement have heen asked to confer with scientific societies and other interested parties before coming back with a new version later this year. The case for such a statement has been recently confirmed by opinion polls showing that public belief in forms of pseudoscience‹such as faith healing and astrology‹is growing in the United States. But the rejection of the draft, although not unusual for s uch a policy statement, illustrates the difficulties that scientists face in trying to draw a recognizable line betueen their own work and pseudoscience. The statement, entitled "What is Science?", defines science as "a disciplined quest to understand nature in all its aspects" and explains that it demands both "open and complete exchange of ideas and data" and "an attitude of scepticism about its own tene ts". It stresses that scientific results must be capable of reproduction, modification or falsification by independent observers. And it closes by noting that "scientists value other, complementary approaches to and methods of understanding nature', but that " if the alternatives are to be called scientific, they must adhere to the principles outlined above" Following the draft's rejection by the council at a meeting last week in Columbia, Ohio, the APS may now draw up two statements‹one for wide public dissemination and the other a more rigorous explanatory statement for scientists themselves. The society decided to produce the statement in response to the concerns of key members that 'pseudoscience' is not only winning increased public attention but may even be causing confusion among science students. APS members have been active in criticizi ng this trend not just in cases related to physics‹such as the alleged discovery of 'cold fusion'‹but also in other fields, such as alternative medicine. Colin Macilwain From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 07:23:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA26188; Mon, 11 May 1998 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980511101640.006b41ec post.queensu.ca> X-Sender: simonb post.queensu.ca X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:16:40 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Bart Simon Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! In-Reply-To: <199805111311.JAA09006 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"-Asti2.0.6P6.GZmLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greetings, Gene Mallove wrote: >Well, well, well, the APS high priests are at it again.. trying to tell us and everyone else what is and >is not science. They especially fear that youth will be corrupted, that "pseudoscience" may be >"causing confusion among science students." Absolutely fascinating - yet the new blurb Gene provided indicated that the draft of this statement on "what is science" was rejected at the APS council meeting because of a lack of agreement on the issue of falsibiability in science (always a fun issue h ere on Vortex btw). Does anybody know more specifics about why the draft was rejected? Perhaps yon high priests have been swayed by an O/U dunking bird demo (definately dunking not drinking btw - a little birdie told me so :-) cheers, Bart ===================================================== Bart Simon simonb post.queensu.ca Dept. of Sociology http://post.queensu.ca/~simonb/ Queen's University Kingston, Ontario phone: 613-545-6000 x7152 K7L-3N6 fax: 613-545-2871 ===================================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 07:44:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA22233; Mon, 11 May 1998 07:43:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:43:39 -0700 Message-ID: <35570A80.1182 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:26:08 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Silicon References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9QKGL3.0.CR5.QwmLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > There is probably a > lot of good science to be done with vaporized silicon compounds. OK, Horace, I have a 1100 gram chunk of pure (not semiconductor grade) silicon. If you want to vaporize some of it - have at it! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 07:52:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA23416; Mon, 11 May 1998 07:47:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 07:47:26 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:43:15 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Merriman should answer Wall Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805111046_MC2-3C8F-AFA8 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"RLsIQ1.0.hj5.zzmLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Ed Wall writes: I trust that you do not consider your light-hearted ridicule to be an adequate response to the assertion that a self-heating apparatus is truly anomalous. You cannot defend the notion that insulation could be arbitrarily effective and ignore calibration data. We would like to see somebody in your position firmly rooting some goal-posts. Surely, your mastery of physics would allow you to do that! Barry Merriman should give us an "adequate response." I expect he will not. Merriman says he is not convinced by cold fusion experiments, so Chris Tinsley and I asked him many time to critique papers by McKubre or Miles. He refused to do so. Like most "skeptics" Merriman goes through four stages: 1. He begins by making totally impossible, absurd claims, like the suggestion that at Dewar flask is "perfect" insulation, or Dick Blue's recent statement that he knows how to make any 50 gram "collection of junk" self heat and remain at 200 deg C for a couple of weeks, and such performance would prove nothing. I used to think this was deliberate obfuscation, but I now believe it is honest confusion. 2. When someone points the error, he responds with evasion and distraction with "dunking bird" joke. This *is* obfuscation; Merriman knows the bird would show no anomaly in a calorimeter. 3. Ridicule. Light hearted ridicule, with me as the target in this case. He should ridicule himself instead. Nothing that I have said -- here or in any other forum -- is one-tenth as ridiculous as his idea that a Dewar flask is perfect insulation. 4. Silence. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 08:07:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA27155; Mon, 11 May 1998 08:06:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:06:25 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:00:15 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-lo3X.0.De6.mFnLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., As a participant ... here is what I see.... Barry gav us a nice satire with Drinking Bird. Leave it there... as satire. If Ed or Jed wish Barry to comment on CF, then fine... BUT: As I see it the Drinking Bird text was a fine bit of humor which a few contributed to as well... so keep them apart! J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 08:53:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA10115; Mon, 11 May 1998 08:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:20:57 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805111123_MC2-3C8F-71EB compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"f2lOZ3.0.zT2.xvnLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex An oak tree in my office parking lot was struck by lightning last night. The damage is extraordinary. I have read about such things, but I have never seen one myself. The lightning hit a fork ~5 meters above ground. That's about a third to half way up the tree. The lightning split the tree in the middle and peeled off *every bit* of the bark around the trunk, from the strike point to the ground. The bark is missing all the way around, as neatly as you would peel a carrot. Branches below the strike still have bark, although the bark on the branches next to the trunk is peeled off out 20 to 80 cm from the trunk. Where the lightning grounded, the soil around the roots shot out, leaving a broad, shallow hole. The soil must have washed away. There is a carpet of fallen of leaves all around. Bark shot across the parking lot with large chunks landing 35 meters away, which I measured by counting parking spaces. I wonder if lumber mills could use bolts of electricity to strip bark off trees . . . I took electronic photos. These digital cameras are handy for recording life's little incidents. I would never bother to take a regular roll of film of an event like this. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 09:01:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA04399; Mon, 11 May 1998 08:56:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:56:10 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <8483e6cb.35571f87 aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:55:50 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Silicon Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"ceowB2.0.a41.Q-nLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-11 10:44:46 EDT, you write: > Horace Heffner wrote: > There is probably a > > lot of good science to be done with vaporized silicon compounds. < OK, Horace, I have a 1100 gram chunk of pure (not semiconductor grade) > silicon. If you want to vaporize some of it - have at it! > Frank Stenger And Horace, I have about 20 or so 4 inch silicon wafers, some etched with circuts (50 or 60 on each wafer) and some plain. I assume these wafers are semiconductor grade. If you want to have at them, let me know. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 09:11:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA12118; Mon, 11 May 1998 09:01:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:01:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511120141.00bfb650 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:01:41 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight In-Reply-To: <19980508212424.AAA13379 Default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"H9GjE1.0.Fz2.Q3oLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:24 PM 5/8/98 +0000, Ed Wall wrote: >What is the price we pay for space heroes? Is it worth $40 billion to get >what probes could get easier. See Van Allen comments. There are two types of manned space missions. Mercury is the best example of the first--where the astronaut is little more than cargo. The Apollo program is the best example of the other type, where the astronauts are there to do work which could not be done better by robots, and even now probably could not be done at all by unmanned missions. The difference between Sojourner and the Apollo astronauts on the moon should make the point--building Sojourner thirty years ago wasn't possible. Even so, it still couldn't match the performance of the Apollo astronauts, especially since some of the Apollo missions carried PhD geologists who knew which samples were important, and which were duplicates. But the real difference was most apparent in the effects of Apollo 8. It didn't even land on the moon, but had a huge impact on the way people look at Earth. 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 Mon May 11 09:22:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14913; Mon, 11 May 1998 09:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511121856.00c1a550 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:18:56 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Case Run 4 Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980508221323.00813750 mail.eden.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"GtmtM3.0.ve3.mIoLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:13 PM 5/8/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > Maybe the higher temperature promoted further reaction of the >deuterium with something in/on the catalyst. The results from Run 4 seemed to show a slight excess of output over input at 30 watts. This could of course be signs of an overunity effect, but a much more prosaic explanation--that something was reacting chemically--seems more likely. If you feel like doing a Run 5, the thing that seems worth doing is to run at this approx 230 degree temperature, but to flush and refill with D2 gas. The one thing I have been concerned about in your testing is that there hasn't been a significant chance for the D2 to "soak" in. 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 Mon May 11 09:35:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA16998; Mon, 11 May 1998 09:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:28:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3b0df38e.35567f8e aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:27:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"4o7i5.0.W94.ESoLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re Vince's latest: >Do I need to insert an additional series resistor so as to measure current? >An ammeter? Yes, either approach is valid, if done correctly. Insert either the resistor or the ammeter in series with the wire from your tube. For safety, do this in the wire between your tube and ground, because meter cases are not necessarily safely insulated for multi-kV potentials. >The SECONDARY output DC was through 16 7.5 watt lamps >in series. The lamps appeared to be at full brightness. This suggests that the voltage drop across the lamps was more than 16 x 100 V = 1600 V or so. Added to the tube voltage drop, that got up to 850 V, the total secondary voltage would naively appear to be about 2.5 kV. What is your transformer secondary rated for, Vince? Is this reasonable? Actually, I suspect that we are already seeing the pathological effects of unknown waveforms and unknown meter averaging circuits. For example, with Vince's half wave supply the gas in the tube has time to recombine almost fully, so each new half cycle must break down the gas again. This can require several hundred more volts than the voltage drop across the tube after the discharge is restarted. If so, the changes in tube voltage say more about changing breakdown threshold voltage as gas pressure and composition vary. The voltage would have little or no relation to power input. Vince, if you (and we) are ever going to learn anything, you will have to either switch to filtered DC power or else to electronics that can acquire both voltage and current as functions of time and multiply them and calculate rms power. I gather that you are on a limited budget, and since the latter alternative is expensive, your only option is DC power. Re vacuum and gas pressure. Your vacuum gauge measures the pressure _difference_ between the surounding atmosphere and your tube. Your atmospheric pressure depends on your altitude and, so some extent, on the weather. It would be more useful if you recorded your base vacuum readings at the beginning and end of each run. If your vacuum system is tight and your pump has developed no flaw, the base vacuum is close to true vacuum (zero absolute gas pressure) in the tube. Then, we could subtract your "H2 fill to XX.X in Hg" from the base vacuum, and we would know the actual gas pressure in your tube. >33 294.7 300 >34 296.5 300 Cant get tube voltage above 300v at full power!? >35 297.5 300 pump down to 26.8 >36 298.8 300 H2 fill to 23.0 >37 325.8 650 >38 379.7 635 This sudden change in tube voltage is probably an example of changed gas conditions changing the _breakdown_ voltage for each new half cycle. It is probably not related to the discharge "running voltage." >88 428.3 650 >89 428.7 650 >90 428.5 650 H2 fill to 24.0 in Hg >91 421.1 800 >92 444.3 800 Ditto. >140 478.5 850 >141 478.5 850 Vacuum at 24.0 >142 479.3 850 Max Temp Reached Here >143 479.1 850 >144 479.3 850 You certainly are getting something hot in there! 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 May 11 09:36:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA13092; Mon, 11 May 1998 09:33:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:33:46 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511113417.00c89d30 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:34:17 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 5 preparations Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"o2aHw1.0.PC3.fXoLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just got off the phone with Dr. Case. He is sending me 20 grams of the same catalyst that worked well at Gene's house. It should be here in a couple of days. Our Run 5 will use it. Barry, I haven't forgotten your suggestion that I test Case's own device. It's just that I already have this apparatus set up and it seems prudent to try a few experiments with it before going to the trouble and expense of bringing Case here...or visiting his lab with my "calorimetry roadshow". 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 Mon May 11 09:39:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA18461; Mon, 11 May 1998 09:35:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:35:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:33:33 +0100 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: re: bird Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"d4akx1.0.MW4.jZoLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ha! Ha! Best work to date from Barry International-ly known comic and his merrymen. (Sorry but, I don't know of a Merriman theorem, proof, conjecture, hypothesis, experiment etc.) Oh, if you're a mathematician, aren't you 'over the hill' by mid thirties? Better do some honest work and become an empiricist. Come on Barry, with your scholarly ability you could do some solid work like say Gibbs did with thermodynamics. You know all these phenomena people keep reporting - some could be right... In good jest even if it doesn't sound like it. Stop kicking sand in our faces you bully! If the weather is anything in California like it is here in London today, my advice is go out and find yourself a nice women and stop being such an adolescent and put it to use like God intended, Prof Faust!!! Ha! Ha! Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 09:56:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA19322; Mon, 11 May 1998 09:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 09:45:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511114415.00c8b078 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:44:15 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 4 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980511121856.00c1a550 spectre.mitre.org> References: <3.0.5.32.19980508221323.00813750 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5VLV-1.0.mj4.2joLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:18 5/11/98 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > The results from Run 4 seemed to show a slight excess of output over >input at 30 watts. This could of course be signs of an overunity effect, >but a much more prosaic explanation--that something was reacting >chemically--seems more likely. Far more prosaic is the likely possibility that the apparent excess (~0.2 watts) is just a systematic error in the calorimetry. This calorimeter has a sensitivity of 20 watts/degree so that apparent excess could have been caused by only a 0.01 degree drift in the offset between the Tin and Tout probes. I typically see offset drift of that magnitude from week to week with the thermistors I'm presently using (epoxy encapsulated types). I recently acquired some glass-encapsulated thermistors which are among the most stable temperatur sensors available (according to a recent article by Hart Scientific which places them above platinum resistance devices, even!). I will be trying these new thermistors soon. >If you feel like doing a Run 5, the thing that seems worth doing is to >run at this approx 230 degree temperature, but to flush and refill with D2 >gas. Good idea. I almost did that in Run 4. Thanks. 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 Mon May 11 10:30:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA25650; Mon, 11 May 1998 10:27:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:27:24 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:21:06 -0500 (GMT) From: Carlos Henry Castano To: Carlos Henry Casta~o Giraldo Subject: Information Miley-Farnsworth device Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD7CCB.B37AD9A0" Content-Id: Resent-Message-ID: <"hLdjG.0.hG6.xJpLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7CCB.B37AD9A0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: I have heard that comment, can any person call and update to vortex-L ? Sincerely, Carlos Henry Casta~o G. Lab. Electroquimica Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Medellin ____________________________________ Miniature fusion: Dr. George Miley of the Fusion research center at the U. of Ill (USA) has built a "Farnsworth Fusor". It produceds 10^10 neutrons per second from the D-D reaction. Plans are (with Daimler Benz) to MARKET the devices for around $60,000 (US) as "controlled neutron sources". For information contact: Rebecca S. Van Meter Editor, Fusion Technology (American Nuclear Society) Urbana IL Phone 217-333-2295, fax 217-333-2906 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD7CCB.B37AD9A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 10:35:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA27633; Mon, 11 May 1998 10:33:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:33:20 -0700 Message-ID: <35573676.148 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:33:42 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike References: <199805111123_MC2-3C8F-71EB compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2dfVz2.0.Pl6.SPpLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18586 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex > > An oak tree in my office parking lot was struck by lightning last night. The > damage is extraordinary. (snip a great report!) This is interesting, Jed! From your description I'll bet this was an unusually high-current strike. I think the normal stroke current is about 20 to 40 kamps but I believe stroke currents exceeding 200 kamps have been recorded. Now, if you had actually been watching the tree at the time of the strike, you would have been in a statistical group of about the same size as have actually witnessed ball lightning - this according to a study at the NASA Lewis lab by Dr. Warren Rayle during the time I worked there. Rayle interviewed people around the lab (some of a 2000 > 3000 person group) to see how many had witnessed ball lightning. One interesting result was that the number of ball lightning witnesses was roughly the same as the number of people who had actually WATCHED a near lightning strike to the ground. Thanks for the report, Jed. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 10:44:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28790; Mon, 11 May 1998 10:41:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:41:36 -0700 (PDT) From: DColling vines.gems.gov.bc.ca Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:37:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Resent-Message-ID: <"Q_aq22.0.k17.EXpLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hmm - isn't silica also soluble in hot alkali? ---------- Original Text ---------- From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner), on 5/8/98 7:22 PM: At 10:03 PM 5/8/98, VCockeram wrote: >In a message dated 98-05-05 12:53:44 EDT, you write: >> From: Schaffer gav.gat.com >> Re Vince's request for suggestions to clean W off SiO2: >> >> Tungsten oxidizes fairly quickly in air at high enough temperature. Then >> you can dissolve the W oxide away with just about any acid. I don't know >> what a good minimum temperature is. > >Ahh yes...thanks. The answer was staring me in the face. This is a quartz >tube, really thermally strong. Just support the tube and heat the area >I wish to clean with a propane torch until red hot. The W will oxidize at >this temperature. Cool down and soak in HCI. >Gonna go try that right now. Thanks. > >Vince >Las Vegas CRC Handbook does show WO2 soluble in acid, but WO3 soluble in HF, but not soluble in HCl. It shows WO3 soluble in hot alkali. Try hot Red Devil lye or Draino if HCl doesn't work completely. Between the two, everything should go! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 10:52:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA32058; Mon, 11 May 1998 10:49:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:49:00 -0700 Message-ID: <35573A2F.7D8D interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:49:35 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XR-5V.0.lq7.AepLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > (snip much good stuff) I gather that you are on a limited budget, and since > the latter alternative is expensive, your only option is DC power. Amen! Now is the time, Vince. Let us know if you need any help on the filtered DC supply. I think Mike mentioned about 5 MFD of filter capacitance - if you have any other high voltage transformers around, you might be able to use the secondary for an inductor IF all its taps are insulated for 3000 volts or so from ground, and, if the secondary can handle the tube current without overheating. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 10:57:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29688; Mon, 11 May 1998 10:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 10:46:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008901bd7d04$4457fc40$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:43:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"DXthV.0.mF7.vbpLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18588 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 11, 1998 11:34 AM Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike >Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> To: Vortex >> >> An oak tree in my office parking lot was struck by lightning last night. The >> damage is extraordinary. > >(snip a great report!) > >This is interesting, Jed! From your description I'll bet this was an >unusually high-current strike. I think the normal stroke current is >about 20 to 40 kamps but I believe stroke currents exceeding 200 kamps >have been recorded. >Now, if you had actually been watching the tree at the time of the >strike, you would have been in a statistical group of about the same >size as have actually witnessed ball lightning - this according to a >study at the NASA Lewis lab by Dr. Warren Rayle during the time I worked >there. Rayle interviewed people around the lab (some of a 2000 > 3000 >person group) to see how many had witnessed ball lightning. One >interesting result was that the number of ball lightning witnesses was >roughly the same as the number of people who had actually WATCHED a >near lightning strike to the ground. >Thanks for the report, Jed. I knew it,I knew it! Frank wouldn't pass up a good lightning strike account. :-) Actually, since it was a Oak those were probably incandescent acorns, Frank. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 11:05:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02749; Mon, 11 May 1998 11:02:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:02:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:01:56 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Merriman should answer Wall In-reply-to: <199805111046_MC2-3C8F-AFA8 compuserve.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199805111800.LAA27653 smtp1.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"y7joh1.0.tg.YqpLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:43 AM 5/11/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu > >Barry Merriman should give us an "adequate response." > > Nothing that I have said -- here or in any >other forum -- is one-tenth as ridiculous as his idea that a Dewar flask is >perfect insulation. > > - Jed Except, of course, for the fact that he did not ever say that. By the way Barry, after reading your wonderful satires, it occurred to me the obvious simple reason Scott isn't having any success with his Case experiments. He always violates their replicability by using adequate calorimetry. He is simply not doing the same experiments; no wonder he doesn't get the same results. C'mon Scott!! Get that calorimeter out of there so you can see the anamolous results! --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 11:13:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02307; Mon, 11 May 1998 11:03:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:03:44 -0700 Message-ID: <35573DAA.153D interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:04:26 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike References: <008901bd7d04$4457fc40$6e8cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ma4lm.0.yZ._rpLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > I knew it,I knew it! Frank wouldn't pass up a good lightning strike account. > Actually, since it was a Oak those were probably incandescent acorns, Frank. > :-) Fred, I havent had incandescent acorns since before my wife and I were married! Frank S. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 11:20:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03621; Mon, 11 May 1998 11:07:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:07:44 -0700 (PDT) From: "michael" To: Subject: Conference Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:43:54 +0100 Message-ID: <007401bd7ce2$d7232620$LocalHost default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0075_01BD7CEB.38E78E20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"sOsh52.0.Qu.kvpLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18592 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0075_01BD7CEB.38E78E20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable How did you guess ? ---------- From: Martin Sevior Sent: 10 May 1998 01:46 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Subject: Re: London Conference On Sat, 9 May 1998, Mike Butcher wrote: >I've just lost all my past email addresses, posts etc. due to hard disk >problem and I had intended dropping in ? > > Thanks, > > > Mike Butcher Do you run Windoze? ------=_NextPart_000_0075_01BD7CEB.38E78E20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

How did you guess ?

----------

From: Martin Sevior

Sent: 10 May 1998 01:46

To: vortex-l eskimo.com

Cc: 'vortex-l eskimo.com'

Subject: Re: London Conference

 

 

On Sat, 9 May 1998, Mike Butcher wrote:

>I've just lost all my past email addresses, posts etc. due to = hard=20 disk

>problem and I had intended dropping in ? > > Thanks, > = > >=20 Mike Butcher

Do you run Windoze?

 

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0075_01BD7CEB.38E78E20-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 11:39:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09059; Mon, 11 May 1998 11:36:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:36:45 -0700 Message-ID: <002f01bd7d0b$7d1eba80$255b2bcf ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Merriman should answer Wall Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:34:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"gRosc1.0.SD2.yKqLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18593 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Lynn Kurtz >> Nothing that I have said -- here or in any >>other forum -- is one-tenth as ridiculous as his idea that a Dewar flask is >>perfect insulation. >> >> - Jed > >Except, of course, for the fact that he did not ever say that. Actually, that's the way I read it, too -- that Barry was saying that the insulation could be nearly perfect -- so nearly perfect that it wouldn't cool to room temperature if it sat in a corner for 2 weeks unattended. Personally I think a box with a self-sustaining temperature would be about the most perfect test imaginable. Though, if it is generating its own heat, it seems that it'll be hard to keep the temperature from rising above the 250C mark. There should be an inherent instability in the device that would cause it to lose heat or overheat (if the effect is real). >By the way Barry, after reading your wonderful satires, it occurred to me >the obvious simple reason Scott isn't having any success with his Case >experiments. He always violates their replicability by using adequate >calorimetry. He is simply not doing the same experiments; no wonder he >doesn't get the same results. C'mon Scott!! Get that calorimeter out of >there so you can see the anamolous results! > >--Lynn But if there is a mystery here that needs to be resolved; If there is an anomalous rise in temperature observed with the Case device when D2 is used instead of H2, then the only way to solve this mystery IS to replicate the device to the point that the effect is observed, then find the explanation. It doesn't do any good to replicate with 'better' equipment and NOT find the anomaly. You can't explain the mystery unless you see the effect. Craig Haynie (Houston) PS: The Drinking Bird posts were excellent humor! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 11:55:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA12305; Mon, 11 May 1998 11:51:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:51:38 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:50:39 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Binn's device Sender: Soo To: "vortex-L eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805111451_MC2-3CA1-E90E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA12282 Resent-Message-ID: <"k1kgh1.0.603.vYqLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vorts, Any Brits. hear Radio 4's PM prog. tonight who can tell me where this guy Binns who has invented some kind of OU device is located? I was driving out of London and was trapped in a jam in the Dartford Tunnel so I missed most of the interview.......spit!!! Apparently, it's being checked out by the MoD and was reported in the Daily Mail (which I also missed). Media Techno-Luvvie, Frank Close reckons it's all spherical appendages.....but then he would, wouldn't he? Any info. appreciated. -Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 12:46:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA23029; Mon, 11 May 1998 12:43:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:43:06 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:43:05 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Humor and integrity Resent-Message-ID: <"xOTd-2.0.ld5.9JrLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: First let me apologize in the event my personal brand of humor has offended anyone. Barry's satire had me laughing so hard I couldn't resist joining in the merriment, like various others who could not resist also. I think it is very healthy to laugh at ourselves on occasion. It is also important to remember that just about everyone active here on vortex is commiting substantial personal resources, time and/or money, to the search for, and study of reports of, anomalous energy. The cost is much higher than apparent. Some are committed with a Quixotic zeal. Some risk reputation, most lose precious time with families and friends, exercise, or other forms of self development. All who experiment risk life and limb to one degree or another. Many here contribute by freely and continuously donating their considerable expertise to people like me, who are among the less educated. For most of us, this is very serious business, though not a business at all. It is a serious commitment in the search for truth and for an answer to one of humanities greatest present needs, clean energy. There have been a lot of personal dues to pay, and it is clear that Jed, Gene and Barry are amoung the highest dues payers, adn deserve our, and each other's, highest respect. Even Dick Blue should be counted in there, if he were active on vortex. It seems to me fruitless to doubt the integrity of people with heavy commitments to the field. There may be the occasional fraud, charlatan, or quack, but the same can be said of various professions, including one of the most noble - medicine. Most of the people here are operating with great integrity, but from within their own perspective. We should always make that assumption in our communications. Last, I would like to say that it is way premature to get polarized on the Case experiments in that the experiments are incomplete. It is the right time, however, for exploration of the technical issues relating to the Case experiments, in that such a discussion might assist or change the progess of the experiments. Now I'm off to joust with a couple of rogue windmills ... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 13:19:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA22589; Mon, 11 May 1998 13:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 12:13:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"MAKSs1.0.pW5.knrLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:37 AM 5/11/98, DColling vines.gems.gov.bc.ca wrote: >Hmm - isn't silica also soluble in hot alkali? >---------- Original Text ---------- Don't know what temperature, but think you are right, though the CRC Handbook shows anly "very slighlty soluble in alkali" for the various forms of SiO2. Sodium silicate, Na2SiO3 + H2O, also called Eisenglass, or called egg glass, is a water based solution. It was used in my younger days to help preserve eggs within the shell, by painting them with it. As a youngster, I also used it to grow "crystal gardens" by placing various chemicals in the bottom of a glass of Eisenglass and watching crystaline tendrils grow. Regards, Horace Heffner > >From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner), on 5/8/98 7:22 PM: > >At 10:03 PM 5/8/98, VCockeram wrote: >>In a message dated 98-05-05 12:53:44 EDT, you write: >>> From: Schaffer gav.gat.com >>> Re Vince's request for suggestions to clean W off SiO2: >>> >>> Tungsten oxidizes fairly quickly in air at high enough temperature. Then >>> you can dissolve the W oxide away with just about any acid. I don't know >>> what a good minimum temperature is. >> >>Ahh yes...thanks. The answer was staring me in the face. This is a quartz >>tube, really thermally strong. Just support the tube and heat the area >>I wish to clean with a propane torch until red hot. The W will oxidize at >>this temperature. Cool down and soak in HCI. >>Gonna go try that right now. Thanks. >> >>Vince >>Las Vegas > > >CRC Handbook does show WO2 soluble in acid, but WO3 soluble in HF, but not >soluble in HCl. It shows WO3 soluble in hot alkali. Try hot Red Devil lye >or Draino if HCl doesn't work completely. Between the two, everything >should go! > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 14:02:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA29849; Mon, 11 May 1998 13:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:50:50 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kurtz should explain Merriman Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805111652_MC2-3CA4-EB0B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"UoiKM.0.JI7.lOsLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:kurtz imap2.asu.edu I wrote that Merriman claimed a Dewar flask constitutes perfect insulation. Lynn Kurtz disagrees: Except, of course, for the fact that he did not ever say that. In that case I misunderstood, and so did Craig Haynie, Ed Wall and number of other people in this forum who contacted me. Since Merriman refuses to clarify or comment further, perhaps Kurtz would be kind enough to explain to us what he *did* mean. Here is the original statement. Remember, the context is a discussion of hypothetical experiment in which a cell remains at 200 deg C inside a Dewar flask for a week or two. Merriman said this would not be convincing proof of excess heat because: At an arbitrarily small rate....i.e., ideally it is possible to heat up a body, insulate it perfectly, and its temperature will never drop. No work done at all after the initial heat input. Explain, please: 1. IS it possible to heat a body and insulate it perfectly? Where do you buy perfect insulation? I could use some! 2. We are talking about a Dewar flask. Is *that* perfect insulation? If it isn't, what was Merriman's point? Why did he say this in the first place?!? There must be reason. 3. Scott Little posted a computation showing that a Dewar is not perfect insulation, and Case's tests last week confirmed it. I have tested Dewar flasks myself, and I note they do cool down at an easily measured rate. Please explain why Little, Case and I are wrong. Kurtz says that Scott Little did not see an effect because he is using "adequate calorimetry." Little is using flow calorimetry. Case employs isoperibolic calorimetry. An experiment with no input is simplified and it can evaluated easily by first principles, without depending on calibrations: heat loss across the walls and the vacuum gap, and losses from the outside of the vessel. These first principles have been an accepted part of physics longer than flow calorimetry has been around. Kurtz should explain to this audience why these basic principles are incorrect, or why they do not apply to a Dewar flask. Please bear in mind we are discussing a proposed experiment, not the present calorimetry, which I myself have repeately described as inadequate and unconvining. Barry Merriman would find it easier to ridicule the views of people who ignore the textbooks, trash elementary laws of physics, and pretend that ideal perfect insulation and other abstract concepts exist in the real world. I do not mind satire or ridicule. My late friend Chris Tinsley often savaged my errors with more biting sarcasm than any "skeptic" can manage. I am used to being corrected and admonished by people like Fleischmann and McKubre. They have high standards and they know infinitely more about these subjects than I do, so I am used to being put in my place by experts. There is one thing I *do* mind though. It is the pot-shot, hit-and-run critiques posted by people like Merriman and Kurtz. They make outrageous, unsupported statements, totally at variance with elementary science. They disrupt the discussion. And then they cut and run! What is the point of participating in an academic discussion if you are unwilling to clarify, explain, and give examples to back up your statements? When Merriman first wrote the above comments, Haynie, Wall and I wrote careful, respectful, balanced responses that would not have been inappropriate at a polite physics symposium at Harvard or Yale. We gave careful reasons why we felt he is wrong. The day before the debate began, Little posted a painstaking analysis which contradicted Merriman's hypothesis. If the skeptics disagree with Little why haven't they challenged this analysis? We (Haynie, Wall, Little and I) write serious, respectful messages, and careful analyses based on conventional physics, and in return the skeptics hand us a barrage of garbage -- yes, garbage, even here! It is disrespectful, irrelevant, sophomoric, cynical, satirical hogwash, intended to distract the audience and derail the discussion. A claim that a body in a Dewar remaining hot is not in and of itself "adequate calorimetry" flies in the fact of elementary science going back to the Lavoisier. If these people seriously wish to redefine basic thermodynamics, they will find no audience more open minded and more willing to help than the readers of this forum. We will listen respectfully. One person here -- Larry Wharton, I think it is -- does seriously propose that the Second Law can be violated. I disagree, and I think all other readers disagree with him. But we do not attack him. He has not been subject to ridicule, satire or insults, because he is sincere and he is willing to make what he considers good arguments to support his hypothesis. Kurtz, on the other hand, makes similar outrageous claims -- wild and crazy physics, unsupported by the evidence, missing from the textbooks. She says isoperibolic calorimetry does not work. It isn't "adequate" -- whatever that means. She expects the rest of us to agree without argument. She refuses to explain, support, or justify these bizarre claims. She and Merriman take wild potshots and then they disappear. This is not how professional scientists conduct serious debates. This kind of behavior will not accomplish anything. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 14:03:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11989; Mon, 11 May 1998 13:57:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:57:53 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511155821.00bf5330 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:58:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case technique - Gene? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Z8i0P1.0.1x2.FPsLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gene, As the only Vortex eyewitness to Case's technique, can you comment on the technique he uses to remove and replace the chamber in the heater nest during each filling? It seems at least possible that he could be subconsciously pressing the chamber into the heater nest harder after the D2 filling than after the H2 fillings. If so, the improved coupling could account for the higher chamber temp observed at the same heater power. But maybe the nature of the heater nest is such that it doesn't make any difference how you place the chamber in there each time... Anyway I was just curious if this issue came up during the demonstration. 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 Mon May 11 14:20:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16249; Mon, 11 May 1998 14:16:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:16:46 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511161716.00bf3e88 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:17:16 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: test for D2...? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qnTyl2.0.Qz3.ygsLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The question has come up: Is the gas I'm filling the Case experiment with really deuterium? The bottle says "DEUTERIUM - RESEARCH GRADE" but maybe somebody made a mistake and supplied protium instead. Can anyone suggest an easy test to differentiate between the two? 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 Mon May 11 14:32:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA19441; Mon, 11 May 1998 14:29:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:29:24 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:25:43 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike - location Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805111728_MC2-3C9B-230C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"pvMhq2.0.hl4.qssLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18600 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I should add that the tree and my office are located at Peachtree DeKalb airport, next to hangers and airstrips. This is a broad, open area which is frequently struck by lightning. However we are about 500 meter from the control tower, where most of it hits. We have had unusually violent weather this spring including a major tornado. The tree might have been hit Saturday. There was rain and tornado warnings on Saturday, and rain on Sunday. I see no sign of fire or heat. I forgot to mention the trunk is 2.4 meters in diameter, and a sample of bark is 2 cm thick. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 14:52:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA08175; Mon, 11 May 1998 14:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:45:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:38:58 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: test for D2...? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805111742_MC2-3C9A-85B1 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"AJCqn2.0.a_1.I6tLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18601 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:little eden.com Scott wonders whether "somebody made a mistake and supplied protium instead." It could happen! People have ordered palladium and gotten platinum instead. Scott asks: Can anyone suggest an easy test to differentiate between the two? Well, if you have several grams to spare I know a foolproof method: 1. Recombine a couple of grams to form heavy water. It will be contaminated with ordinary water but not enough to matter. 2. Freeze the heavy water. 3. Drop the ice in tap water. If it's D2O it will sink. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 14:53:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA24658; Mon, 11 May 1998 14:49:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:49:33 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ee01bd7d26$6ebab140$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: , Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike - location Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:47:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"F4T4M1.0.C16.i9tLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Date: Monday, May 11, 1998 3:32 PM Subject: [OFF TOPIC] A lighting strike - location >To: Vortex > >I should add that the tree and my office are located at Peachtree DeKalb >airport, next to hangers and airstrips. This is a broad, open area which is >frequently struck by lightning. However we are about 500 meter from the >control tower, where most of it hits. We have had unusually violent weather >this spring including a major tornado. The tree might have been hit Saturday. >There was rain and tornado warnings on Saturday, and rain on Sunday. > >I see no sign of fire or heat. > >I forgot to mention the trunk is 2.4 meters in diameter, and a sample of bark >is 2 cm thick. Bark? Sounds more like Dog Wood than Oak. Sorry, Jed. FJS > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 14:54:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA24367; Mon, 11 May 1998 14:48:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 14:48:09 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <7dfb6867.355771b1 aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:46:23 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"cZC771.0.ay5.O8tLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, I ran a short run this morning (Monday) to find the best operating tube pressure (actually,vacuum). I started the run with an H2 fill (with K) to 20.0 in Hg, started the glow and waited 10 minutes for the temperature to stabilize. At the 10 minute point I recorded the temperature and then lowered (towards higher vacuum) 1/2 in Hg (.5) and waited another ten minutes, and so on, pulling 1/2 in Hg more vacuum every ten minutes until an indicated vacuum of 27.0 was reached. At that point I reversed the procedure, ADDING H2 in 1/2 in Hg (.5) increments every 10 minutes until the arc/glow would no longer sustain. That was at a reading of 20.0 in Hg. At that pressure, the glow stayed on for perhaps 1.5 minutes and suddenly extinguished. I ended the run at that point. Here are the results of the run. P=tube vacuum Tc=degrees C +/- 0.1 C VDC=voltage measured across the tube _P____Tc___VDC_Comments_____ 20.0 493 1800 vac incr 20.5 494.7 1650 vac incr 21.0 492.9 1550 vac incr 21.5 486.5 1350 vac incr 22.0 479.7 1300 vac incr 22.5 472.9 1250 vac incr 23.0 463.5 1150 vac incr 23.5 454.3 1080 vac incr 24.0 442.5 1000 vac incr 24.5 433.5 850 vac incr 25.0 414.5 800 vac incr 25.5 396.1 700 vac incr 26.0 380.1 600 vac incr 26.5 284.5 400 vac incr 27.0 145.5 400 vac incr 26.5 254.5 300 add H2 26.0 283.2 400 add H2 25.5 331.8 500 add H2 25.0 385.5 600 add H2 24.5 412 700 add H2 24.0 424.1 850 add H2 23.5 432.5 950 add H2 23.0 441.9 1000 add H2 22.5 450.5 1100 add H2 22.0 456.3 1200 add H2 21.5 458.5 1300 add H2 21.0 461.5 1400 add H2 20.5 460.9 1500 add H2 20.0 458.1 1650 add H2 Glow would not sustain. End It looks (to me) like the best operating tube pressure is between 20.5 and 21.5 when operating with K in the tube. The K causes a big difference in tube charictaristics. At the highest temperatures the tube walls are glowing at bright red heat, but strangly, the glow discharge is barely visible, a very pale violet, not bright at all. While the tube is still loaded with K I will do another run as follows: I will start at maximum tube vacuum (27.0 in Hg indicated) and add H2 in 1/2 in Hg increments every 10 minutes but this time I will plot the tube temperature every minute. BTW, Rick, the "high temp silicon" slagged big time and the thermocouple seperated from the bronze shoe. Heading for the ceramics hobby store for some ceramic clay. THAT should hold this sucker togther. This thing really cooks! What does all this mean? No idea until I do some H2 no K runs at various fill pressures to see what kind of temperatures result. All previous runs with no K have been at a set single pressure. I guess this is how science works; each answer opens up more questions. It's still fun though. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:08:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10683; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:00:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ff01bd7d27$a4c348a0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Solar Array Comparison (http://godzilla.lerc.nasa.gov/ppo/compare.html) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:56:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD7CF5.52CADC20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"QpQuq1.0.lc2.nJtLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18604 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD7CF5.52CADC20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Solar Array Comparison The basic building block of the MCSA is the Photovoltaic Power Module = (PPM). A PPM is a collection of 80 large-area silicon solar cells in a 5 = cell x 16 cell matrix. These cells were originally developed for the = Space Station Freedom program and are planned for use on the = International Space Station (ISS). While the cells and the way they are = mounted on a flexible Kapton substrate and wired in series via a flat = printed circuit (copper) are the same, there are differences in the way = in which the the cells are assembled to form modules, panels and = blankets or wings. The biggest difference between the MCSA and ISS arrays regarding the = solar cells is that for ISS, 400 cells are wired in series (5 x 40-cell = modules) to obtain a voltage of 167 V versus the MCSA where 80 cells are = wired in series (1 x 80-cell modules), giving a voltage of 32.5 V. = Another difference is that the row of 5 cells at each end of the 80-cell = MCSA PPM were cut by 0.5 cm so that they could fit into the existing = Russian support structure, which leads to the next major difference in = the solar arrays. While both the MCSA and ISS arrays are "deployable" = on-orbit, the MCSA is supported by a robust all-Russian structure based = on composite frames reinforced with fiberglas struts while the ISS = arrays are entirely flexible with support mainly from the composite = deployment mast and tensioning mechanisms. The table below highlights some of the MCSA and ISS array design = features. ISS Solar Array MCSA on Mir = =20 ***Attribute*** Solar Cell Type silicon silicon Cell Surface Size 8x8 cm (3.2 x 3.2 in.) 8x8 cm (3.2 x = 3.2 in.) Cell Thickness (nom.) 0.20 mm (0.008 in.) 0.20 mm (0.008 = in.)=20 Coverglass Thickness (nom.) 0.13 mm (0.005 in.) 0.13 mm (0.005 = in.) Cell Assembly Thickness 0.33 mm (0.013 in.) 0.33 mm (0.013 = in.) =20 Solar Cell Assembly Weight 6.2 g (0.0137 oz.) 6.2 g (0.0137 = oz.) # Cells in a Blanket 16,400 6,720 Module (PPM) Size 40 cells (5x8) 80 cells = (5x16) Modules per Panel 5 2 Panel Size 0.38x4.3 m (1.24x14.25 ft) 0.44x2.7 m = (1.4x8.8 ft) Hinged Panels per Blanket 84 42 Blanket Length 32 m (104 ft.) 18 m (60 = ft.) Blanket Width 4.3 m (14.25 ft.) 2.7 m (8.8 = ft.) Blanket GEOMETRICAL Area 138 sq.m.(1482 sq.ft.) 49 sq.m.(528 = sq.ft.) Solar Cell ACTIVE Area 105 sq.m.(1130 sq.ft.) 42 sq.m.(452 = sq.ft.) =20 Cells in series per Circuit 400 80 Voltage per Circuit (BOL 56C) 167 v 32.5 v Power, Beg-of-Life (BOL) 16 kW (1 Blanket) 6 kW -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Back to MCSA Home Page=20 =20 Last Updated Thur Oct 10 15:02 EDT 1996 Dave Hoffman ( david.j.hoffman lerc.nasa.gov) ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD7CF5.52CADC20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Solar Array Comparison
 
3D"[P&PO
=20

Solar Array Comparison

The basic building block of the MCSA is the Photovoltaic=20 Power Module (PPM). A PPM is a collection of 80 large-area silicon = solar=20 cells in a 5 cell x 16 cell matrix. These cells were originally = developed for=20 the Space Station Freedom program and are planned for use on the = International=20 Space Station (ISS). While the cells and the way they are mounted on a = flexible=20 Kapton substrate and wired in series via a flat printed circuit (copper) = are the=20 same, there are differences in the way in which the the cells are = assembled to=20 form modules, panels and blankets or wings.

The biggest difference between the MCSA and ISS arrays regarding the = solar=20 cells is that for ISS, 400 cells are wired in series (5 x 40-cell = modules) to=20 obtain a voltage of 167 V versus the MCSA where 80 cells are wired in = series (1=20 x 80-cell modules), giving a voltage of 32.5 V. Another difference is = that the=20 row of 5 cells at each end of the 80-cell MCSA PPM were cut by 0.5 cm so = that=20 they could fit into the existing Russian support structure, which leads = to the=20 next major difference in the solar arrays. While both the MCSA and ISS = arrays=20 are "deployable" on-orbit, the MCSA is supported by a robust=20 all-Russian structure based on composite frames reinforced with = fiberglas struts=20 while the ISS arrays are entirely flexible with support mainly from the=20 composite deployment mast and tensioning mechanisms.

The table below highlights some of the MCSA and ISS array design=20 features.

                                 ISS Solar Array       =
    MCSA on Mir      =20
***Attribute***
Solar Cell Type                      silicon                  silicon
Cell Surface Size             8x8 cm (3.2 x 3.2 in.)    8x8 cm (3.2 x =
3.2 in.)
Cell Thickness (nom.)          0.20 mm (0.008 in.)       0.20 mm (0.008 =
in.)=20
Coverglass Thickness (nom.)    0.13 mm (0.005 in.)       0.13 mm (0.005 =
in.)
Cell Assembly Thickness        0.33 mm (0.013 in.)       0.33 mm (0.013 =
in.) =20
Solar Cell Assembly Weight      6.2 g (0.0137 oz.)        6.2 g (0.0137 =
oz.)
# Cells in a Blanket                  16,400                   6,720
Module (PPM) Size                  40 cells (5x8)          80 cells =
(5x16)
Modules per Panel                       5                        2
Panel Size                0.38x4.3 m (1.24x14.25 ft)   0.44x2.7 m =
(1.4x8.8 ft)
Hinged Panels per Blanket              84                       42
Blanket Length                    32 m (104 ft.)            18 m (60 =
ft.)
Blanket Width                    4.3 m (14.25 ft.)          2.7 m (8.8 =
ft.)
Blanket GEOMETRICAL Area     138 sq.m.(1482 sq.ft.)      49 sq.m.(528 =
sq.ft.)
Solar Cell ACTIVE Area       105 sq.m.(1130 sq.ft.)      42 sq.m.(452 =
sq.ft.)        =20
Cells in series per Circuit            400                      80
Voltage per Circuit (BOL 56C)          167 v                   32.5 v
Power, Beg-of-Life (BOL)          16 kW (1 Blanket)            6 kW
3D"[MCSA Back to MCSA Home Page
=20
Last Updated Thur Oct 10 15:02 EDT 1996
Dave Hoffman (=20 david.j.hoffman lerc.nasa.gov)
------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD7CF5.52CADC20-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:12:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA00543; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:06:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:06:23 -0700 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805081038_MC2-3C5F-21ED compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:05:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Simon Says Science Resent-Message-ID: <"Lm8pN3.0._7.TPtLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Jed Rothwell writes: > >Barry Merriman writes: > > I'm a little fuzzy on what Case's "self sustaining" devices are going to > "prove". Wont they simply amount to a black box that---once > started---registers a certain elevated temperature reading on an > internal T sensor for a long time? That would be proof of a > self-sustaining T reading, but its still not calorimetry. > >This *is* calorimetry in its most fundamental and indisputable form. This is >an isoperibolic calorimeter, of the purest, simplest, most reliable designs. >The problems reported with other isoperibolic calorimeters -- like thermal >gradients and poor mixing close to the walls -- cannot affect this one >because input power is zero. I think it is bad form to argue with Jed on this point. He is right beyond any doubt. The idea of excess heat is that the heat output exceeds the energy input. If the energy input is zero any heat output will exceed the energy input. > As I said, >most of the heat will escape out of the top, where the blanket heater power >wires, sensor wires, Peltier etc., are attached. Suppose the Dewar surface is >within a tenth degree C of ambient and the top alone is well above ambient, by >several degrees. That will prove the point. I trust nobody will say it is a >heat pump. No, on second thought I do not trust that. Pathological skeptics >will claim it is a heat pump that moves energy from the Dewar walls, drags it >across the 200 deg C thermal gradient to concentrate it at the core, and then >spews that heat out the top. They will say the outside Dewar wall temperature >is slightly lower than the surroundings, by less than 0.1 deg C, an amount too >small to be measured with our equipment. Yup, that's what they will say. Okay, >I trust that no rational human beings will make such claims. First of all, the maximum heat that can be pumped is the energy input divided by the Carnot efficiency. Since the energy input is zero, the heat that can be pumped is zero. Secondly, the self-sustaining test will not work so there will be no claims that it works through a heat pump effect. The claim will be that it fails to work due to the non existence of cold fusion. Finally, I think it is a good idea to address Jed's often asserted claim that skeptics have invoked unreasonable heat pump explanations. A heat pump works by taking heat from one heat sink and delivering it to another at a higher temperature. Jed has ranted incessantly about the fact that allegedly working cf systems cannot be working as a heat pump because no part of the system is colder than the ambient environment. A cold part is only necessary when the heat transferred to the ambient environment exceeds the power input from all sources. This includes the electrolysis, pump and heater power. Yes, I included the heater power. In all the latest high power CETI devices that operate for extended periods of time, a water heater is used, allegedly so that the water inflow into the cell is kept at a constant temperature. I think that the actual reason for this heater is that these devices would develop cold parts without it. The cold parts of the system would prove that it acting as a heat pump and the heater is necessary to cover it up. I note that we have heard nothing from Jed about this additional heater. It certainly is very strange. The cf cell is supposed to be heating up the water so why do we need an electric water heater in this system. A proper analogue between the Case cell and past cf heat pumps would be to have an electric heater, the power to which is not included in the input power, at the base of the cell. Then enough power would have to be delivered to the cell to pump the heater heat to the top at a higher temperature. With this analogue then we could have Jed claim that the cell is not acting as a heat pump because no part of the cell is cold and those claiming to the contrary are pathological skeptics. Of course it is nonsense to claim that a system is not acting as a heat pump if no parts of it are cold when a heater is used to heat up the cold parts of it. Moreover, if an entire CETI like system is placed in an insulated system, the temperature rise should be just that which would be deduced from the power input instead of the bogus power deduced from temperature rise across the cell. This experiment has been done and the temperature rise is consistent with zero energy production in the cell. The alleged energy gain in the better systems ranges from 100 to 1000 to one. Since the pump energy, which is about 30 times the electrolysis power, is not included, the actual gain factor ranges about from 3 to 30. Taking an average factor of about 10 we see that it is easy to measure the real effect. Either the device will heat up consistent with the energy input or it will heat up 10 times faster. The experiment has been done and there is no additional increase in the heat up rate. This experiment proves that the alleged cf cell is producing zero energy and is simply acting as a heat pump. Always we hear from Jed that the skeptics are ignorant and he is informed. So why do we hear about this from me and not from Jed? I would have to say that Jed is ignorant and I am not. I would equate this situation to two brothers, one younger and less mature believes in Santa Clause and the other older and more mature does not believe in Santa. The father of the brothers, believing that the older brother is mature enough to do away with childhood fantasies has told him that there is no Santa Clause. The older brother tells the younger brother there is no Santa. The younger brother then becomes very angry. He believes in Santa, his father has not told him there is no Santa and he thinks the older brother is lying. The younger brother can go to talk to his father, who may or may not tell the truth, or he can just wait and time will dispense with his childhood fantasies. I would like to see Jed go and talk to father Dennis Cravens about this matter and see what the story is. 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 Mon May 11 15:23:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA04415; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:18:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:18:05 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980511161037.00aeec60 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> X-Sender: claytor_t_n popmail.esa.lanl.gov X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:10:38 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: Re: test for D2...? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"PyExN1.0.s41.RatLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: We just combine with oxygen and weigh the result and count for tritium. Deuterium always has detectible amounts of tritium whereas protium is usually at background. Tom. At 04:17 PM 5/11/98 -0500, you wrote: >The question has come up: > >Is the gas I'm filling the Case experiment with really deuterium? The >bottle says "DEUTERIUM - RESEARCH GRADE" but maybe somebody made a mistake >and supplied protium instead. > >Can anyone suggest an easy test to differentiate between the two? > > > >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) > > http://www.nde.lanl.gov/staff/claytor/claytor.htm Thomas N. Claytor Claytor_t_n lanl.gov Los Alamos National Laboratory ESA-MT, MS C914 Los Alamos NM, 87545 505-667-6216 voice 505-665-7176 fax From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:37:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA17248; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805112232.SAA09770 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: test for D2...? Date: Mon, 11 May 98 18:35:12 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"DRUJU2.0.QD4.qptLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >Is the gas I'm filling the Case experiment with really deuterium? The >bottle says "DEUTERIUM - RESEARCH GRADE" but maybe somebody made a mistake >and supplied protium instead. > >Can anyone suggest an easy test to differentiate between the two? Fill two mylar balloons of identicla size and flat weight -- one with H2 and the other with purported D2. Then attach both to a balance beam ("see-saw") and see where the upward lifting balance point comes. The density difference will cause differential bouyancy -- should be enough to tell the difference. By the way, from what company did your gas come? Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:36:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA12581; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:32:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:32:43 -0700 Message-Id: <199805112232.SAA09794 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Case technique - Gene? Date: Mon, 11 May 98 18:35:16 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"Hl8ik.0.Y33.0otLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18608 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >Gene, > >As the only Vortex eyewitness to Case's technique, can you comment on the >technique he uses to remove and replace the chamber in the heater nest >during each filling? The tank is very loose (not a tight fit at all) in the "nest" and I would say its position was identical in the nest each time. I doubt very much that any "preferred handling" could account for 13.2 C temperature difference. I basically rule that out entirely. IF that type of explanation were in order, I think Case would have noticed and corrected such erratic effects ages ago. >It seems at least possible that he could be >subconsciously pressing the chamber into the heater nest harder after the >D2 filling than after the H2 fillings. If so, the improved coupling could >account for the higher chamber temp observed at the same heater power. I reject this as an explanation. Nice try but no cigar. > >But maybe the nature of the heater nest is such that it doesn't make any >difference how you place the chamber in there each time... I think this is the case -- so to speak. > >Anyway I was just curious if this issue came up during the demonstration. The issue did not come up. However, if I were to see him do the same experiment again--and I expect I will, I would monitor that factor very carefully, just to rule out the possiblity of preferred nesting. The thing that really impressed me about the testing was the close match of the two initial H2 runs -- 183 C and 182 C. The 178.1 C baseline on the third run was also on the same order and a bit lower in the expected direction due to the apparent cessation of chemical activity (For now, i'll buy that as the explanation for the lowering). The subsequent gradual appearance of 191.3 C was quite remarkable. Furthermore, it came in a drifting upward manner that would be consistent with some new emerging effect. It wasn't just "bang" -- here is a higher number that might be caused by some weird differential conductivity or something else silly that we haven't thought of. But then again, I am not God, unlike folks like Dick Blue and Robert Park of the APS, who *think* they are. It is always possible that there is some systematic error here, but I doubt it. In any event, the self-sustainer will certainly end all doubts -- with all due respect to the dunking bird crowd that seems not to get the point that a hot rock cannnot stay hot in a dewar indefinitely and that the heat loss power from such a dewar can be calibrated easily, if necessary, to indicate the magnitude of the power source within the [nuclear powered] "hot rock." Best, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302 Phone: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:39:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA14679; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:36:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:36:56 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <8d216881.35577d71 aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:36:32 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"-NF9c3.0.Fb3.6stLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-11 13:41:19 EDT, you write: > Try hot Red Devil lye > or Draino if HCl doesn't work completely. Between the two, everything > should go! > Regards, > Horace Heffner I used the HCI (35%),neutralize and then hot Red Devil...worked like a charm! Thanks Horace. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:43:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18364; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:39:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:39:11 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <5c9cc9bf.35577d71 aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:36:31 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"wOu8j1.0.qU4.CutLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18610 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-11 12:33:24 EDT, you write: > From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Vince's questions:..... > >An ammeter? > Yes, either approach is valid, if done correctly. ....... > For safety,......... not necessarily safely insulated for multi-kV potentials. No problem. I don't touch meters anyway while running. > >The SECONDARY output DC was through 16 7.5 watt lamps > This suggests that the voltage drop across the lamps was more than 16 x > 100 V = 1600 V or so. Added to the tube voltage drop, that got up to 850 > V, the total secondary voltage would naively appear to be about 2.5 > kV.What is your transformer secondary rated for, Vince? Is this > reasonable? Very reasonable. Open circut will go to 3.2 Kv >.............. > > Vince, if you (and we) are ever going to learn anything, you will have to > either switch to filtered DC power......... > your only option is DC power. Yeah...don't I know it. I was directed to a supplier in Ohio that has 10Kv 750 ma diodes for 6 bucks each. Eight of those in a bridge should do the trick. I have one .6 mfd 2600 volt oil filled cap now. Will add maybe two more to get around 2 mfd. More? Let me know. > Re vacuum and gas pressure...... It would be more useful if you recorded your base vacuum readings > at the beginning and end of each run. Not a problem at all. Will do. > If your vacuum system is tight.. It is. and your pump has developed no flaw,.... Still chugging well. The cooling fan helps I suspect. > Then, we could subtract your "H2 > fill to XX.X in Hg" from the base vacuum, and we would know the actual > gas pressure in your tube. Should I include the local Weather Channel barometer reading? I am at exactly 3000 feet MSL here. Also nice because I saw Deep Impact yesterday. <> > > You certainly are getting something hot in there! Yes Mike, it's cooking! The beechwood stand I made for this is getting charred. I love the smell of beechwood in the morning! I did have one high temperature excursion that went to 505.1 C at a fill of 22.0 In Hg, 1200 volts across the tube. Jeeze! > > Michael J. Schaffer Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:40:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA14804; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:37:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:37:11 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <38e4c5ac.35577d72 aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:36:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"204SS3.0.Bd3.MstLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-11 13:51:55 EDT, you write: > Amen! Now is the time, Vince. Let us know if you need any help on > the filtered DC supply. I think Mike mentioned about 5 MFD of filter > capacitance - .....<>.... > Frank Stenger My garage is getting that Bram Stoker (sp?) look. Hmmm....5 mfd....ok cupla more oil filled caps and I'm there! Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 15:42:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA16286; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:39:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:39:08 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511173940.00bf74b8 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:39:40 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: test for D2...? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19980511161037.00aeec60 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jVHhd1.0.xz3.9utLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 16:10 5/11/98 -0600, Thomas N. Claytor wrote: >We just combine with oxygen and weigh the result and count for tritium. How do you combine it with oxygen in an orderly way?..i.e. without a messy explosion. 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 Mon May 11 15:47:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18887; Mon, 11 May 1998 15:44:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 15:44:01 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980511174433.00bfa830 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:44:33 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: test for D2...? In-Reply-To: <199805112232.SAA09770 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cXS8Z1.0.1d4.mytLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 18:35 5/11/98 -0400, E.F. Mallove wrote: >Fill two mylar balloons of identicla size and flat weight.... nice, thanks. >By the way, from what company did your gas come? Spectra Gases, 80 Industrial drive, Alpha NJ 08865. Case says he gets his D2 from the same place. 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 Mon May 11 16:42:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA02083; Mon, 11 May 1998 16:39:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:39:52 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:34:32 -0500 (GMT) From: Carlos Henry Castano To: "Carlos H. Casta~o Giraldo" Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"f_Rex.0.NW.6nuLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Unidentified subject! Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18614 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ofelia Margarita Giraldo Alzate Desde Cuatro Esquinas, Rionegro Other E-mail: chcastan hotmail.com (it's Chequed every couple of weeks) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 16:49:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28940; Mon, 11 May 1998 16:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35577ED5.5A5E earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:42:29 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Part 1/2 05/08/98 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"-KAsh1.0.347.squLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Received: from rmforall.earthlink.net (1Cust241.tnt23.dfw5.da.uu.net [208.254.197.241]) by gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA23846 for ; Mon, 11 May 1998 16:19:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35577991.306A earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:20:01 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique 05/08/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit [Note by Rich Murray: This email version will look less choppy if the viewing line width is reduced to about 40-characters.] Subject: ICCF-7 Conference Report Author: Elliot Kennel, Ekennel Apsci.com, Ekennel@Compuserve.com I attended the 7th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-7), April 19-24, 1998. The proceedings are not yet out, so my comments are a bit tentative as they are based on my notes and memory. I think that the conference itself was wonderfully organized (thanks to Fred Jaeger et al at ENECO). They correctly recognized that cold fusion scientists tend to be workaholics, and so amusements were kept to a minimum, and sessions plus workshops allowed a maximum of technical exchange. The format, with only a few oral presentations but very strong poster sessions worked very well. In past years, split sessions were tried but many people wanted to attend multiple topics. At any conference, most of the action is out in the hall anyway, so the poster sessions tended to promote that sort of thing. So I think the format was nearly perfect. There were a few results which I find encouraging and which possibly indicate that some important discoveries are being made. On the whole, however, I confess that I have become increasingly skeptical about the major claims which have been made in the cold fusion community. Specifically, while in Japan at the New Hydrogen Energy Laboratory from 1996-1998, I was involved in several experiments which appeared to give positive results in excess heat, tritium, helium and transmutations, but further investigation always showed that the results were likely due to some artifact, and not to a true anomaly. Accordingly, I wonder if others are also producing artifacts and not recognizing it, or could it be that they are producing real results while I am failing to discern the difference between my experiments and theirs? Anyway, my personal standard of proof is very high these days. Excess Heat In the area of excess heat, during my time in Japan I was troubled by the observation that a single experiment could produce excess heat as measured by an isoperibolic calorimeter, but simultaneously produce zero excess heat as measured by a mass flow calorimeter. I interpret the effect as follows: at high deuterium loading, a state change occurs in the surface of the cathode which causes the open-circuit voltage (as well as the voltage under load) to increase. Under this condition, there is a higher percentage of thermal energy generated at the cathode, and less in the electrolyte. This changes the calibration coefficient of the cell and results in an excess heat signal. Many researchers have observed the loss of excess heat upon switching from isoperibolic calorimetry to mass flow calorimetry (including NHE Lab and the IMRA Japan group). Ed Storms, a key proponent of the excess heat effect and a brilliant researcher whom I have known and respected since the early 1980s, has built a dual calorimeter system and sees the same effect. His interpretation is that the artifact problem does exist, and thus excess heat values of ~10% should be ignored, but higher values are probably due to an actual (nuclear) anomaly. Storms thinks that excess heat results of ~50% are too high to be explained by the artifact observed at NHE Lab. However, my view is that isoperibolic calorimeters have been shown to be unreliable for measuring excess heat in electrolytic cells in which the electrode surfaces are changing, and so I am skeptical of all excess heat data which depends on isoperibolic calorimetry, even for very good setups. This disagreement has not been resolved yet. In Japan, we also found errors in the design of the mass flow calorimeter for the Frascati electromigration cell. The problem was the estimation of the heat leakage in the calorimeter. The heat leakage was underestimated, so that when the cell was run at a temperature colder than the surroundings, it appeared to generate excess heat. The difference between deuterium and hydrogen is that the electrical resistance is different, which changes the losses. The device produced no excess heat despite the best efforts of Dr. Paolo Tripodi (who, by the way, I consider to be a highly competent engineer). Dr. Francesco Celani also visited us, and as far as I know agrees that the device sent to Japan produced no excess heat. Celani also told me that he agrees with my previous criticism of the electromigration effect on theoretical grounds (namely, the formulation he used last year depends upon an infinite medium approximation, whereas the long thin wire he uses in electrolysis will be much more strongly affected by electrolysis rather than electromigration. Thus, his cell works via pulsed electrolysis, and the electromigration effect is negligible). Nevertheless, his papers seem to gloss over these problems. Unfortunately, CETI did not present much at the conference. CETI is famous for their claim about reproducible excess heat. Although I have only a passing familiarity with the system, I am still skeptical about whether mass flow calorimetry is really reliable with a two phase, electrochemically reactive working fluid. It seems to me likely that the excess temperature effect is real, but perhaps the presence of gas bubbles in the electrolyte (which occurs as soon as the cathode is loaded) may make it difficult to measure the actual density, volumetric flow rate, specific heat and chemical enthalpy change (assumed to be zero) of the working fluid. So I think it is very likely an excess temperature device, but I am unwilling to believe in excess energy until I see a “normal” calorimeter read the same thing. Martin Fleischmann continues to emphasize that a positive temperature coefficient is mandatory in order to see excess heat effects. His notion is that the NHE laboratory work may have been effective at obtaining very high loading, but it is not sufficient to produce excess heat. Positive thermal feedback is also necessary, and is provided by the isoperibolic calorimeter. Thus, Fleischmann regards the calorimeter as an active part of the device, rather than a passive measurement tool. There is also a long-standing dispute between Fleischmann and the NHE lab guys over the differential equations which are used to describe the calorimeter. Using Fleischmann’s equations, there appears to be excess heat in several samples. However, the NHE group argued (I think it was ICCF-5, to which I don’t have immediate access, so I can’t cite the specific reference) that Fleischmann’s methods led to erroneous results. For my part, however, I am more concerned because calorimeters of the type used by Fleischmann have been shown (to my satisfaction, at least) to give false positives at high loading due to the electrochemical state change which apparently occurs. This fact overrides Fleischmann’s reassuring rationale that the isoperibolic calorimeter provides temperature feedback needed to make the cold fusion effect switch on. Then there are other problems associated with open cell calorimetry which have been cited by numerous critics. I do not understand why he does not use the closed cycle type of calorimeter used by Storms and others. If excess heat is going to be recognized as a scientific fact, it needs to be demonstrated in a rigorous, unambiguous way. Tiny amounts of heat, the existence of which depends on several PhDs in mechanical engineering arguing about hair-splitting differences between the differential equations to describe an imperfect calorimeter, just isn’t convincing. The argument that ureliable instrumentation is a mandatory requirement for seeing an anomaly is likewise troublesome. At best it is ambiguous, at worst it is simply wrong. Some interesting data was presented by a little-known researcher, Dr. L. C. Case, who used his a priori knowledge about chemical catalysis combined with an Edisonian approach to studying materials, to identify several material combinations which produce apparent excess heat. Case claims that Pd and other metals works well on activated charcoal. He seems very open and willing to share his data, which will simplify evaluation by others. I think he’s a longshot, but I like his style. The DeNinno group in Italy continues to make innovations in loading techniques. The finding that an electric current enhances gas loading is quite peculiar, and indicates that there is some unusual electrochemical behavior taking place. Similarly, Storms is continuing to advocate that open circuit voltage must be measured as a way of determining the loading characteristics of the cell. I wonder if these results can be connected in some way. Transmutation Since the last conference, many persons have gotten very excited about the possibility of transmutation reactions and isotope shifts. Some of the data looks more convincing than others. Some claims are made on the basis of the following rationale: a. The system is known to be very clean. b. Impurities are found on the cathode. c. Since the system is clean, the impurities must be due to a nuclear reaction. This seems very weak to me, since it is impossible to show that the system was really clean before the experiment. Moreover, electrolysis cells are often used to clean up liquid waste streams, because all positive ions plate out on the cathode. So the fact that a few milligrams of positive ionic crud appears on the cathode, is not surprising to me. The presence of isotopic shift seems much more important. If the cathodic crud is always the same abundance as normal material, it is very likely chemical contamination, since the cold fusion process, whatever it is, is highly implausible that it would just happen to mimic the ultrahigh energy bombardment and subsequent radioactive decay from the creation of the universe during the Big Bang (unless the universe was created by cold fusion instead—of course that assumption ups the ante for cold fusion quite a bit). On the other hand, if there is an unnatural isotope shift, this is difficult (though not impossible—see below) to achieve via normal chemical processes. Some comment is necessary on potential errors in isotope identification. Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy (SIMS) is a technique used by many investigators. However, there are different types of SIMS, ranging from completely useless to marginally useful but often misleading. With low-res SIMS, it is not possible to separate molecules from atoms. Thus Mass 102 could be Pd-102, Ru-102, or it might be something like Al2O3. So everything appears isotope shifted in low res SIMS. At higher res, most of the apparent shifts are no longer seen, but some persist. Ru-104 and Pd-104 are examples of elemental interference which is very difficult to overcome. A good state of the art machine can obtain an m/?m of over 6000, but the m/?m rating required to separate Ru-104 and Pd-104 is about 75,000. High-res SIMS is subject to other errors, particularly in non-uniform surfaces (which includes many electrolysis surfaces) because of the SIMS relative sensitivity factor (RSF) which is isotope dependent, and which also depends on the identity of the neighboring atom. The ability to translate SIMS observations to the original concentration of the observed ions is dependent upon the ability to obtain RSF for the element in question. IR/Cr = RSFI (II/CI) where IR is the intensity of secondary ions from the reference atom, usually the majority atom in the target; CR is the concentration of reference atoms in the target; Ii is the secondary ion intensity of the ith element atoms in the target, and Ci is the concentration of the ith element atoms in the target. For many problems, the RSF of the matrix is constant, and the other atoms are present only as slight impurities of the host matrix. In this case, it is likely that the RSF factors will be quite constant for these impurities. However, the RSFs are not constants for each atomic species. They are functions of the host matrix atoms as well. In a dirty, heavily contaminated sample with substantial lattice strain energy, the RSFs will vary in an unpredictable way, and may in fact vary from isotope to isotope. In other words, RSFI = f(CR,CI,U) , where U refers to the local lattice strain energy. In other words, what you are doing in SIMS is blasting the surface with oxygen and tearing away atoms from the surface. But the energy required to tear the atom from the surface depends on how big it is as well as how it is bonded to its neighbor. If you have less than a clean, pure surface, there are going to be substantial variations in the SIMS signature for a given element. Annealing the sample can reduce the error due to variation of the RSF. There is also a fallacy in trusting the literature values too much. Not all material adheres to the literature value of abundance. There can be some variations according to where it is originally mined. In addition, some elements are routinely sold in isotope-enriched form. For example, when you buy lithium, it is normally something like 99% Li-7. This is because Li-6 is used for nuclear applications, and the Li-7 is sold as the byproduct from the separation process. Also, isotopic separation can occur due to the electrolysis process itself, especially for light elements. In particular, studies at NHE Lab have shown that some degree of separation occurs in the H-D-T system, and some smaller effects may exist in other systems. For these reasons, SIMS is proven to be unreliable for identifying isotope shift. SIMS apparent isotope shift has been observed with excess heat, and without it, with deuterium and with hydrogen. Moreover, since the Karabut group reports SIMS shifts due to Xenon bombardment (i.e., no hydrogen, no deuterium, no palladium, no electrolysis), then the link between isotope shift and electochemical cold fusion is much more ambiguous. I am also not excited about arguments for a transmutation origin of cathodic crud based on patterns in the distribution of elements. Electrochemically transported crud should consist mainly of positive ions and not negative ions, and thus will create patterns corresponding to the periodic table (i.e., valence). The presence of mostly positive ions on the cathode suggests chemical transport rather than a nuclear origin. Dr. George Miley and Dr. T. Mizuno have been among the strongest advocates for the existence of transmutation effects. I like Mizuno’s arguments the best, because he has at least some data which shows a 100% isotope shift in copper (all Cu-63, no Cu-65, according to SIMS), plus he has detected Cu with several other techniques (but unfortunately not yet with NAA as far as I know) . So this looks like a reasonable argument. Even though SIMS is not very reliable, 100% vs. 0% is tough to explain. Still, as argued above neutron activation, rather than SIMS, is probably the preferred technique for observing isotope shift. However, Cu is a bit of a problem since one of the lines needed to make the identification is 511 keV, which unfortunately is used by several radionuclides. The half life must be measured to distinguish between several radionuclides. On the other hand, Miley’s approach is to use both neutron activation analysis (NAA) and SIMS together. This is the correct approach, as neutron activation can be compelling evidence for many (though not all) radionuclides. The main problem with NAA is that it is possible to make mistakes with individual elements because two or more radionuclides often emit at the same gamma energy. In addition, as mentioned above, some variation in isotopic abundance can occur naturally or in the refining process or during electrolysis. Miley’s isotope shift claims are not as spectacular as Mizuno’s, though Miley’s methodology appears to be better. From my point of view, Miley’s data looks like chemical transport. The biggest shifts occur for those elements in the smallest abundance, which arouses doubt. If you are willing to believe that the system is dirtier than Miley thinks, then the data is not really very anomalous. I would like to see a single element with a well-studied, verifiably anomalous isotope shift as revealed by NAA for which all the error mechanisms have been considered and ruled out. I have not yet seen this yet. Mizuno’s data looks much more anomalous, though better measurements are needed to be sure that he really has something. Maybe he is right that the SIMS data is good enough to conclude that a Cu isotope shift has occurred, but I’m very suspicious of SIMS and would like to see a very good measurement with NAA to corroborate it. I hope this is possible. I think Professor Richard Oriani fell into a trap in his paper, in which he talked about superatoms with weight of over 300. Mass spec is simply not reliable for this purpose. I felt badly for him, because my impression has been that he is a very competent mechanical engineer. But now I suspect someone has sucked him into very dubious spectroscopic research, and he is no longer in his field of expertise. I would tend not to accept neutron activation results as proof of isotopic shift unless the shift is greater than about 10-15% and several sigma for most heavy elements and I don’t accept uncorroborated SIMS at all. It may be possible to accept lower shifts by NAA if it can be shown that the element in question never deviates from the literature value of isotope distribution no matter what its source; or if the NAA gamma structure allows multiple confirmations of isotopic distribution (i.e., multiple gamma lines) with high confidence. There is some possibility that Mizuno or Miley may have something, but I think I would like to see more before concurring with their contentions. So there is some positive evidence, but it is still resting on some shaky assumptions. In any case, non-transmutation mechanisms, such as unexpected isotope separation should also be kept open, rather than limiting the options to nuclear transmutations or nothing. Radiation Detection In this area, the best results are being obtained by accelerators. I think Kasagi’s work from the last conference shows that there are some anomalous reactions that happen at low energies (specifically simultaneous three-body D-D-D reactions, resulting in high energy alpha and proton emission which absolutely should not occur. This is the only part of the cold fusion area which I feel confident in (but I’m not sure that it is at all related to the Pons-Fleischmann effect). If a theoretical understanding of the effect can be reached, then it may be possible to say whether other claimed observables can actually occur. This year’s paper from Kasagi claims an enhanced fusion rate for Lipson’s PdO-Pd-PdO-Au heterostructure foils. I’m not sure about that one, but I don’t see any glaring errors either. The only way that I see how it could be wrong is if the control experiment (using pure Pd) absorbed substantially less deuterium than expected, whereas the heterostructure would have to have loaded better. Takahashi has attempted to extend the 3-body experiments, although most of the people I talked to felt that he needed to use a better detector in order to be certain that he really has observed a three body reaction. I was disappointed by a presentation by Ohmori, in which he claimed that some anomalous effect occurred during high current electrolysis, at which point the electrode becomes hot and generates a plasma. A fantastic neutron flux (106 n/sec) was claimed, but then Ohmori admitted that this might be due to electromagnetic noise from the plasma. Since he is not dead from radiation poisoning, the latter explanation is likely. It seems to me that this is probably nothing more than the burnout heat flux (at a certain point, the heat transfer coefficient decreases, which causes the surface to heat up, which causes the heat transfer coefficient to further decrease, and so on. This causes flash boiling, similar to what Ohmori observed). The low quality of this paper frankly shocked me, and may cause me to re-evaluate the isotope shift papers by the Hokkaido University group. My confidence in their research has been thoroughly shaken. Similarly, the work of the Iwamura group at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) was disappointing, as they reported non-reproducible results which have the definite appearance of electronic noise. Several papers from China also fit into this category. There is a mysterious group referred to as the Cincinnati group, which apparently is hoping for fame and fortune via a variant of cold fusion. They supposedly reduce radioactivity in an electrochemical cell. Most persons believe that the radioactivity is simply transported to other places in the cell further away (or shielded) from the detector. Anyway, these super-proprietary systems are impossible to evaluate since they are kept so tightly under wraps. After they win the Nobel Prize and receive a few multi-billion dollar utility contracts, perhaps they will be more forthcoming. Or perhaps they will be too busy suing everybody who wants to work on their stuff. However, in the meantime they will be bogged down for years due to the difficulties they have created for others to understand their work. For some reason, Celani got involved in this research and submitted a “last minute” paper with “preliminary results” on this phenomenon. If the cold fusion community wishes to be taken seriously, we need to stop supporting these sensational claims based upon sloppy, quasi-secret data. Helium At NHE lab, I observed helium on a quadrupole mass analyzer (QMA) from a variety of different sources, including leaks, contamination, etc. One particularly troubling finding was that, if the turbopump got too warm (due, for example to pumping out deuterium from an outgasing sample), it would lose efficiency at low mass numbers, and peaks at Mass 1, 2, 3 and 4 could be observed. At high resolution, the quadrupole mass analyzer would show a distinct He-4 peak under these conditions. We checked this out with the maker of the QMA and were told that it is normal. In other words, simply putting a metal hydride sample in the chamber and pumping down is enough to cause a helium peak to appear, but it is not from the sample, but only residual helium which is not being removed by the turbopump. I wonder if others have seen this same effect and not realized what causes it. If so, some of the claims for He-4 may be incorrect. Some of the most credible researchers in this area are Mel Miles and Ben Bush. I talked to Bush a little about his results. I think he had eight positive results and 6 negative results on control samples, if I’m not mistaken (i.e., 14 samples behaved as expected). However, the positive results were all done one after the other. I’d like to see future experiments done with an excess heat loaded cathode first (loaded with D2), and control experiment (maybe some other metal loaded with hydrogen, or something like that), so that the measurements alternate: live, control, live, control, live, control, etc. The significance of the result is not the observation of helium, since that is observed often for a number of reasons, but rather the correlation of the helium with what happened in the experiment. I am not convinced that they eliminated all chances of systematic error. Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to sit down with Mel Miles. I think he is a very careful and competent scientist, so I regret not getting a chance to review his helium data. We did chitchat some about our experiences in Japan, but unfortunately we did not exchange much technical details. Yamaguchi of NTT retracted his helium results. At the end of the conference, of the speakers (I think it was Bressani) tried to get Yamaguchi to say that his results were really positive, but that perhaps his equipment wasn’t sensitive enough to observe it. Tritium The work of Tom Claytor continues to produce positive results in tritium generation. Claytor has a very good reputation, and is known as a careful and meticulous scientist. Therefore, since his data has not been adequately refuted in the past several years, it needs to be taken seriously. Romodanov of Luch also continues to report results, but is less forthcoming about how his experiment works. However, the QMA observations of mass 5 (presumed to be DT) as suggested by the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries group has been adequately shown to be due to DDH, at least as far as I am concerned, based on experiments at NHE Laboratory. Opening the chamber to put in the sample allows water vapor to enter, which enhances the DDH “background” temporarily. The definitive test is a scintillation cocktail procedure, which showed no tritium excess in our experiments. If there really were enough tritium to be seen on QMA, then we again would need to explain why the researchers are not dead. However, the MHI guys have not retracted their data. Theoretical Work I’m not a competent cold fusion theorist, so I can’t really say much in this area. However, Peter Hagelstein of MIT is still saying that it is possible to couple lattice states and individual nuclear states, so I have to believe that experiments such as Kasagi’s are possible. Hagelstein is still interested in the possibility of dispersing nuclear transition energy in the surrounding lattice, as a means of producing excess heat. Kim of Purdue has attempted to describe ways by which three body interactions might occur, as well as unexpected shielding effects which might be present. I wonder if some of his arguments might be applied to Claytor’s data. Again, I’m not an expert, but both of these men seemed to have good arguments of how anomalous nuclear reactions could be made to occur (of course they might have slipped a subscript somewhere, but I would never notice). For that reason, I think that cold fusion research is not foolishness, but should be considered to be a hypothetical possibility at least. However, the burden of proof is on the experimenters to produce a bulletproof experiment that demonstrates an effect. The conference organizers did a good job of screening the theory papers, which in past years has been of very non-uniform quality. NHE Laboratory NHE Laboratory is now closing, and the equipment is being assigned to different universities pursuing cold fusion and related studies. Some expected that there would be a financial windfall for basic research as a result of the lab closing, but as is usually the case, when a development program shuts down, basic research funding also becomes tight. Similarly, I am amused at some CF advocates in the US who are lobbying for a cutting of hot fusion funds, assuming that that money would be reprogrammed for cold fusion. Excess heat is not so unbelievable, but believing that the government is going to reprogram money for cold fusion is really a pathological belief! The conclusions of NHE Laboratory are generally negative concerning the reality of the cold fusion effect. In most cases, positive results were achieved but subsequently proven to be due to artifacts or other non-nuclear effects. I think the cold fusion community in general does not appreciate just how difficult it is to tell the difference between an artifact and a real result, and the conclusions from NHE Lab, though not necessarily the last word, should not be simply swept aside and ignored. I was kind of surprised to find myself listed as a coauthor on Lipson’s paper. I’m not ready to buy into his conclusions because I haven’t been given the data files on the experiment. I have a little routine for converting Japanese MCA data files into Excel format, which I think is necessary to evaluate the data. I don’t think Lipson’s manual summaries of the data are adequate. Still it is encouraging that his samples showed an apparently enhanced fusion cross section in Kasagi’s accelerator experiments, so perhaps something indeed happens. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 16:52:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29176; Mon, 11 May 1998 16:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35577F1F.43B earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:43:43 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Part 2/2 05/08/98 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"P6eGt2.0.n77.aruLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Received: from rmforall.earthlink.net (1Cust241.tnt23.dfw5.da.uu.net [208.254.197.241]) by gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA04554 for ; Mon, 11 May 1998 16:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35577C9F.5E03 earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:33:03 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Part 2/2 05/08/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Part 2/2 Summary As far as I can see, it looks like there is a good chance that Kasagi has observed some low energy accelerator effects (though they may be entirely unrelated to the Pons-Fleischmann effect). These results strongly suggest that the nuclear state is coupled to the lattice state in some way which is not yet understood. Accordingly, it could be a very important result, although perhaps not as wonderful as some would like. Similarly, Tom Claytor’s data at LANL continues to look good, and an adequate refutation of his data does not currently exist. So I think that there is some reason for believing that there is a mechanism for enhancing nuclear transitions which are otherwise not anticipated, and I support further experimentation and theoretical investigations in this area. In particular, I believe that a replication of the Kasagi D-D-D experiment should be attempted. I think that it is likely that if the anomaly is repeated, it will eventually be understood. As far as excess heat and transmutation are concerned, I think that the exotic effects are looking less and less likely as more time goes on and more and more ways of making false positives are identified. Moreover, there are so many separate claims in the field (probably 100 or so) that they cannot all be true. Thus, in reality most everyone in the field is skeptical about most of the data. However, I think it probably is worthwhile in continuing to investigate some of the better experiments simply because the payoff is very high, even though the probability of success seems very low to me. Thus I think that accelerator experiments hold the key to cold fusion in the near term. If these are understood, the physics may help resolve some of the other debates in the cold fusion community about what is and is not possible. Moreover, no less a critic than Douglas Morrison has suggested at ICCF-6 that such research could be of interest, perhaps, in explaining solar processes. However, as I’ve become aware of more and more ways to generate false positives, I’m increasingly skeptical of electrochemical cells, excess heat, transmutation, etc. I do not believe that all researchers performing such experiments are universally incompetent or guilty of pathological science. On the contrary, I think there are some very good people involved in cold fusion research. Still, these are very difficult experiments, and there are very subtle artifacts which can be generated. It takes a lot of time and many, many control experiments to properly identify these artifacts. At this point, I tend to accept the results of Kasagi, and am optimistic about Claytor’s results. The work of Storms, Takahashi, Miles, Bush, Mizuno, Miley, Case, Lipson, DeNinno and others looks interesting enough that it ought to be continued, though I am skeptical about the conclusion that a nuclear reaction is responsible for the unusual observations. My general advice in this field is that it is better to measure the same thing five ways, than to measure five different things one way. Also, if a researcher can’t think of at least ten different control experiments, he or she just isn’t trying. Elliot B. Kennel Director of Research and Development From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 16:50:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07210; Mon, 11 May 1998 16:48:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 16:48:10 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 23:47:47 +0000 Message-ID: <19980511234745.AAA20402 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"YYdzv2.0.Vm1.vuuLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > > Dear Vo., > > As a participant ... here is what I see.... > > Barry gav us a nice satire with Drinking Bird. Leave it there... >as satire. > If Ed or Jed wish Barry to comment on CF, then fine... > > BUT: As I see it the Drinking Bird text was a fine bit of humor >which a few contributed to as well... so keep them apart! > > J > It is hard to see them as not being together. Politicians know the kind of power that the late-night comedians can wield. When people are laughing, they are not thinking critically as they accept the absurd pretexts. We are not intrinsically rational (a statement for which there is boundless evidence, IMO), though many of us are well practiced in rational arts of reason like logic, science and math. Humor is good when it reminds us of our ridiculousness to keep us from taking ourselves too seriously (to agree with Horace's excellent post Humor and Integrity) so as to maintain healthy perspective. However, there is a vast difference between humor and how seriously we should take what we do. The evidence for CF is not ridiculous, even if Barry Merriman declines to comment upon it, nor are the track records of the scientists who have staked their reputations behind it. I'm glad that he can enjoy himself and I appreciate his intellect and humor, but I have to question his motive if he has no interest in seriously commenting on McKubre's or Claytor's work for only an investment of time, but invests a lot of resources in the least likely candidate, Joe Champion, with the most outrageous claims. Might Barry be irrational? Might he admit it, at least to himself? Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 17:09:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA01778; Mon, 11 May 1998 17:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:55:53 -0500 (GMT) From: Carlos Henry Castano Reply-To: Carlos Henry Castano To: Carlos Henry Casta~o Giraldo Subject: test, please ignore Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"HJabp2.0.dR.l7vLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 17:25:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA15242; Mon, 11 May 1998 17:23:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:23:29 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5c9cc9bf.35577d71 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:24:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"Iw6-m.0.3k3.0QvLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18619 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, >Yeah...don't I know it. I was directed to a supplier in Ohio that has 10Kv >750 ma diodes for 6 bucks each. Eight of those in a bridge should do >the trick. I have one .6 mfd 2600 volt oil filled cap now. Will add maybe >two more to get around 2 mfd. More? Let me know. With all your ballast in there, 750 mA ought to be more than enough for the current. And 10 kV ought to handle the 3.2 kV AC (about 4.5 kV peak). Maybe you can get by with just 4 diodes, though the voltage safety factor is a bit less than usually recommended. I'll see if I can find a suitable filter capacitor for you in my junk. 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 May 11 17:46:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA20333; Mon, 11 May 1998 17:41:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:41:35 -0700 Message-ID: <35579ADB.6B80 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:42:03 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ye9Sr.0.Nz4.xgvLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > With all your ballast in there, 750 mA ought to be more than enough for the > current. And 10 kV ought to handle the 3.2 kV AC (about 4.5 kV peak). Maybe > you can get by with just 4 diodes, though the voltage safety factor is a > bit less than usually recommended. If I'm not mistaken, Mike, 3.2 kV is already the peak - it's what his half-wave rectifier tops out at into his modest filter cap at no load. Is this right, Vince? If so, you're in roses with 4 diodes - then you have 4 for spares! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 18:00:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA27740; Mon, 11 May 1998 17:58:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 17:58:52 -0700 Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 11:56:58 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Subject: Re: Kurtz should explain Merriman In-Reply-To: <199805111652_MC2-3CA4-EB0B compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"8VlAG1.0.Ln6.AxvLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18621 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 11 May 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > inside a Dewar flask for a week or two. Merriman said this would not be > convincing proof of excess heat because: > > At an arbitrarily small rate....i.e., ideally it is possible to heat up > a body, insulate it perfectly, and its temperature will never drop. No > work done at all after the initial heat input. > In principle it would be theoretically possible if no MEASUREMENTS of the temperature were made. However a thermocouple used to read out the temperature would drain a bit of energy from the system causing the temperature to drop. I really like the proposal to use a Peltier device to make a LED glow. That would be a nice publicity item but of course the real heat loss would be much greater than that. As Jed says it would be very easy to calibrate the chamber by running some power into the system and measuring the steady state temperature that results. IF the self-sustainer works to Gene's satisfaction after suffering a bout of questions from us, I'll certainly buy one. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 18:24:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA14319; Mon, 11 May 1998 18:20:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:20:11 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <4e76faf0.3557a32e aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 21:17:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"tZeKk1.0.XV3.4FwLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18622 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-11 20:44:11 EDT, you write: > If I'm not mistaken, Mike, 3.2 kV is already the peak - it's what his > half-wave rectifier tops out at into his modest filter cap at no load. > Is this right, Vince? > Frank Stenger That is correct Frank. Vince Cockeram From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 18:37:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA16514; Mon, 11 May 1998 18:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 18:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 21:30:10 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wharton's comments on Case, CETI Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805112132_MC2-3CA8-DE06 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"N7lsI1.0.x14.3TwLr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18623 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Larry Wharton writes: In all the latest high power CETI devices that operate for extended periods of time, a water heater is used, allegedly so that the water inflow into the cell is kept at a constant temperature. That is incorrect. The 50 watt water heater in the Power Gen demo and other large cells was only used when the water was cold from sitting in Craven's lab. It was always turned off in the demonstrations observed by me Power Gen and by others subsequently. I did not see the heat on, except briefly when Cravens demonstrated that the draw from the heater just about doubled total power consumption. I note that we have heard nothing from Jed about this additional heater. It certainly is very strange. That is incorrect. I stated this explicitly many, many times over the years in response to Wharton's claim. The cf cell is supposed to be heating up the water so why do we need an electric water heater in this system. We don't! Who said we did? This "observation" is a figment of Wharton's imagination. He certainly never heard it from me, or Cravens, or anyone connected with CETI, or any of the companies like Motorola that have independently verified the CETI cells using a variety of different calorimeters. I cannot imagine where claims like this filter in from. They are like urban myths -- undocumented, untraceable, and obviously based on someone's vivid imagination. I suspect Wharton himself made this up, but who knows? Moreover, if an entire CETI like system is placed in an insulated system, the temperature rise should be just that which would be deduced from the power input instead of the bogus power deduced from temperature rise across the cell. This experiment has been done and the temperature rise is consistent with zero energy production in the cell. The alleged energy gain in the better systems ranges from 100 to 1000 to one. Since the pump energy, which is about 30 times the electrolysis power, is not included, the actual gain factor ranges about from 3 to 30. This is incorrect. With the small 1 ml CETI cells, the pump power exceeds the cell output, but with the larger cells total input to all components including the pump, the cell, the meters and even the cell heater is much smaller than the cell output. With the cell heater turned off, input was 85 watts, output 500 to 1200 watts. To quote my original report: The pump, cooling fan and DC power supplies electrolysis all have one common AC cord, which is monitored by a Radio Shack analog AC voltmeter and a multimeter. Total power consumption by all components is 85 watts. As I recall, the pump motor consumed about 50 watts. Obviously most of the 85 watts total consumption never got close to the water, coming out immediately from the meter power supplies, blower fan motor, and pump motor. Most of the pump waste heat is dumped outside the pump housing. An aquarium pump motor must be air cooled, or it will heat up the water and kill the fish. Taking an average factor of about 10 we see that it is easy to measure the real effect. Either the device will heat up consistent with the energy input or it will heat up 10 times faster. The experiment has been done and there is no additional increase in the heat up rate. This experiment proves that the alleged cf cell is producing zero energy and is simply acting as a heat pump. No, it proves that CF output power is not proportional to input power. To prove that 50 watts of input to the pump produces 1000 watts heat pump heat transfer, you have to find a part of the machine that is absorbing 950 watts from the surroundings. A small object that did that would be quite cold to the touch, and it soon be covered with mist and frost. Anyone would spot it instantly. Yet every part of the machine that I felt, from the aquarium reservoir, to the tubes, to the cell itself was much warmer than the surroundings. Water samples from the reservoir and tubes were always 10 to 20 deg C hotter than the surroundings. The reservoir thermocouple agreed with these readings. Where does that leave the heat sink? Did I forget to feel one short segment of the inlet tube, where all the heat transfer occurred? If the heat transfer was inside the pump, in the bottom of the reservoir, then the water in the reservoir and the reservoir housing would have to be much colder than the room, because something would have to transfer all pump power, all pump heat, and 950 other watts from that location a meter away to the cell. This hypothesis is even more implausible than the theory that I cannot tell the difference between a flow of 1 drop of water per minute and 1 liter per minute. So why do we hear about this from me and not from Jed? I would have to say that Jed is ignorant and I am not. We do hear this from Jed! Time after time we have been over the heat pump hypothesis. All of us hear it, Larry Wharton alone refuses to listen. I much prefer people who listen and then tell me I cannot tell a drop from a liter, or I am damn liar. At least I can tell the message is getting through. I even prefer the people who evade the issue, change the subject, and write stupid satire about dunking birds. At least it is amusing. I would like to see Jed go and talk to father Dennis Cravens about this matter and see what the story is. I do not need to talk to Cravens, I could see for myself there was no 950 watt heat pump energy transfer underway. In any case, I have talked to Cravens and to CETI's new director of research and development. He is from Exxon and he knows a heat pump when he sees it. Hell, anyone would. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 19:19:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA15040; Mon, 11 May 1998 19:16:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 19:16:46 -0700 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 19:18:39 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Kurtz should explain Merriman In-reply-to: <199805111652_MC2-3CA4-EB0B compuserve.com> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199805120216.TAA13388 smtp1.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4gRkI2.0.Xg3.B4xLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18624 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:50 PM 5/11/98 -0400, you wrote: >To: Vortex; >INTERNET:kurtz imap2.asu.edu > >I wrote that Merriman claimed a Dewar flask constitutes perfect insulation. >Lynn Kurtz disagrees: > > Except, of course, for the fact that he did not ever say that. > >In that case I misunderstood, and so did Craig Haynie, Ed Wall and number of >other people in this forum who contacted me. Since Merriman refuses to clarify >or comment further, perhaps Kurtz would be kind enough to explain to us what >he *did* mean. I said he did not *say* that, and he didn't. >Here is the original statement. Remember, the context is a >discussion of hypothetical experiment in which a cell remains at 200 deg C >inside a Dewar flask for a week or two. Merriman said this would not be >convincing proof of excess heat because: > > At an arbitrarily small rate....i.e., ideally it is possible to heat up > a body, insulate it perfectly, and its temperature will never drop. No > work done at all after the initial heat input. > Do you see the words "ideally it is possible"? I think you know as well as I do that Barry would never claim a Dewar flask is a perfect insulator. So why do you pretend otherwise? >Explain, please: > >1. IS it possible to heat a body and insulate it perfectly? Where do you buy >perfect insulation? I could use some! > Of course not. We all know that. Why do you ask? >2. We are talking about a Dewar flask. Is *that* perfect insulation? If it >isn't, what was Merriman's point? Why did he say this in the first place?!? >There must be reason. No it isn't perfect insulation. Nobody claims it is. If you want to know why he said it, why don't you ask him instead of putting words in his mouth that he didn't say? >3. Scott Little posted a computation showing that a Dewar is not perfect >insulation, and Case's tests last week confirmed it. I have tested Dewar >flasks myself, and I note they do cool down at an easily measured rate. Please >explain why Little, Case and I are wrong. > Nobody said they were perfect insulators. >Kurtz says that Scott Little did not see an effect because he is using >"adequate calorimetry." Little is using flow calorimetry. Case employs >isoperibolic calorimetry. An experiment with no input is simplified and it can >evaluated easily by first principles, without depending on calibrations: heat >loss across the walls and the vacuum gap, and losses from the outside of the >vessel. These first principles have been an accepted part of physics longer >than flow calorimetry has been around. Kurtz should explain to this audience >why these basic principles are incorrect, or why they do not apply to a Dewar >flask. Please bear in mind we are discussing a proposed experiment, not the >present calorimetry, which I myself have repeately described as inadequate >and unconvining. > You love to put words in people's mouths, don't you. > There is one thing I >*do* mind though. It is the pot-shot, hit-and-run critiques posted by people >like Merriman and Kurtz. They make outrageous, unsupported statements, totally >at variance with elementary science. They disrupt the discussion. And then >they cut and run! Please show me the outrageous unsupported statements I made that are totally at variance with elementary science. And just because I don't post regularly doesn't mean I don't read the forum. >... in return the skeptics >hand us a barrage of garbage -- yes, garbage, even here! It is disrespectful, >irrelevant, sophomoric, cynical, satirical hogwash, intended to distract the >audience and derail the discussion. Chill out, Jed. Its the end of the semester. You can't blame Barry for letting a little humor loose. I quite enjoyed it and I think others did also. >Kurtz, on the other hand, makes similar outrageous claims -- wild and crazy >physics, unsupported by the evidence, missing from the textbooks. Have you been hallucinating? >She says That's "He says", but then you usually jump to conclusions, don't you. >isoperibolic calorimetry does not work. No, [he] didn't say that. >It isn't "adequate" -- whatever that >means. She expects the rest of us to agree without argument. She refuses to >explain, support, or justify these bizarre claims. She [He] and Merriman take wild >potshots and then they disappear. This is not how professional scientists >conduct serious debates. This kind of behavior will not accomplish anything. Sorry you didn't like the tongue-in-cheek aside I made to Barry. Humor is good for people. Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 20:01:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA27515; Mon, 11 May 1998 19:58:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 19:58:26 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 02:57:55 +0000 Message-ID: <19980512025754.AAA16469 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"sYzhx.0.dj6.FhxLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18625 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >But the real difference was most apparent in the effects of Apollo 8. >It didn't even land on the moon, but had a huge impact on the way people >look at Earth. > > Robert I. Eachus Yes, and Al Gore recently wanted an entire program dedicated to just doing that, getting awe inspiring pictures of the planet. It was heavily ridiculed because the equipment already exists to do it and it would be an absurd waste of money. I concur that humans are well suited for short stints in low-orbits doing experiments in zero gravity. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the money that would be required to research and build life-support mechanisms able to sustain health in astronauts for the round-trip to Mars for robotic research? Virtual exploration could reach much further, couldn't it? Enhancing forms of synthetic perception would have tremendous benefits for non-space related research. Someday we probably will have the means to do things that are science fiction now. That is how it has been for a long time. There were always people willing to risk all on a chance that some new design might work and because of them, we have the wonderful things that cost many lives to develop. This hero archetype is a wonder to contemplate and has been for centuries and I have no right to object, unless it is my money being spent. I think that politicians have found heros to be useful objects for rallying the masses, but I think they have enough other tricks. The most significant knowledge gained per the dollar spent should be the optimized parameter in scientific exploration. That is not how it is done, however. For instance, medical research tends to focus on diseases for which there are advocacy groups. Women's breasts are more pleasant to contemplate than men's prostates, but mortality statistics are similar. Breast cancer research gets many times the funding and attention and public awareness. We see posters of women doing breast self-examination and it is a common subject in sit-coms, but do we see, or would we want to even think of men prostrated on the table getting probed? "In the 1920s, a new operation for enlarged prostates replaced an old one. *For sixty years no one studied the records to determine whether the new operation was as beneficial as the old one.* When these studies were done, they found the new operation resulted in a 45% greater chance of dying in the five years after surgery. Finally, in 1989, seventy years later, the data were published in the New England Journal of Medicine" [The Myth of Male Power, Warren Farrell; reference: "Mortality and Recuperation after Open and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, v. 320, no.17, April 27, 1989, pp. 1120-24] Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 20:04:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA29359; Mon, 11 May 1998 20:03:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:03:00 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD7DA5.CF3B7CA0 pc038---brendan> From: Brendan Hall To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Case: Channel Artifact Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:56:15 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA29324 Resent-Message-ID: <"ym6WU2.0.bA7.ZlxLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18626 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Question: Why does the channel artifact only rear its head for this particular catalyst (assuming there is a channel artifact)? There are two possible explanation to this, but I do not yet believe that these are strong and am currently without any ability to obtain proof of either. Firstly, if the degradation is based mainly on chemical reactions attacking the activated carbon, r ather than by thermal expansion, and the palladium is a significant mechanical binder of the chips, then the amount of palladium on the surface of the activated carbon, for this catalyst, may be optimal for the degradation of the chips. In other words, i f there was less palladium, there would be insufficient catalysis to chemically degrade the chips. If there is more palladium, the palladium can physically bind the chips inhibiting degradation. The second, more subtle, effect is the possibility that the location of the palladium crystals degrade the chips such that a narrow particle size distribution of fines is being formed. In addition, if there is liquid build up on the base of the cell, and this liquid is boiling, there may be an enhancement of the degradation due to the mechanical action of the bubbles, and possible cavitation. However, surface tension may prevent signif icant release of the degraded particles to enhance the flow channel artifact. Have United Catalysts had any previous difficulty due to catalyst degradation? What is the particle size distribution before and after the cell run? Are the small particles heavy in palladium? Question: Why would a particle size influence the thermocouple temperature readings? If, within the interstitial volume around the thermocouple, the particles were fluidised, there would be very little affect, as fluidised beds have a way of averaging the heat transfer. In a channel, however, particle size has several ways it can influen ce the temperature. First, the force needed to strip the particles from the walls is a function of the particle size. Second, heat transfer to the thermocouple, if dominated by the particles rather than the gas, depends on the proximity of the particles to the thermocouple as they flow past (and therefore possibly the inertia of the entrained particle), and the heat capacity and temperature of the particles themselves. A narrow particle size range therefore has the possibility of increasing the relative influence of other factors, such as gas density, if the particles are of the appropriate size to produce the channel artifact. Could someone have a look at the particle size distribution of the particles that lodge onto the thermocouple during the reaction? Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 20:12:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA31095; Mon, 11 May 1998 20:10:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 20:10:14 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <6f10d7c1.3557bd6f aol.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 23:09:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"Z7GLJ2.0.nb7.LsxLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18627 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-11 20:24:38 EDT, you write: > From: Schaffer gav.gat.com <> > With all your ballast in there, 750 mA ought to be more than enough for the > current. And 10 kV ought to handle the 3.2 kV AC (about 4.5 kV peak). <> > Michael J. Schaffer Mike, Open circut, the power supply tracks a straight line from input 30v = output 800v to input 100v = output 2500v. I am having fun charting all these things with Lotus. Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 22:31:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA22596; Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:34 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3557DE0E.5508 math.ucla.edu> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:28:46 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: bird References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"LjzAi3.0.vW5.1uzLr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18628 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Cornwall RO wrote: > > Ha! Ha! > > (Sorry but, I don't know of a Merriman theorem, proof, conjecture, > hypothesis, experiment etc.) Actually, there is an algorithm named (partly) after me despite my best attemtps to name it something more meaningful, but its related to methods for computing the motion of interfaces in material and biological systems, and so has no great bearing on fusion.... > Oh, if you're a mathematician, aren't you > 'over the hill' by mid thirties? Thats mostly a romantic misperception---many mathematicians continue to do innovative work well into their later days. Of course, as time goes by, the probability that a given research will get out of research goes up, which is one factor that contributes to the misperception...i.e., is not that the person couldn't continue to do good work, its that they got more interested in doing soemthing else. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 23:20:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA27787; Mon, 11 May 1998 23:17:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 23:17:48 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 22:17:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Ripple voltage calc for H2 Glow Discharge with K Resent-Message-ID: <"dDGId.0.5o6.Bc-Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18629 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:36 PM 5/11/98, VCockeram wrote: >In a message dated 98-05-11 12:33:24 EDT, you write: >> From: Schaffer gav.gat.com > Vince's questions:..... >> >An ammeter? > >> Yes, either approach is valid, if done correctly. ....... >> For safety,......... not necessarily safely insulated for multi-kV >potentials. > > No problem. I don't touch meters anyway while running. > >> >The SECONDARY output DC was through 16 7.5 watt lamps > >> This suggests that the voltage drop across the lamps was more than 16 x > >100 V = 1600 V or so. [snip] It would be good to nail down the current in the secondary. This can be done by putting an ammeter in the secondary *prior to turning the current on*. It needs to be highly insulated by placing on thick plastic or a pane of glass, and should not be touched while the power is on, obviously. Should also be placed in the circuit near ground if that is possible. However, never bet your life on ground staying ground. For an estimate of maximum possible secondary current, you could use the watts supplied at the primary. If you are still running the primary at 115 V and 5 A, that is about 575 W input. If the secondary is running at about 2000 V then the max possible current in the secondary is 575W/2000V = 288 mA. Another way to estimate current is using the above figures of sixteen 7.5 W lamps at 1600 V. The current in the lamps at full brightness is 7.5 W/ 115 V = 0.065 A, or about 65 mA. The resistance of a single lamp is R = V/I = 115 V/0.065 A = 1763 ohms. The resistance of the 16 lights is about 28 Kohm, and with 1600 V across them you should be puttng out about 56 mA. Let's use 70 mA for a round number. > I have one .6 mfd 2600 volt oil filled cap now. Will add maybe >two more to get around 2 mfd. More? Let me know. To calculate the filter capacitor size needed you have to decide on the acceptable ripple. Let's assume acceptable ripple is about 10 percent, or Vr = 200 V when running at 2000 V. We have the approximation Vr = I/(2(f)(C)), where f is the frequency, i.e. 60 Hz. So C=I/(120(Vr)) = (.07 A)/(120(200))= 2.91x10^-6 farads, or about 3 uF is needed for 10 percent ripple. To go the other way, using your above figure of 0.6 mfd as an example (that is microfarads, not millifarads true?) We have a ripple voltage of Vr = (0.07 A)/(120(.6x10^-6 F)) = 972 V, which is not so good. If that figure is millifarads, then the ripple is about a volt, which is extraordinary. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 11 23:41:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA30565; Mon, 11 May 1998 23:39:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 23:39:55 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3557EEC8.53C0 math.ucla.edu> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 23:40:08 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF References: <19980511234745.AAA20402 Default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"f5E_o.0.TT7.ww-Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18630 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > > I have to question his motive if he has no interest in > seriously commenting on McKubre's or Claytor's work for > only an investment of time, but invests a > lot of resources in the least likely candidate, > Joe Champion, with the most outrageous claims. > Might Barry be irrational? The question is "candidate" for what? Indeed, of the class of people making claims in the cold fusion area, I selected Joe as the *most* likely candidate---the the most likely candidate for a person who's work I could investigate and definitively figure out what was really going on. There are two things that made Joe an exceptional choice: (1) his claimed effects were huge, not small, and theorfore easier to work with. (2) Joe was entirely willing to work to whatever degree necessary to investigate his claims. For example, CETI is a (1), but most definitely not a (2). Same with E-Quest. You say Joe's claims were "outrageous". Indeed they were, but: (a) they were no more fundamentally outrageous than the claims of many other CF investigators, including "respectable" folks like Miley who were reporting transmutation, which is no more nor less than what Joe claimed. As Joe suggested, if you did it in a test-tube you got Miley's micrograms, and if you did it in a huge vat, you got Champions grams. Logical in itself, no? And compared to the alternatives in the area of large scale claims, I found Joes claims relatively tame---at least Joe could provide credible R&D histories for the development of his techniques, as opposed to having them dictated by God a 'la the Cinncinatti Group, for example. (b) No less a scientist than Dr. John Bockris himself is (in his own words, 99%) certain that he and Champion transmuted base elements into gold in their famous TAMU experiments---so then, its not just Champion's outrageous claims, but also Bockris's. Do you consider it irrational that I would try to follow up Bockris's work? Addressing your main point, as to why I don't investigate the work of McKubre or Claytor: thats quite easy, I of course gave this issue serious consideration before follwoing the Champion track. the simple reason is that a proper investigation of their work is much more difficult, in terms of the equipment needed and the scientific expertise needed, and the experimental protocols, because their claimed results are far more subtle, and the equipment and materials required for their work is much more complex. For example, Claytor is far better suited than I to carry out his experiments, and interpret the results. I doubt I could contribute anything to his investigation. (Someone like Mike Schaeffer probably could, though...). In contrast, Champion's personal interest these days was in industrial development of his process, and therefore my strictly scientific interests were complementary, and were contributing a scientific element to the investiagations that would not have otherwise been present, so it was a good match of interests. Basically, after failing to get any collaboration going with CETI (entirely due to their unwillingness to provide any sort of low cost DEMO unit I could evaluate and show to my colleagues), I assesed the CF world after Bockris's LENR conferance and saw the following: (a) the new big claim was widespread transmuation, a la Miley and Ohmori, etc. (b) there was a bi-modal distribution of results, which academic scientists claiming very subtle small scale effects, and non-academic (CETI, E-QUEST, CG, Champion,...) claiming the same principles gave them large scale "industrial" effects. Since the small scale results were beyond my easy ability to investigate, I decide to attack the large scale, and of those players, Champion had the greatest combination of accessibility and credibility (the credibility due to the word of Bockris and others, not Joe himself!). Finally, maybe you are mistakenly thinking that I expected to find "real transmutation" or "real cold fusion", and thus that Joe was unlikely to have "the real thing". I don't expect that in *any* of these large scale claims, and so my expectation was that Joe was no more "right" or "wrong" than anyone else claiming huge effects. I did expect to find some real experimental effect that had a subtle explanation, and that could shed light on at least what all the other large scale claimants are observing, if not the small scale ones as well. I be delighted if the long odds came through, but I investigate these things to find out whatever is going on (and to have fun), not to reach a prejudged conclusion. So, you had reason to "question my motive", and I explained. Are you satisfied? Now why don't you provide some background on your research efforts in CF, because I have reason to suspect you of being a govenrment disinformation agent intent on discrediting the scientists intent on discrediting CF. ;-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 00:08:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA00545; Tue, 12 May 1998 00:07:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:07:28 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 23:07:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF Resent-Message-ID: <"IM6Ix1.0.E8.lK_Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18631 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:40 PM 5/11/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >Ed Wall wrote: >> >> I have to question his motive if he has no interest in >> seriously commenting on McKubre's or Claytor's work for >> only an investment of time, but invests a >> lot of resources in the least likely candidate, >> Joe Champion, with the most outrageous claims. >> Might Barry be irrational? > >The question is "candidate" for what? "Tortoise Fellow" of the Order of the Tortoise? 8^) > >Indeed, of the class of people making claims in the >cold fusion area, I selected Joe as the *most* likely >candidate---the the most likely candidate for a person >who's work I could investigate and definitively figure >out what was really going on. Joe was not only the most likely candidate, he was the *only* Tortoise Fellow available to check out! 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 00:22:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA01327; Tue, 12 May 1998 00:19:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:19:26 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3557F80B.76D math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:19:39 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Merriman should answer Wall References: <199805111046_MC2-3C8F-AFA8 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ix9kH3.0.aK.zV_Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18632 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Like most "skeptics" Merriman goes through four stages: > > 1. He begins by making totally impossible, absurd claims > 2. When someone points the error, he responds with evasion > 3. Ridicule. > 4. Silence. > > - Jed You are so right Jed. However, you did forget a few steps: 1.1 He attempts to replicate CETI experiment, ultimately daunted by CETI's refusual to cooperate and the failure of independent repolication 1.2 He spends considerable time and effort investigating the large scale transmutation claims of Joe Champion. Once you include those, I'd say you've got all us "skeptic" nailed to the wall. Its good that Jed has characterized the four stage of "skeptic"-al argumentation. Meanwhile, perhaps "CF advocates" should familiarize themselves with the for stages of grief, the first of which, I recall, is DENIAL... ;-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 00:34:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA02221; Tue, 12 May 1998 00:32:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:32:22 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3557FB12.A1C math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:32:34 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Simon Says Science References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BxJDF1.0.bY.5i_Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18633 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry Wharton wrote: > > >Barry Merriman writes: > > > > what are Case's "self sustaining" devices going to > > "prove"? Wont they simply amount to a black box that---once > > started---registers a certain elevated temperature reading > > I think it is bad form to argue with Jed on this point. > He is right beyond any doubt. > The idea of excess heat is that the heat output exceeds the > energy input. > If the energy input is zero any heat output will exceed the > energy input. > Larry how can you of all people say this? Was it not yourself who repeatedly said the CETI demo's proved nothing because they did not measure changes in chemical potential of their device? And that for a device that "apparently" put off ~100--1000 Watts and was, by Jeds claim, warm to the touch. I am making *exactly* the same point above. There is chemical energy stored in the original ingredients, and one has to be sure that the actual energy put off by the system exceeds this. A "T" reading alone, as you have said many times yourself, does not guarantee this. On has to somehow measure the total change in "enthalpy" of the system, and the mere presence of a self-sustained T reading does not provide such a measurement. Obviously, a *properly* designed self-sustainer could function as a suitable calorimeter. And, obviosuly, I could also design a device that could maintain an elevated single T probe reading so as to fool an unwitting observer into thinking the device was hot (say, a catalytic reaction present only on the surface of the T probe, for example). My only point is that it has to be made certain that the designed device is an example of the former and not the latter. I cannot see how anyone would dispute that such a distinction has to be made, somehow. I gather some folks make such distinctions subconsciously, but I prefer to think about the real realtion between whta is being measured and what one is attemtping to measure. So, call me a "skeptic". -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 00:47:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA03608; Tue, 12 May 1998 00:44:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:44:06 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3557FDD4.A3F math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:44:20 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Merriman should answer Wall References: <199805111046_MC2-3C8F-AFA8 compuserve.com> <3557F80B.76D@math.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nbYZg3.0.Du.5t_Lr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18634 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry Merriman wrote: > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > > Like most "skeptics" Merriman goes through four stages: > > > > 1. He begins by making totally impossible, absurd claims > > 2. When someone points the error, he responds with evasion > > 3. Ridicule. > > 4. Silence. > > > > - Jed > Actually, we can refine these stages, making them a little more accurate, by prefacing them with the following addenda: 1. Jeds distorts things to make it look like [...] 2. Jed perceives that [...] 3. Jed lacks a sense of humor regarding CF, thus he feels [...]d. 4. Because he gets tired of pointless arguments with Jed, he resorts to [...] I'm entering stage 4. now ;-) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 01:17:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA05359; Tue, 12 May 1998 01:11:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 01:11:31 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3558043E.A40 math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 01:11:42 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work References: <19980510152948.AAA23968 Default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M1Uyu1.0.fJ1.oG0Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18635 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > > > I trust that you do not consider your light-hearted ridicule to be an > adequate response to the assertion that a self-heating > apparatus is truly anomalous. It would be "anomalous", meaning strange and interesting, but far from drop dead, sell the farm proof of O/U. > You cannot defend the notion that insulation could be > arbitrarily effective and ignore calibration data. Who said anything about calibration data? The claim was that Case was essentially going to encapsulate his present device---which gives off a T reading, as I gather, and get it to run itself---meaning that to the outward observer, it will still give off similar T readings. Thats a great anomaly, but All I am saying is that demosntration, ***in the absence of all the calibration and redundant measurement needed to turn his set-up into a true calorimeter***, would not be as impressive as putting his original simple device into an independent researchers well calibrated calorimeter, and having it register 20% "excess heat" for a time the greatly exceeds the evident stored chemical energy of the ingredients. In other words, why would I as a scientist prefer a device that "self-sustains" an ill defined state, versus a non-self sustaining device that maintains a well characterized state of *heat production* for an anomalously long time? I think the people involved here are all guilty of having their own preconceived notion of what a desirable self-sustainer would be, and then they are projecting that onto what Case is going to build. All I am saying is "what **is** case going to build?". Is it clearly going to satisfy everyone's preconceived notions of "self-sustainment". That is not at all clear. Perhaps folks would feel less stress if I simply said: I have no doubt you (Ed, Jed, Gene, etc) can imagine a self-sustainer based on Case's experiment that would be quite convincing to any scientist. BUT IS THAT WAS CASE IS ACTUALLY BUILDING RIGHT NOW? Does it coincide with your subconcious presumptions of what a self-sustainer whould be? People's dream is that Case's self-sustainer sits there in the corner, the whole thing glowing like a cigarette lighter for months on end. My "nightmare" is that instead it sits in the corner, a black box with a single T probe sticking out reading 200C. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 01:40:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA00988; Tue, 12 May 1998 01:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 01:38:02 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355809F4.7687 math.ucla.edu> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 01:36:04 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work References: <19980510152948.AAA23968 Default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6eBc6.0.MF.ef0Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18636 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > > We would like to see somebody in your position firmly > rooting some goal-posts. Goal-posts are not the right analogy, for there is no perfomance hurdle that a given researcher can surmount that "proves" anything. But, the procedure is very simple, and requires no knowledge of physics: (1) Claimant provides working model of his device to a good number of independent researchers, and/or assists them in building their own replications, that in either case the claimant certifies as "functioning properly". (2) Independent researchers verify that the effect is repeatable, and that it truly is "O/U". Seems pretty reasonable to me, no? has anyone done it? No, because if they had, by definition the experiment would be transmittable from one researcher to the next, and therefore spread like wildfire through the science and engineering community (even if the device itself had to be passed on, due to some inabaility to copy it). The only thing that ever truly held back CF was lack of repeatability...all else would be inconsequential if the effects were easily repeatable. In the case of Case, he could easily start by providing Jed/Gene and Scott with working models to actually *test*, but he has chosen to proceed by building a self-sustainer. Not the most direct way to get to my "goal posts". -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 02:19:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA03437; Tue, 12 May 1998 02:18:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 02:18:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01ad01bd7d86$764401e0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Over-The-Hill Physics? Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 03:15:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Z7FIU3.0.dr.xF1Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18637 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Suppose that as a mass approaches speed-of-light c , Mrel = Mo/(1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2 at some point at the "top of the energy hill" goes to Mrel = Mo/(1 + v^2/c^2)^1/2 ie., a negative mass-energy mode? Lorentz Expansion sort of like stretching a rubber band? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 03:05:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA14177; Tue, 12 May 1998 03:03:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 03:03:09 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <7dfb6867.355771b1 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 00:02:43 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"zCxp71.0.LT3.Sv1Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18638 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince - > BTW, Rick, the "high temp silicon" slagged > big time and the thermocouple seperated from > the bronze shoe. Heading for the ceramics > hobby store for some ceramic clay. THAT > should hold this sucker togther. This thing > really cooks! Yup, you're up into temperatures that only the fancy furan epoxies can withstand. Might as well use something ceramic. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 04:20:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA18570; Tue, 12 May 1998 04:17:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 04:17:53 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980512061858.0081f3c0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 06:18:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case: Channel Artifact In-Reply-To: <01BD7DA5.CF3B7CA0 pc038---brendan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0cJ7Z1.0.4Y4.W_2Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18639 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:56 PM 5/12/98 +1000, Brendan Hall wrote: >Could someone have a look at the particle size distribution of the particles that lodge onto the thermocouple during the reaction? ....er, what reaction, Brendan? Thus far in my experiments, the catalyst just sits there and does nothing when you make the switch from H2 to D2. Stay tuned for Run 5, which will employ the very same catalyst that showed the Case effect during the demonstration at Gene's house. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 04:57:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA22978; Tue, 12 May 1998 04:56:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 04:56:19 -0700 Message-Id: <199805121155.HAA07300 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Case: Channel Artifact Date: Tue, 12 May 98 07:59:03 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"U4t6i.0.uc5.XZ3Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18641 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >Stay tuned for Run 5, which will employ the very same catalyst that showed >the Case effect during the demonstration at Gene's house. Minor correction - moved lab out of basement long ago (July 1996) -- potapov work was done in summer of 1995 at sanother location. Now there is a separate 1800 ft^2 lab and back issue magazine storage area some 2 miles from house. Publishing office is in same office complex at Bow Technologies Center. Glad to know where the D2 came from. I've noticed that the price is quite variable depending on whom you ask. Good luck on #5! Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 04:58:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA22970; Tue, 12 May 1998 04:56:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 04:56:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199805121155.HAA07306 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! Date: Tue, 12 May 98 07:59:06 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id EAA22943 Resent-Message-ID: <"21yym3.0.mc5.WZ3Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18640 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Bart wrote: >Absolutely fascinating - yet the new blurb Gene provided indicated that >the draft of this statement on "what is science" was rejected at the APS >council meeting because of a lack of agreement on the issue of >falsibiability in science (always a fun issue here on Vortex btw). Does >anybody know more specifics about why the dra New info on this APS episode appears in Science, 1 May 1998 page 663 - edited.by Constance Holden: ******** Defining "Science" for the People Give physicists a few minutes and they can produce a definition of general relativity; give them a few years and they should be able to define "science." Right? Wrong. Three years ago, physicist Robert Park of the University of Maryland, College Park, persuaded the American Physical Society (APS) that it needed a "hit squad" of scientific heavies to swat down phony science reports‹ from occasional electromagnetism scare stories to sightings of Kennedy faces on the moon as they arise. But before you can say what science isn't, you have to be able to say what it is, says Park, APS's publicist. So the society's public affairs panel laboriously crafted a defnition. But afte r reviewing the statement last month, the APS council swatted it down. "Nobody liked it," says Park. "It even wound up confusing a lot of my scientific colleagues." The APS declined to release the definition, but according to APS President Andrew Sessler, former director of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the statement should make three points: that science is based on empiricism; that it requires "open exchan ge of data and ideas" to reproduce and verify findings; and that science's "devotion to an attitude of skepticism" nurtures a selfcorrecting mechanism. APS's latest tack is to seek out other societies that could join the effort to arrive at a "consensus" definition. The hope is to come up with a half-page of crystalline prose that the council can approve when it meets in the fall. ***** I knew that that slime-mold Park had to have had something to do with that APS lunacy. We have a nice feature about Park in Issue #19 (now at the printer) -- the "Words to Eat" section. I'll send him an autographed copy. Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 05:22:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA25259; Tue, 12 May 1998 05:21:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 05:21:54 -0700 Message-Id: <199805121221.IAA10810 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Date: Tue, 12 May 98 08:24:48 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"RqHKA.0.VA6.Xx3Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18642 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry wrote: >In the case of Case, he could easily start by providing Jed/Gene >and Scott with working models to actually *test*, but he has chosen >to proceed by building a self-sustainer. Not the most direct >way to get to my "goal posts". IF Case can build a self-sustainer, that is exactly what the demo working model will be that you can have. It might be equipped with a thermoelectric converter to satisfy those who need to see some work being performed - the long-sought "Fusion Flashlight." (I think that Mitch Swartz holds the honor -- or maybe it's Dennis Cravens -- of having been the first to light an LED from the heat output of a CF cell.) If it's hot enough, it could include a small reciprocating steam engine or turbine that could do work. IF Case cannot build a self-sustainer, then serious work will have to be done to investigate *his particular configuration* to find out how an *apparent* excess heat source can appear and yet not allow the process to self-heat. Best, Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 06:17:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA19075; Tue, 12 May 1998 06:13:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 06:13:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:10:56 +0100 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: bird In-Reply-To: <3557DE0E.5508 math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"e_Wc62.0.zf4.0i4Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18643 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 11 May 1998, Barry Merriman wrote: > Cornwall RO wrote: > > > > Ha! Ha! > > > > (Sorry but, I don't know of a Merriman theorem, proof, conjecture, > > hypothesis, experiment etc.) > > Actually, there is an algorithm named (partly) after me despite my > best attemtps to name it something more meaningful, but > its related to methods for computing the motion of interfaces > in material and biological systems, and so has no great > bearing on fusion.... Respectfully. Sorry for being so biting. You are a great scholar, you must be to be at UCLA but sometimes other people notice things too. Its best to be humble in life? Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 07:02:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA25459; Tue, 12 May 1998 06:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 06:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 05:57:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: If it's hot it's work Resent-Message-ID: <"ghiBK3.0.dD6.sM5Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18644 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:11 AM 5/12/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >Ed Wall wrote: >> >> >> I trust that you do not consider your light-hearted ridicule to be an >> adequate response to the assertion that a self-heating >> apparatus is truly anomalous. > >It would be "anomalous", meaning strange and interesting, >but far from drop dead, sell the farm proof of O/U. It is *far better* proof in that the longer the run lasts, the better the signal/noise ratio. By simply elongating run time you can get 50 sigma, 100 sigma, etc, on a very high lower bound for the COP, or ratio of total energy in vs total energy out. The data should be reliable if (1) the steel container is wrapped with insulation inside the dewar and (2) the calorimetry thermistor(s) is (are) placed on the outside of the steel container but inside the insulation. > >> You cannot defend the notion that insulation could be >> arbitrarily effective and ignore calibration data. > >Who said anything about calibration data? I did, repeatedly. I even posted a brief experiment that demonstrated the basic principles. Do an experiment to get a feel for what is involved. If you have a big dewar around, a roughly 10 ohm 20 W resistor, and benchtop regulated DC power supply, you can put together an experiment that will let you get a feel for how difficult it is to even *obtain* 200 C with 7 W of input power, much less *maintain* it with no power input for weeks. It is beyond any credibility whatsoever that you can maintain most of the surface of a 500 ml well insulated steel container at over 150 C indefinitely, or even 3 weeks, in a room temperature environment without input energy, regardless of the insulation you provide. There you go Barry, the *second* challenge. >The claim >was that Case was essentially going to encapsulate his >present device---which gives off a T reading, as I gather, >and get it to run itself---meaning that to the outward observer, >it will still give off similar T readings. >Thats a great anomaly, but All I am saying is that demosntration, >***in the absence of all the calibration and redundant measurement >needed to turn his set-up into a true calorimeter***, would >not be as impressive as putting his original simple device into an >independent researchers well calibrated calorimeter, and having >it register 20% "excess heat" for a time the greatly >exceeds the evident stored chemical energy of the >ingredients. Even if ten experimenters get 5 sigma results there will still be doubt at a piddling COP of 1.2. Furthermore, it is of little practicle use. Besides, Case's design goal is now 30 watts, which does have a practical use, if it can be maintained with no input power. > >In other words, why would I as a scientist prefer a device that >"self-sustains" an ill defined state, versus a non-self >sustaining device that maintains a well characterized state >of *heat production* for an anomalously long time? Because in the latter case confidence increases indefinitely with run time. You want to be certain the effect is real, right? This is the best that Case could possibly hope do with a limited budget. It is much better that an infinite COP device be distributed for verifiction than a 1.2 device isn't it? Surely that is worth an extra couple months. [snip] > All I am saying is "what **is** case going >to build?". [snip] >People's dream is that Case's self-sustainer sits there in >the corner, the whole thing glowing like a cigarette lighter >for months on end. My "nightmare" is that instead it sits in >the corner, a black box with a single T probe sticking >out reading 200C. If it does produce 30 watts, the stated design objective, it will only be glowing to an IR camera, but the external heat output will be unmistakeable. I would readily agree that self sustaining 30 watt output is unlikely, and that production a self sustainer based solely on H2 and a catalyst at 200 C is probably unlikely. Some artifact will likely be found. However, considering there are limited resources available, Case seems to be doing the wise thing spending a month or two to build one. If it doesn't work, then it should help find the artifact. If it works, it will be the biggest technological breakthrough ever. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 07:16:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA27261; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 07:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980512100428.00c34720 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:04:28 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: References: <3b0df38e.35567f8e aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"32WR2.0.sf6.IV5Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18645 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:27 AM 5/11/98 -0800, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >Vince, if you (and we) are ever going to learn anything, you will have to >either switch to filtered DC power or else to electronics that can acquire >both voltage and current as functions of time and multiply them and >calculate rms power. I gather that you are on a limited budget, and since >the latter alternative is expensive, your only option is DC power. The latter is expensive AND difficult to do right. (The main problem is avoiding radio frequency pickup in the wires to your voltage and current probes.) 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 May 12 07:19:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA28932; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:14:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 07:14:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 05:56:57 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"sHTwF1.0.s37.7b5Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18646 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:02 AM 5/12/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: >Vince - > > > BTW, Rick, the "high temp silicon" slagged > > big time and the thermocouple seperated from > > the bronze shoe. Heading for the ceramics > > hobby store for some ceramic clay. THAT > > should hold this sucker togther. This thing > > really cooks! > >Yup, you're up into temperatures that only the fancy furan epoxies can >withstand. Might as well use something ceramic. > >- Rick Monteverde >Honolulu, HI Why not simply drop the voltage? "Optimum" operating conditions are not at this point conditions which produce the most heat, but rather conditions which produce the best signal/noise ratio. You want the most reliable H2 vs H2 + K signal. By operating too hot you are reducing reliability, possibly introducing chemical reactions with the quartz or electrodes, and increasing convection in the vicinity of the tube. You thus increase the data variablilty and reduce the signal to noise ratio. When you do the graphs of power range, or input voltage the ratio of H2 temperature to H2 + K temperature across the power or input voltage range might tell you if there is any return for running at a higher power range. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 07:24:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA00324; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 07:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980512101858.00c3ca20 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:18:58 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: test for D2...? Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980511161716.00bf3e88 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8zo7J3.0.y4.xi5Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18647 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:17 PM 5/11/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >Can anyone suggest an easy test to differentiate between the two? Use Vince's approach. Put some in a quartz tube, run a current through it, and then examine the spectrum. Unfortunately the strong hydrogen lines are not in the visible part of the spectrum, but you can use a flouresent screen to show them. In any case the deuterium lines are slightly different, so the best way to check would be first set up the spectrograph with (nearly) pure H2, then add some gas from your deuterium flask. If you get twinned lines, it is deuterium. 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 May 12 07:45:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA03354; Tue, 12 May 1998 07:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 07:39:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980512103045.0096b860 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:30:45 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <7dfb6867.355771b1 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9q0K21.0.Gq.uy5Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18648 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:46 PM 5/11/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >It looks (to me) like the best operating tube pressure is between >20.5 and 21.5 when operating with K in the tube. The K causes a big >difference in tube charictaristics. At the highest temperatures the tube >walls are glowing at bright red heat, but strangly, the glow discharge is >barely visible, a very pale violet, not bright at all. Okay, most of your energy is being released in the UV. Second the tube you are using is probably not quartz! (You said it came from a halogen lamp for a photocopier. Originally all such "quartz iodine" tubes were pure quartz, but eventually glasses that could take the heat were developed. These glasses do not have the same transparency to UV as quartz, and the temperature you are seeing convinces me that you are not using quartz. (I used to put kilowatt loaded to the blue end of the spectrum, with UV in the thousands of candles, and the quartz tube would NOT glow visibly when new. Old--order of one hundred hours--tubes had a mix of tungsten oxide, tungsten xenate and tungsten silicide near the electrodes. Those areas did glow.) Last reminder--if the tube is currently soaking up 90% or more of the UV, then switching to quartz will mean: 1) Much lower temperatures. 2) You will get a tan in minutes, a sunburn in an hour. 3) You must take care of your eyes! 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 May 12 08:04:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08321; Tue, 12 May 1998 08:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 08:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:46:01 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: test for D2...? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805121048_MC2-3CB9-CF29 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"l7XF01.0.s12.MH6Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18649 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little asks: "How do you combine it with oxygen in an orderly way?..i.e. without a messy explosion." Use a platinum mesh recombiner. In a closed cell you have to take fanatical steps to ensure the recombiner is clean, but in this case it does not matter if you contaminate the heavy water. Platinum costs a fortune. I think a little bit'll do ya. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 08:16:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08965; Tue, 12 May 1998 08:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 08:05:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:45:50 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: If it's hot it's work Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805121048_MC2-3CB9-CF28 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"eCi0F.0._B2.sK6Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18650 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Barry Merriman writes: . . . All I am saying is that demonstration, ***in the absence of all the calibration and redundant measurement needed to turn his set-up into a true calorimeter***, would not be as impressive as putting his original simple device into an independent researchers well calibrated calorimeter, and having it register 20% "excess heat" for a time the greatly exceeds the evident stored chemical energy of the ingredients. Obviously calibrations will be done, but this is a first principle device, it is not dependent upon calibrations, and if it remains hot for a week calibrations will be irrelevant. That is why we picked this test. We do not want to get hung up in arguments about calibration. The skeptics will always demand another three digits of precision or a thousand hours more calibration. We want a calorimeter which can be modeled without reference to calibrations. Hundreds of independent researchers have already seen 20% or more excess heat in reactions that greatly exceed stored chemical energy. These experiments are well documented in the literature. They have not convinced Merriman or the other skeptics. In other words, why would I as a scientist prefer a device that "self-sustains" an ill defined state . . . What could possibly be ill defined about a hot body in a Dewar? It is a classic example of pure, simple physics. People's dream is that Case's self-sustainer sits there in the corner, the whole thing glowing like a cigarette lighter for months on end. My "nightmare" is that instead it sits in the corner, a black box with a single T probe sticking out reading 200C. In three messages posted here and sent to Merriman I stated explicitly that this configuration, with a single T probe, would be unacceptable. I said that we will use a mercury thermometer and/or a Peltier device at the top of the Dewar, and we even hope the device remains palpably warm at the top. Merriman knows I said this. His statement evasive and intellectually dishonest. It is a strawman argument: he knows we have no intention of running an experiment with a single thermocouple. It is not a matter of dreaming or hypothesizing. Mallove and I have explicitly stated that Case plans to bring a self sustaining machine back to Bow if he succeeds in making one, and we plan to test it with redundant thermometers. How can we make that point clearer? How many more times must I say this before Merriman will get the message? I am sick of this dialog of the deaf. We propose an experiment. We carefully spell out what we intend to do, and why we intend to it. We ask for serious critiques from the so-called skeptics. In return, they throw a bucket of garbage at us and the next day they come back with a twisted strawman version of an experiment that we would never perform -- because it has such glaring weaknesses -- and they say this strawman experiment "would never convince *me*!" Well it would not convince *me* either, and I said so first, and I repeated it THREE times! Merriman hints that he will only be satisfied with a self-sustaining device that glows like a cigarette lighter. He has moved the goalposts another 200 kilometers. The Case device runs at 250 deg C maximum, so it cannot meet the "glowing lighter test." I expect he selected this new arbitrary goal because he knows it cannot be met. Elsewhere, Merriman writes: In the case of Case, he could easily start by providing Jed/Gene and Scott with working models to actually *test*, but he has chosen to proceed by building a self-sustainer. Not the most direct way to get to my "goal posts". As we stated here -- explicitly, repeatedly -- WE ASKED Case to build a self sustainer and provide it to us. It wasn't his idea, although he readily agreed to it. He has until Thursday, May 14. We will not be satisfied with anything less convincing. If there is any blame for this one-week delay, it lies with us. If he succeeds we will immediately begin manufacturing hundreds of exact copies of his device. Obviously, we will test them individually to make sure they work, and we will send one to Scott Little as soon as possible. Obviously, a self sustainer can also be used in a flow calorimeter. Nobody could do this faster than we can. When the path to success leads through Bow, New Hampshire, a self sustainer is the most direct way to get to the goal post. If Case fails to provide us with a self sustainer then I suppose there must be something wrong with his present calorimeter. I see no reason to think there is an error, except for Scott Little's puzzling results. Tentatively, I suppose Little's experiment failed because he did not follow the protocol closely, but who knows? In gas loading experiments, repeated heating and cooling is usually considered a key step. It is too early to tell, and speculation is a waste of time. We will resolve these issues by performing experiments. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 10:24:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA03259; Tue, 12 May 1998 10:16:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 10:16:14 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 20:06:59 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35587820.F4951781 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 19:26:08 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Interesting paper (eprint:hep-ph/9805269) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cdNp4.0.ro.RF8Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18651 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: hep-ph/9805269 Title: Where is the antimatter Authors: Guang-jiong Ni (Department of Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R.China) Comments: 5 pages, Latex, no figure The antimatter exists everywhere, but under suppressed state. So its appearance is nothing but the various effects of special relativity. Available from http://xxx.lanl.gov Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 11:44:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA18255; Tue, 12 May 1998 11:39:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 11:39:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805112132_MC2-3CA8-DE06 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:35:46 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Wharton's comments on Case, CETI Resent-Message-ID: <"z_mxZ.0.2T4.JT9Mr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18652 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; There seems to be some problem of communication with Jed Rothwell here. I have made the claim that entire CETI like systems that were producing large amounts of alleged excess energy, have been put into closed insulated containers and the temperature rise of the entire system has been measured. Moreover I have claimed that the temperature rise is consistent with only the total energy input and with zero excess energy production. Now that is a remarkable statement and it is direct proof that the excess energy production of working CETI like cells is zero. In Jed's response he did not address this claim at all. I wonder what is going on. Maybe he knows that my claim is true or fears that it is and is afraid to discuss it. Come on Jed, you can do better than that. Don't you think that I have imagined or made up the experiments that I refer to? You only discussed experiments that were in direct contact with the ambient environment. How about the experiments in which the system was placed in an insulated container? Don't you think these experiments are a "figment of my imagination"? >Larry Wharton writes: > > In all the latest high power CETI devices that operate for extended > periods of time, a water heater is used, allegedly so that the water > inflow into the cell is kept at a constant temperature. > >That is incorrect. The 50 watt water heater in the Power Gen demo and other >large cells was only used when the water was cold from sitting in Craven's So now we have Jed admitting that there is a water heater in the large cells. Also note I used the word "extended" periods of time. The Power Gen 95 demo run was too short to prove much of anything. The idea all along was that the system was to run for weeks or more to prove excess energy production much beyond chemical. So what are the runs of weeks or more with excess heat exceeding the total power input in which the water heater was not used? > The cf cell is supposed to be heating up the water so why do we need an > electric water heater in this system. > >We don't! Who said we did? This "observation" is a figment of Wharton's >imagination. He certainly never heard it from me, or Cravens, or anyone >connected with CETI, or any of the companies like Motorola that have >independently verified the CETI cells using a variety of different >calorimeters. I cannot imagine where claims like this filter in from. They are >like urban myths -- undocumented, untraceable, and obviously based on >someone's vivid imagination. I suspect Wharton himself made this up, but who >knows? The function of the water heater is clearly described in CETI's patents. It is stated that the function of the water heater is to maintain the cell inflow water at a constant temperature. Do you want patent numbers Jed? It seems to me that since you are so knowledgeable and I am not, that you should already know the patent numbers in which the function of the water heater is described. If not I will look up the numbers for you. >This is incorrect. With the small 1 ml CETI cells, the pump power exceeds the >cell output, but with the larger cells total input to all components including >the pump, the cell, the meters and even the cell heater is much smaller than >the cell output. With the cell heater turned off, input was 85 watts, output >500 to 1200 watts. To quote my original report: > > The pump, cooling fan and DC power supplies electrolysis all have one > common AC cord, which is monitored by a Radio Shack analog AC voltmeter > and a multimeter. Total power consumption by all components is 85 watts. > >As I recall, the pump motor consumed about 50 watts. Obviously most of the 85 >watts total consumption never got close to the water, coming out immediately >from the meter power supplies, blower fan motor, and pump motor. Most of the Here Jed is discussing past reports of systems in direct thermal contact with the environment. This has nothing to do with my claim of tests run in a closed insulated container. 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 May 12 13:44:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02175; Tue, 12 May 1998 13:40:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:40:06 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <199805112132_MC2-3CA8-DE06 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 12:59:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wharton's comments on Case, CETI Resent-Message-ID: <"LjAjh2.0.CX.YEBMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18656 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Larry W. wrote: .... I >have made the claim that entire CETI like systems that were producing large >amounts of alleged excess energy, have been put into closed insulated >containers and the temperature rise of the entire system has been measured. Who did this? When? I never heard about such a test. >Moreover I have claimed that the temperature rise is consistent with only >the total energy input and with zero excess energy production. If true, this is very interesting. What was the enclosing calorimeter like? 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 Tue May 12 13:45:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02857; Tue, 12 May 1998 13:42:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:42:15 -0700 Message-ID: <19980512203802.4943.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:38:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: Dunking Bird vs Drinking Bird To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"4w6CC2.0.Vi.XGBMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18657 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Phhhtttttht! LOL! LOL! I think I just spewed coffee and snot everywhere! I love it! ---Paraphrasing Barry Merriman : >at least one Nobel prize winner has put forth the >theory that the bobbing motion of the bird is in a >subharmonic resonance with the zero point fluctuations >in the electromagnetic field, and thereby directly >taps Zero Point Energy. Better be carefull Barry -- you might get a following on this theory ;) Next step -- put a set of almost complete Bobbing Bird OU Device [BBOD] plans on the internet so the rest of the group gets distracted for a month or so....... Point taken. Later, == Anton Rager a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 13:58:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA28448; Tue, 12 May 1998 13:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:38:42 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wharton's comments on Case, CETI Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805121642_MC2-3CC1-C31F compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"4amPG3.0.Ly6.6JBMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18658 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Larry Wharton writes: There seems to be some problem of communication with Jed Rothwell here. I have made the claim that entire CETI like systems that were producing large amounts of alleged excess energy, have been put into closed insulated containers and the temperature rise of the entire system has been measured. I did misunderstand that point. I thought that was a hypothetical statement that IF an entire CETI cell . . . etc. You say this experiment was actually performed with a "CETI like system." Okay, I was not aware of that, I have no details and no knowledge of the work. So, Larry, if you would be so kind, tell us: 1. Who performed this experiment? When and where, and how many times? Have you got an e-mail address for the principal experimenter? 2. What is a "CETI like" cell? 3. Tell us a little about the equipment, procedures and results. What was the size and weight of the cell, the size of the enclosed box? What were the power levels and temperature, mass of the electrodes etc. What was the flow rate of the flow calorimeter that was placed inside the isoperibolic calorimeter (the closed, insulated, container)? How was the gas recombined? 4. Has there been any paper published about this? Is there a web site? Any schematics, data sets, or photographs available? Moreover I have claimed that the temperature rise is consistent with only the total energy input and with zero excess energy production. I do not see how this experiment would contradict the flow and Seebeck calorimetry performed with other CETI cells. I have no knowledge of the work in question, but if I might speculate . . . a "CETI like" cell will probably not produce energy. If the flow calorimeter in this test showed an excess, perhaps it had an error like insufficient mixing. In that case, the flow would show excess but the larger isoperibolic calorimeter surrounding it would show nothing. (This would be the converse of the dual calorimeter built by the NHE and Storms.) Now that is a remarkable statement and it is direct proof that the excess energy production of working CETI like cells is zero. It is not proof until has been replicated independently at high sigma by many people, and it has been shown that the result is not an artifact of the flow calorimeter. In Jed's response he did not address this claim at all. I wonder what is going on. Maybe he knows that my claim is true or fears that it is and is afraid to discuss it. Nope. Nothing like that. I know about many CF experiments, but there are hundreds more I have never heard of. Enlighten me! Come on Jed, you can do better than that. Don't you think that I have imagined or made up the experiments that I refer to? Well, I guess people do sometimes imagine things. However, I usually take reports at face value. I assume this experiment did take place, and I trust you will supply us with a description, schematics, photographs (if available) and other pertinent information that will allow us to judge the results. If you will not or you cannot give us the details, then it does not matter whether the experiment is real or imaginary. It might as well be imaginary. You only discussed experiments that were in direct contact with the ambient environment. How about the experiments in which the system was placed in an insulated container? The only experiments like this that I am aware of were with a Seebeck-like thermoelectric calorimeter, in a heat after death reaction, with everything (including the pump) turned off. These tests reportedly showed excess heat. I have very few details about them. The function of the water heater is clearly described in CETI's patents. It is stated that the function of the water heater is to maintain the cell inflow water at a constant temperature. Do you want patent numbers Jed? I have observed two CETI cells in operation for a total of five days. In some cases the inlet water heater was in use with the smaller cell for a while to bring the water temperature up to an effective operating temperature, but it was soon turned off. With the larger cell it was not needed. What the patent says or does not say is irrelevant, because I am reporting my own observations which were published here and in Infinite Energy. What I saw overrules what the patent says, and what you interpret the patent to mean. You have the impression that the aux heater is left on at all times, but that is not true. It seems to me that since you are so knowledgeable and I am not, that you should already know the patent numbers in which the function of the water heater is described. The function, as I understand it, is to bring the water up to the optimum operating temperature. That is helpful but not necessary. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 14:31:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA08643; Tue, 12 May 1998 14:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3558BD59.79038EF8 ariel.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 17:21:29 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! References: <199805121155.HAA07306 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9OrsZ1.0.u62.RwBMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18659 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > > I knew that that slime-mold Park had to have had something to do with > that APS lunacy. We have a nice feature about Park in Issue #19 (now at > the printer) -- the "Words to Eat" section. I'll send him an autographed > copy. > > Best, Gene Mallove If this is your best, I'd hate to see your worst. Just an observation, but attacking people for differing with you on your beliefs strikes me as immature. This is what the religous crusades and naziism were all about. It seems obvious to me that you have an emotional attachment to your own belief system and take it personally when someone expresses a conflicting point of view. This fundamental bias of integrity goes counter to the idea of scientific skepticism; in other words, you will be much less likely to objectively consider alternate points of view should they turn out to be more founded in reality than yours. In short, you are doing exactly what you accuse all the skeptics of doing. Don't expect to be taken too seriously by them. Sincerely, Terren 'slime-mold' Suydam From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 14:47:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA10901; Tue, 12 May 1998 14:37:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:37:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:59:10 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805121402_MC2-3CC4-5298 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"QicdY1.0.Eg2.f4CMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18660 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:Ekennel Apsci.com Rich Murray posted this critique here. I'd like to respond to a few of Kennel's comments. Most of the critique relates to radiation, helium, other nuclear measurements and theory, which are over my head. Someone who understands these issues should comment, to educate the rest of us. Kennel writes: In Japan, we also found errors in the design of the mass flow calorimeter for the Frascati electromigration cell. The problem was the estimation of the heat leakage in the calorimeter. The heat leakage was underestimated, so that when the cell was run at a temperature colder than the surroundings, it appeared to generate excess heat. I heard this from Ed Storms too. It is a mind-boggling mistake. You should NEVER run a calorimeter colder than the surroundings, except temporarily to load the cathode or check performance. Martin Fleischmann continues to emphasize that a positive temperature coefficient is mandatory in order to see excess heat effects. His notion is that the NHE laboratory work may have been effective at obtaining very high loading, but it is not sufficient to produce excess heat. Positive thermal feedback is also necessary, and is provided by the isoperibolic calorimeter. Thus, Fleischmann regards the calorimeter as an active part of the device, rather than a passive measurement tool. True, and important. Fleischmann is right on all counts. If excess heat is going to be recognized as a scientific fact, it needs to be demonstrated in a rigorous, unambiguous way. Tiny amounts of heat, the existence of which depends on several PhDs in mechanical engineering arguing about hair-splitting differences between the differential equations to describe an imperfect calorimeter, just isn't convincing. I agree completely. However, Fleischmann says that we can learn important lessons from these tiny amounts of heat, even if they do not convince the majority of scientists. I do not understand what lessons he has in mind. Other statements in this critique reveal that Kennel sometimes fails to check matters-of-fact. He does not take the time to discuss papers with the authors before critiquing them, even when the authors wait patiently at poster sessions, anxious to discuss their work. Kennel would make a lousy newspaper reporter. Here are some examples: Some of the super-proprietary systems, such as CETI and the so-called Cincinnati Group cell, are impossible to evaluate since they are kept so tightly under wraps. Nothing about the Cincinnati Group (CG) is under wraps. Details were fully published by us, in I.E. You can buy a device for a moderate cost. This statement reminds me of those proprietary secret flight tests performed in 1905 in full view of the commuter trolley line in Dayton, Ohio, which had been witnessed by sixty leading citizens, many of whom signed affidavits. The French AEC tested the CG device, and came up with positive preliminary results. Biberian put up a poster about it and answered questions. Kennel should have talked to him. He would have learned the device is not under wraps. Here are other examples of lazy reporting about Ohmori and Mizuno: I was disappointed by a presentation by Ohmori, in which he claimed that some anomalous effect occurred during high current electrolysis, at which point the electrode becomes hot and generates a plasma. A fantastic neutron flux (106 n/sec) was claimed, but then Ohmori admitted that this might be due to electromagnetic noise from the plasma. Since he is not dead from radiation poisoning, the latter explanation is likely. I believe that would depend upon the speed the neutrons were traveling, but, in any case, there were two points of confusion: 1. As Kennel points out, during the lecture and poster session O&M readily admitted that most and perhaps all of the signal was due to electronic noise. 2. They confused English terminology. I do not recall the words, but during the lecture they gave the impression that the high count was registered at the detector; this was the count of incident neutrons. What they meant to say was: this was the count of neutrons extrapolated for the entire sample, based on the incident surface of the detector. The actual count was much lower. It seems to me that this is probably nothing more than the burnout heat flux (at a certain point, the heat transfer coefficient decreases, which causes the surface to heat up, which causes the heat transfer coefficient to further decrease, and so on. This causes flash boiling, similar to what Ohmori observed). Obviously the fluid around the cathode boiled, but I do not understand how this flash boiling would produce dramatic apparent excess heat. Why did the electrolyte go from 80 deg C to boiling in half the time the control run did, with the same input power and the same stirring? When a cathode in the middle of cool liquid boils, the vapor escapes, and the electrolyte as a whole heats up more slowly than it would with a larger, cooler cathode. All else being equal, local boiling should *increase* the time it takes to heat the entire mass of electrolyte. The low quality of this paper frankly shocked me, and may cause me to re-evaluate the isotope shift papers by the Hokkaido University group. My confidence in their research has been thoroughly shaken. Uh, huh. This was preliminary paper describing experiments that began a few months ago, so it was quite rough around the edges. It was preliminary report. The isotope shift papers describe data that was taken by O&M and four independent industrial laboratories: Techno Research Laboratory, Hitachi Instruments Engineering Co.; Nissan Analysis and Research Center; Mitsubishi Heavy Industry Co.; and Meidenshya Co. The graphs in the papers were all based on the corporate data, which has better resolution than the university equipment can achieve. Therefore, O&M's ability to detect isotopes is irrelevant. Kennel did not realize who did the spectroscopy. He knows nothing about the details of the experiments beyond what is in the papers, despite that fact that he spent a year in Japan in a laboratory 20 minutes away from O&M. Ohmori has 500 pages of data from Hitachi alone, but Kennel never asked to see any of the original raw data. Ohmori has 50+ sample cathodes, each with macroscopic grains of iron with tremendous isotope shifts. (It is barely macroscopic: it looks like grains of pepper at the bottom of the vial. However, experts tell me that is enough for any spectroscope.) Ohmori has lent out samples and I am sure he would have been happy to lend Kennel one. If Kennel had any doubts about O&M's ability to do spectroscopy, he could have resolved these doubts for the cost of a taxi ride. But he never did, and neither did anyone else at the NHE laboratory. They ignored the experiments at the University of Hokkaido. If they had bothered to confirm the iron isotopes found by four corporate research labs, they could have presented *indisputable proof of a nuclear reaction* to the NHE project leaders in Tokyo and to the national press, but they never lifted a finger to get this proof. That is one of the reasons my confidence in their research was thoroughly shaken after ICCF6. I'll go further. That is one of the reasons I suspect Fleischmann may be right. I suspect that after years of bungling and mismanagement, the NHE degenerated into a deliberate hatchet job. The real, unstated goal during the last two years of the project was to prove that cold fusion does not exist. They went out of their way to avoid looking at positive evidence. Melvin Miles had to complain loudly before they agreed to include one sentence about his work, on one viewgraph, in parentheses. I object to Kennel's broad statements about calorimetry, in which he makes no distinctions about power level, geometry, and other critical parameters. He lumps all isoperibolic calorimeters into on category: However, my view is that isoperibolic calorimeters have been shown to be unreliable for measuring excess heat in electrolytic cells in which the electrode surfaces are changing, and so I am skeptical of all excess heat data which depends on isoperibolic calorimetry, even for very good setups. I am skeptical of milliwatt results, but the well-known problems in these power domains have no bearing on results at 1 watt, or 10 watts, or the French AEC isoperibolic calorimeter boil off events. Furthermore there are many examples of superb low power isoperibolic calorimetry, from people like Miles and Fleischmann. Their blank experiments and extensive calibrations prove that this form of calorimeter does work in the hands of an expert. Here is another statement that needs qualification: In the area of excess heat, during my time in Japan I was troubled by the observation that a single experiment could produce excess heat as measured by an isoperibolic calorimeter, but simultaneously produce zero excess heat as measured by a mass flow calorimeter. Yes, a single experiment *could* but that does not mean they all do, at all power levels, regardless of cross checking and techniques like measuring the temperature at the wall instead of in the fluid. We agree that *some experiments, with some isoperibolic calorimeter configurations, at some power levels* have problems. Miles pointed that out 8 years ago, and he spelled out problems that people like Kennel are still unaware of. He doubts *all* calorimetry because he has not read the literature and he does realize where the known pitfalls lie. Ed Storms, a key proponent of the excess heat effect and a brilliant researcher whom I have known and respected since the early 1980s, has built a dual calorimeter system and sees the same effect. His interpretation is that the artifact problem does exist, and thus excess heat values of ~10% should be ignored, but higher values are probably due to an actual (nuclear) anomaly. Storms thinks that excess heat results of ~50% are too high to be explained by the artifact observed at NHE Lab. Ed Storms would never be so careless! ~10% of what? 1 watt? Of course! 40 watts? No, a 4 watt excess in a properly designed, carefully calibrated isoperibolic calorimeter would be significant. ~50% would be a lot more significant. The artifact observed at the NHE lab would never occur at 40 watts, as far as I know. Certainly not if it is anything like the artifact Storm reported with his dual calorimeter. (I am at a disadvantage here; it is not clear to me exactly what happened with the NHE calorimeter. I have three recent papers from Storms about his calorimeter, but nothing from the NHE yet.) I interpret the effect as follows: at high deuterium loading, a state change occurs in the surface of the cathode which causes the open-circuit voltage (as well as the voltage under load) to increase. Under this condition, there is a higher percentage of thermal energy generated at the cathode, and less in the electrolyte. This changes the calibration coefficient of the cell and results in an excess heat signal. This is a unique interpretation which bears no resemblance to the Storms papers, or to Storms' own hypotheses about low power artifacts. The changes in material that affect the OCV are microscopic. It is difficult for me to imagine how these tiny spots could accomplish this. How would they send a message to the electrolyte to lower its impedance, and to the anode to stop making so much heat, thus changing the percentages? Regarding transmutation, Kennel writes: This seems very weak to me, since it is impossible to show that the system was really clean before the experiment. Blank runs serve this purpose. On Ohmori's gold cathodes, surface areas which are not roughened before the experiment show no anomalies, so they can be compared to other surface areas with SIMS, which zero in on one spot. Moreover, electrolysis cells are often used to clean up liquid waste streams, because all positive ions plate out on the cathode. So the fact that a few milligrams of positive ionic crud appears on the cathode, is not surprising to me. Agreed. "Crud" alone proves little, unless three conditions are met, as they were in the Mitsubishi test. 1. The cell has a very simple design with no nooks and crannies (a big problem with the CETI RIFEX kits). 2. Contaminants in all cell components and electrolyte have been carefully inventoried before the experiment. 3. The mass of the element in the crud is greater than all known contamination, and the contamination in the anode is still there after the experiment. But if the crud has isotope shifts, these three conditions do not apply. Mitsubishi passed that test albeit not with titanium. Kennel agrees, and then throws in a wildcard I have never seen before: The presence of isotopic shift seems much more important. If the cathodic crud is always the same abundance as normal material, it is very likely chemical contamination, since the cold fusion process, whatever it is, is highly implausible that it would just happen to mimic the ultrahigh energy bombardment and subsequent radioactive decay from the creation of the universe during the Big Bang. Why is this implausible? What do we know about CF that precludes the possibility it creates elements with the same isotopic distribution that the big bang did? For that matter, what do we know about the big bang? Perhaps the elements in the earth were created by cold fusion, in which case we would expect them to have the same isotope distribution. Perhaps some, like Ti, were created by CF, and Fe was created in the big bang. That would explain the Mitsubishi results. That, I'll grant, is ridiculous handwaving on my part, but it is no worse than Kennel's original hazy hypothesis. This hypothesis is not falsifiable. We cannot test it in a laboratory, since we cannot recreate the big bang. To his credit Kennel says: "unless the universe was created by cold fusion instead of course that assumption ups the ante for cold fusion quite a bit." My hypothesis, that elements were created by both hot and cold fusion, is slightly more plausible. Here is a tamer hypothesis, loosely cobbled together from what theoreticians have told me: It appears that CF breaks down the coulomb barrier. Some experts believe it creates an extremely small area in which atoms are disintegrated and some form of plasma is created. This may be a whole group of atoms acting as one, or it might be a few atoms under pressure equivalent to the core of a neutron star. In any case, over a tiny area, it does seem likely that atoms undergo the extreme conditions seen in the most violent parts of the universe, so it is no surprise the outcome of the reactions is similar when atoms reform. The reshuffled matter ends up forming ordinary atoms with the usual distribution of neutrons. Material close to the reactions captures stray neutrons and other bits and pieces, producing isotope shifted material. The material at the core of the reaction, which undergoes unimaginably violent changes, comes out with the same isotopic ratios as natural matter, because it follows the same laws as it is formed. Some comment is necessary on potential errors in isotope identification. Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy (SIMS) is a technique used by many investigators. However, there are different types of SIMS, ranging from completely useless to marginally useful but often misleading. Elsewhere Kennel says that he only trusts SIMS when it is used with some other spectroscopy, which looks at the entire sample at one time. As far as I know, in every major transmutation experiment, other instruments have been used. Kennel does not mention this. I have heard this many times from Kennel and others. I do not know enough about these SIMS machines to judge, but I must say, I am puzzled. These machines are designed to measure elements and isotopes (particularly the hi-resolution models). They are intended for that purpose. They are used in other scientific research to measure isotopes, and in blank CF runs they always come with the normal, expected isotopic distribution. Why are they inadequate to the task? Why do people build them in first place, if they are "completely useless to marginally useful?" Let me hasten to add that I know of many cases in which delicate, high tech equipment has been misused, abused, useless and misleading. You see examples in everything from medical diagnostic equipment, to telephone equipment, to police radar and "Breathalyzer" alcohol detectors. However, when equipment from reputable manufacturers is properly certified and calibrated, and when it is operated by trained people, in my experience it usually works. Obviously it is possible to spook a spectrometer into mistaking an element for a compound, but the people who operate these machines, particularly at places like Hitachi Instruments Engineering Co., know about these problems, and they take steps to avoid them. For example, they remove the compounds by chemical means. The details are over my head, but I have spoken with experts and I believe they know as much about these problems as Kennel does, and infinitely more than Rich Murray. I am at a disadvantage here because I know next to nothing about the physics and standard procedures used to eliminate errors, but it is my distinct impression that companies like Hitachi know what they are doing. They have been manufacturing spectrometers for many decades, and problems like compounds masquerading as elements have been around from the beginning. People rely on these machines in conventional scientific research, police forensic investigations, archeology et cetera. The evidence from them has been used in court to convict people of serious crimes. So I find it difficult to imagine that these machines when used for their intended purpose are "completely useless to marginally useful" . . . but who knows? One thing for sure. If people like Kennel and Murray really do know something that Hitachi Instruments Engineering experts do not know, and they have discovered critical errors which make these machines unreliable, they are wasting their talent. They should consult with Hitachi, which would gladly pay them hundreds of thousands. I am serious about this. I often joke that the "skeptics" will win a batch of Nobel prizes when they can prove their statements about coffee that stays hot for a week in a thermos bottle, but in this case I am serious. Kennel describes his doubts about SIMS in technical detail in the part culminating with the equation "RSFI = f(CR,CI,U)." If Kennel sincerely believes he has discovered errors or weaknesses in the instruments and standard techniques used by Hitachi for Hokkaido U., or in Mitsubishi's in-house work on their own experiment, he should write a paper or proposal, present it to them, and suggest that they pay him to fix these problems. Along the same lines, in a less serious vein, Rich Murray should offer assistance to God Almighty. Experts tell me that Murray and God have fundamental disagreements they should hash out. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 15:00:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA32361; Tue, 12 May 1998 14:43:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 14:43:02 -0700 Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 17:37:34 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Run outside first? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805121740_MC2-3CC1-C76D compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"9KGUq2.0.Fv7.M9CMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18661 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Scott Little >INTERNET:little eden.com Scott, It bothers me that you cannot subject your Case replication to rapid and extreme temperature changes. I have often read that gas phase experiments depend upon these changes to load the lattice. (I do not know why.) I believe you mentioned that you cannot do this because your calorimeter does not allow sudden shifts and extensive cooling. In that case, why not perform the first phase of experiment outside the calorimeter? Place the cell on the table. Purge it two or three times with hydrogen, and heat and cool it. Do not bother to record the temperature. You already have baseline tests with hydrogen, and this is a first-principle calorimeter so additional calibration with hydrogen is not important. After you load the cell with deuterium you can install it in the calorimeter. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 15:53:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18575; Tue, 12 May 1998 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 17:06:44 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique [COPY 2?] Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805121710_MC2-3CC8-A310 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"gn71h3.0.8Y4.ggCMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18662 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:Ekennel Apsci.com [I sent this message to Vortex, but it did not appear. Perhaps it is too large, or it got lost in the mail, or I did not get my copy back . . . I also sent it to Kennel directly, and he is probably seeing a second copy now. - JR] Rich Murray posted this critique here. I'd like to respond to a few of Kennel's comments. Most of the critique relates to radiation, helium, other nuclear measurements and theory, which are over my head. Someone who understands these issues should comment, to educate the rest of us. Kennel writes: In Japan, we also found errors in the design of the mass flow calorimeter for the Frascati electromigration cell. The problem was the estimation of the heat leakage in the calorimeter. The heat leakage was underestimated, so that when the cell was run at a temperature colder than the surroundings, it appeared to generate excess heat. I heard this from Ed Storms too. It is a mind-boggling mistake. You should NEVER run a calorimeter colder than the surroundings, except temporarily to load the cathode or check performance. Martin Fleischmann continues to emphasize that a positive temperature coefficient is mandatory in order to see excess heat effects. His notion is that the NHE laboratory work may have been effective at obtaining very high loading, but it is not sufficient to produce excess heat. Positive thermal feedback is also necessary, and is provided by the isoperibolic calorimeter. Thus, Fleischmann regards the calorimeter as an active part of the device, rather than a passive measurement tool. True, and important. Fleischmann is right on all counts. If excess heat is going to be recognized as a scientific fact, it needs to be demonstrated in a rigorous, unambiguous way. Tiny amounts of heat, the existence of which depends on several PhDs in mechanical engineering arguing about hair-splitting differences between the differential equations to describe an imperfect calorimeter, just isn't convincing. I agree completely. However, Fleischmann says that we can learn important lessons from these tiny amounts of heat, even if they do not convince the majority of scientists. I do not understand what lessons he has in mind. Other statements in this critique reveal that Kennel sometimes fails to check matters-of-fact. He does not take the time to discuss papers with the authors before critiquing them, even when the authors wait patiently at poster sessions, anxious to discuss their work. Kennel would make a lousy newspaper reporter. Here are some examples: Some of the super-proprietary systems, such as CETI and the so-called Cincinnati Group cell, are impossible to evaluate since they are kept so tightly under wraps. Nothing about the Cincinnati Group (CG) is under wraps. Details were fully published by us, in I.E. You can buy a device for a moderate cost. This statement reminds me of those proprietary secret flight tests performed in 1905 in full view of the commuter trolley line in Dayton, Ohio, which had been witnessed by sixty leading citizens, many of whom signed affidavits. The French AEC tested the CG device, and came up with positive preliminary results. Biberian put up a poster about it and answered questions. Kennel should have talked to him. He would have learned the device is not under wraps. Here are other examples of lazy reporting about Ohmori and Mizuno: I was disappointed by a presentation by Ohmori, in which he claimed that some anomalous effect occurred during high current electrolysis, at which point the electrode becomes hot and generates a plasma. A fantastic neutron flux (106 n/sec) was claimed, but then Ohmori admitted that this might be due to electromagnetic noise from the plasma. Since he is not dead from radiation poisoning, the latter explanation is likely. I believe that would depend upon the speed the neutrons were traveling, but, in any case, there were two points of confusion: 1. As Kennel points out, during the lecture and poster session O&M readily admitted that most and perhaps all of the signal was due to electronic noise. 2. O&M confused the English terminology. I do not recall the words, but during the lecture they gave the impression that the high count was registered at the detector; this was the count of incident neutrons. What they meant to say was: this was the count of neutrons extrapolated for the entire sample, based on the incident surface of the detector. The actual count was much lower. It seems to me that this is probably nothing more than the burnout heat flux (at a certain point, the heat transfer coefficient decreases, which causes the surface to heat up, which causes the heat transfer coefficient to further decrease, and so on. This causes flash boiling, similar to what Ohmori observed). Obviously the fluid around the cathode boiled, but I do not understand how this flash boiling would produce dramatic apparent excess heat. Why did the electrolyte go from 80 deg C to boiling in half the time the control run did, with the same input power and the same stirring? When a cathode in the middle of cool liquid boils, the vapor escapes, and the electrolyte as a whole heats up more slowly than it would with a larger, cooler cathode. All else being equal, local boiling should *increase* the time it takes to heat the entire mass of electrolyte. The low quality of this paper frankly shocked me, and may cause me to re-evaluate the isotope shift papers by the Hokkaido University group. My confidence in their research has been thoroughly shaken. Uh, huh. This was preliminary paper describing experiments that began a few months ago, so it was quite rough around the edges. It was preliminary report. The isotope shift papers describe data that was taken by O&M and four independent industrial laboratories: Techno Research Laboratory, Hitachi Instruments Engineering Co.; Nissan Analysis and Research Center; Mitsubishi Heavy Industry Co.; and Meidenshya Co. The graphs in the papers were all based on the corporate data, which has better resolution than the university equipment can achieve. Therefore, O&M's ability to detect isotopes is irrelevant. Kennel did not realize who did the spectroscopy. He knows nothing about the details of the experiments beyond what is in the papers, despite that fact that he spent a year in Japan in a laboratory 20 minutes away from O&M. Ohmori has 500 pages of data from Hitachi alone, but Kennel never asked to see any of the original raw data. Ohmori has 50+ sample cathodes, each with macroscopic grains of iron with tremendous isotope shifts. (It is barely macroscopic: it looks like grains of pepper at the bottom of the vial. However, experts tell me that is enough for any spectroscope.) Ohmori has lent out samples and I am sure he would have been happy to lend Kennel one. If Kennel had any doubts about O&M's ability to do spectroscopy, he could have resolved these doubts for the cost of a taxi ride. But he never did, and neither did anyone else at the NHE laboratory. They ignored the experiments at the University of Hokkaido. If they had bothered to confirm the iron isotopes found by four corporate research labs, they could have presented *indisputable proof of a nuclear reaction* to the NHE project leaders in Tokyo and to the national press, but they never lifted a finger to get this proof. That is one of the reasons my confidence in their research was thoroughly shaken after ICCF6. I'll go further. That is one of the reasons I suspect Fleischmann may be right. I suspect that after years of bungling and mismanagement, the NHE degenerated into a deliberate hatchet job. The real, unstated goal during the last two years of the project was to prove that cold fusion does not exist. They went out of their way to avoid looking at positive evidence. Melvin Miles had to complain loudly before they agreed to include one sentence about his work, on one viewgraph, in parentheses. I object to Kennel's broad statements about calorimetry, in which he makes no distinctions about power level, geometry, and other critical parameters. He lumps all isoperibolic calorimeters into one category: However, my view is that isoperibolic calorimeters have been shown to be unreliable for measuring excess heat in electrolytic cells in which the electrode surfaces are changing, and so I am skeptical of all excess heat data which depends on isoperibolic calorimetry, even for very good setups. I am skeptical of milliwatt results, but the well-known problems in these power domains have no bearing on results at 1 watt, or 10 watts, or the French AEC isoperibolic calorimeter boil off events. Furthermore there are many examples of superb low power isoperibolic calorimetry, from people like Miles and Fleischmann. Their blank experiments and extensive calibrations prove that this form of calorimeter does work in the hands of an expert. Here is another statement that needs qualification: In the area of excess heat, during my time in Japan I was troubled by the observation that a single experiment could produce excess heat as measured by an isoperibolic calorimeter, but simultaneously produce zero excess heat as measured by a mass flow calorimeter. Yes, a single experiment *could* but that does not mean they all do, at all power levels, regardless of cross checking and techniques like measuring the temperature at the wall instead of in the fluid. We agree that some experiments, with some isoperibolic calorimeter configurations, at some power levels have problems. Miles pointed that out eight years ago, and he spelled out problems that people like Kennel are still unaware of. He doubts *all* calorimetry because he has not read the literature and he does realize where the known pitfalls lie. Ed Storms, a key proponent of the excess heat effect and a brilliant researcher whom I have known and respected since the early 1980s, has built a dual calorimeter system and sees the same effect. His interpretation is that the artifact problem does exist, and thus excess heat values of ~10% should be ignored, but higher values are probably due to an actual (nuclear) anomaly. Storms thinks that excess heat results of ~50% are too high to be explained by the artifact observed at NHE Lab. Ed Storms would never be so careless! ~10% of what? 1 watt? Of course! 40 watts? No, a 4 watt excess in a properly designed, carefully calibrated isoperibolic calorimeter would be significant. ~50% would be a lot more significant. The artifact observed at the NHE lab would never occur at 40 watts, as far as I know. Certainly not if it is anything like the artifact Storm reported with his dual calorimeter. (I am at a disadvantage here; it is not clear to me exactly what happened with the NHE calorimeter. I have three recent papers from Storms about his calorimeter, but nothing from the NHE yet.) I interpret the effect as follows: at high deuterium loading, a state change occurs in the surface of the cathode which causes the open-circuit voltage (as well as the voltage under load) to increase. Under this condition, there is a higher percentage of thermal energy generated at the cathode, and less in the electrolyte. This changes the calibration coefficient of the cell and results in an excess heat signal. This is a unique interpretation which bears no resemblance to the Storms papers, or to Storms' own hypotheses about low power artifacts. The changes in material that affect the OCV are microscopic. It is difficult for me to imagine how these tiny spots could accomplish this. How would they send a message to the electrolyte to lower its impedance, and to the anode to stop making so much heat, thus changing the percentages? Regarding transmutation, Kennel writes: This seems very weak to me, since it is impossible to show that the system was really clean before the experiment. Blank runs serve this purpose. On Ohmori's gold cathodes, surface areas which are not roughened before the experiment show no anomalies, so they can be compared to other surface areas with SIMS, which zero in on one spot. Moreover, electrolysis cells are often used to clean up liquid waste streams, because all positive ions plate out on the cathode. So the fact that a few milligrams of positive ionic crud appears on the cathode, is not surprising to me. Agreed. "Crud" alone proves little, unless three conditions are met, as they were in the Mitsubishi test. 1. The cell has a very simple design with no nooks and crannies (a big problem with the CETI RIFEX kits). 2. Contaminants in all cell components and electrolyte have been carefully inventoried before the experiment. 3. The mass of the element in the crud is greater than all known contamination, and the contamination in the anode is still there after the experiment. But if the crud has isotope shifts, these three conditions do not apply. Mitsubishi passed that test albeit not with titanium. Kennel agrees, and then throws in a wildcard I have never seen before: The presence of isotopic shift seems much more important. If the cathodic crud is always the same abundance as normal material, it is very likely chemical contamination, since the cold fusion process, whatever it is, is highly implausible that it would just happen to mimic the ultrahigh energy bombardment and subsequent radioactive decay from the creation of the universe during the Big Bang. Why is this implausible? What do we know about CF that precludes the possibility it creates elements with the same isotopic distribution that the big bang did? For that matter, what do we know about the big bang? Perhaps the elements in the earth were created by cold fusion, in which case we would expect them to have the same isotope distribution. Perhaps some, like Ti, were created by CF, and Fe was created in the big bang. That would explain the Mitsubishi results. That, I'll grant, is ridiculous handwaving on my part, but it is no worse than Kennel's original hazy hypothesis. This hypothesis is not falsifiable. We cannot test it in a laboratory, since we cannot recreate the big bang. To his credit Kennel says: "unless the universe was created by cold fusion instead of course that assumption ups the ante for cold fusion quite a bit." My hypothesis, that elements were created by both hot and cold fusion, is slightly more plausible. Here is a tamer hypothesis, loosely cobbled together from what theoreticians have told me: It appears that CF breaks down the coulomb barrier. Some experts believe it creates an extremely small area in which atoms are disintegrated and some form of plasma is created. This may be a whole group of atoms acting as one, or it might be a few atoms under pressure equivalent to the core of a neutron star. In any case, over a tiny area, it does seem likely that atoms undergo the extreme conditions seen in the most violent parts of the universe, so it is no surprise the outcome of the reactions is similar when atoms reform. The reshuffled matter ends up forming ordinary atoms with the usual distribution of neutrons. Material close to the reactions captures stray neutrons and other bits and pieces, producing isotope shifted material. The material at the core of the reaction, which undergoes unimaginably violent changes, comes out with the same isotopic ratios as natural matter, because it follows the same laws as it is formed. Some comment is necessary on potential errors in isotope identification. Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy (SIMS) is a technique used by many investigators. However, there are different types of SIMS, ranging from completely useless to marginally useful but often misleading. Elsewhere Kennel says that he only trusts SIMS when it is used with some other spectroscopy, which looks at the entire sample at one time. As far as I know, in every major transmutation experiment, other instruments have been used. Kennel does not mention this. I have heard this many times from Kennel and others. I do not know enough about these SIMS machines to judge, but I must say, I am puzzled. These machines are designed to measure elements and isotopes (particularly the hi-resolution models). They are intended for that purpose. They are used in other scientific research to measure isotopes, and in blank CF runs they always come with the normal, expected isotopic distribution. Why are they inadequate to the task? Why do people build them in first place, if they are "completely useless to marginally useful?" Let me hasten to add that I know of many cases in which delicate, high tech equipment has been misused, abused, useless and misleading. You see examples in everything from medical diagnostic equipment, to telephone equipment, to police radar and "Breathalyzer" alcohol detectors. However, when equipment from reputable manufacturers is properly certified and calibrated, and when it is operated by trained people, in my experience it usually works. Obviously it is possible to spook a spectrometer into mistaking an element for a compound, but the people who operate these machines, particularly at places like Hitachi Instruments Engineering Co., know about these problems, and they take steps to avoid them. For example, they remove the compounds by chemical means. The details are over my head, but I have spoken with experts and I believe they know as much about these problems as Kennel does, and infinitely more than Rich Murray. I am at a disadvantage here because I know next to nothing about the physics and standard procedures used to eliminate errors, but it is my distinct impression that companies like Hitachi know what they are doing. They have been manufacturing spectrometers for many decades, and problems like compounds masquerading as elements have been around from the beginning. People rely on these machines in conventional scientific research, police forensic investigations, archeology et cetera. The evidence from them has been used in court to convict people of serious crimes. So I find it difficult to imagine that these machines when used for their intended purpose are "completely useless to marginally useful" . . . but who knows? One thing for sure. If people like Kennel and Murray really do know something that Hitachi Instruments Engineering experts do not know, and they have discovered critical errors which make these machines unreliable, they are wasting their talent. They should consult with Hitachi, which would gladly pay them hundreds of thousands. I am serious about this. I often joke that the "skeptics" will win a batch of Nobel prizes when they can prove their statements about coffee that stays hot for a week in a thermos bottle, but in this case I am serious. Kennel describes his doubts about SIMS in technical detail in the part culminating with the equation "RSFI = f(CR,CI,U)." If Kennel sincerely believes he has discovered errors or weaknesses in the instruments and standard techniques used by Hitachi for Hokkaido U., or in Mitsubishi's in-house work on their own experiment, he should write a paper or proposal, present it to them, and suggest that they pay him to fix these problems. Along the same lines, in a less serious vein, Rich Murray should offer assistance to God Almighty. Experts tell me that Murray and God have some fundamental disagreements they should hash out. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 16:01:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA28071; Tue, 12 May 1998 15:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 15:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980512175645.00bfa82c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 17:56:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Run outside first? In-Reply-To: <199805121740_MC2-3CC1-C76D compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"7rDq92.0.Xs6.BGDMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18663 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 17:37 5/12/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >It bothers me that you cannot subject your Case replication to rapid and >extreme temperature changes.....why not perform the first >phase of experiment outside the calorimeter?... After you load the cell with >deuterium you can install it in the calorimeter. Nice idea, Jed. Actually it would be "assemble the calorimeter around the cell" but the effect is exactly the same. With the cell exposed I could invoke all sorts of rapid temperature excursions. 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 May 12 16:18:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA02089; Tue, 12 May 1998 16:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980512114136.00beee10 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 11:41:36 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <19980512025754.AAA16469 Default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"QVR9X2.0.SW.wUDMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18664 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:57 AM 5/12/98 +0000, Ed Wall wrote: >Yes, and Al Gore recently wanted an entire program dedicated to just doing >that, getting awe inspiring pictures of the planet. It was heavily >ridiculed because the equipment already exists to do it and it would be an >absurd waste of money. Not to justify Al Gore's proposals (since I can't) I was trying to say that Apollo 8 did a great job of determining that there was no life on the moon. Putting human eyes in lunar orbit completed a job that had been up to that point been one of the main goals of the Ranger program and the corresponding Russian lunar program. The shorthand for this among those working on the Apollo program was that Apollo 8 had killed the moon. Although all the isolation gear for the astronauts was used for bureaucratic reasons, after Apollo 8 no one with any understanding of the issues was seriously concerned. The Apollo 8 astronauts made one of those intuitive leaps which requires being there--the human eye is very, very sensitive to traces of life signs, and when looking at the surface of the moon, their eyes constantly tracked trying to find something to look at. When the earth came into view--3000 times farther away--they had no trouble seeing signs of life. There are hundreds of "scientific mysteries" that are open problems where unmanned observations have raised questions which the robots were unable to answer. In some cases, like the faces in Cydonia on Mars, later better observations cleared things up. But in most of these cases, a human observer would have seen, reacted, and cleared the mystery up immediately. There is a role for unmanned probes. There is a role for manned missions. And most important we need to combine them correctly. We have the technology NOW to build a spaceship which can spend thirty years or more touring the solar system and gathering knowledge. The cost would be much less than the hundreds of individual unmanned missions it would replace. But we can't build an unmanned craft which will do the same thing. Let's look from another direction. How many problems on the successful Mars mission could have been fixed in two minutes by a man on site, but took several days by remote control? How many of the previous Mars missions would have been successful if someone had been there to fix "minor" problems. How much was the Galileo mission hurt by a loose cable in the wrong place. And that was a particularly costly blunder. The high gain antenna could have been deployed in LEO, where there was a shuttle crew doing checkout. NASA decided they would rather design for deployment after LEO departure. >I concur that humans are well suited for short stints in low-orbits doing >experiments in zero gravity. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the money >that would be required to research and build life-support mechanisms able to >sustain health in astronauts for the round-trip to Mars for robotic >research? Virtual exploration could reach much further, couldn't it? >Enhancing forms of synthetic perception would have tremendous benefits for >non-space related research. Actually humans seem much better designed for life in low gee environments like the moon or Mars. If you want to regard the role of the human in the loop as a service mechanic for the robots, yes, men can do that role well. But much more valuable is their role as and observer and synthesizer of information. Remember the "fireflies" on early Mercury missions? Remember how long it took the astronauts, who had "been there" to convince the scientists on the ground that these were ice condensed on the capsule? Remember the (should have been real embarrassing instance where an astronaut said he could see a train on the ground, and the NASA scientist saying that of course he couldn't see the train, he was just reaching a conclusion from smoke blowing from the engine? I still have the picture, but the response that he (was it Cooper, I'll check) could count the cars, and that the engine was a diesel was a classic. The human eye and the camera could both see a lot more from orbit than had originally been believed, but the pictures from a hand-held camera are even better still. 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 May 12 16:24:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03450; Tue, 12 May 1998 16:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805122318.TAA20107 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! Date: Tue, 12 May 98 19:21:53 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"ellYA3.0.jr.ebDMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18665 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I beg to differ with you Terren, who wrote: >In short, you are doing exactly what you accuse all the skeptics of >doing. Don't expect to be taken too seriously by them. No way! It is THEY who threw mud first starting at MIT in late April 1989. I am merely giving it back to them -- citing THEIR "religious statements" against CF. They deserve it. I am taken seriously by thousands of people in this world on the matter of CF (subscribers and radio and TV listeners) -- how about YOU? What have you done or investigated in this field? As far as skeptics -- I could care less what they think of me -- I know very well what they think of me/us. The only thing I care about is what I intend to DO to them, which is to put them out of business and prove them wrong-squared. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 20:32:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA11004; Tue, 12 May 1998 20:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 20:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 23:21:39 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Gotta pipe up... Physics high priests are at it again! In-Reply-To: <3558BD59.79038EF8 ariel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FYIQ81.0.sh2.sEHMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18667 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., and Terren, A little editorial and ramble.... part of a cherry tree. Terren has said he will be witing about CF. I study the histroy and ethics of science. Terran ... great name by the way, said he was interested more in the interactions of the persons... as opposed to the science. And, Terran, please correct me if I err ...Terren said he maybe was not completely qualified to know of the science, but rather wanted to write about the personal interactions .... This strikes me as attempting to write about farmers, maybe farmers with "new ideas" .... but not employ any background, or learn of the background of the farming ... Many authors take on projects and do careful research, to learn about an area or field with which they are not familiar. Usually the work is well liked if the research is done well. Many persons are able to teach themselves about new areas or new fields. Not everyone learns all they know in school. On to some notes.... On Tue, 12 May 1998, Terren Suydam wrote: > E.F. Mallove wrote: > > > > I knew that that slime-mold Park had to have had something to do with > > that APS lunacy. We have a nice feature about Park in Issue #19 (now at > > the printer) -- the "Words to Eat" section. I'll send him an autographed > > copy. > > > > Best, Gene Mallove > > If this is your best, I'd hate to see your worst. Just an observation, > but attacking people for differing with you on your beliefs strikes me > as immature. Woa! Does not maturity manifest in many ways? This is what the religous crusades and naziism were all > about. Will you have contusions from leaping at conclusions? It seems a jump from a vitriolic comment to the terrors of war. > > It seems obvious to me that you have an emotional attachment to your own > belief system and take it personally when someone expresses a > conflicting point of view. This fundamental bias of integrity goes > counter to the idea of scientific skepticism; in other words, you will > be much less likely to objectively consider alternate points of view > should they turn out to be more founded in reality than yours. > Slime mold ... and naziisim? > In short, you are doing exactly what you accuse all the skeptics of > doing. Don't expect to be taken too seriously by them. > I have met Gene .... I found him to be open minded and flexible .... it would be hard for me to think he would do anything EXACTLY like others, rather he finds his own path. > Sincerely, > Terren 'slime-mold' Suydam NOW: The fun part.... and stand by for a technical treat in one of my next posts.... and "lighten up, guys...." That goes for everybody ... it is May and soon we will have lightning bugs! Slime Mold I know from slime mold.... and from Bo Didley. In the mid 70s I was the electronics 'first shirt' for the sound at bo's concert in Miami Fl, before he did his Europe tour.... intetersting guy... interesting times! Slime mold is VERY cool! It changes from a plant... into an animal ... and back again, in a little as 18 hours if the conditions are right, and the nivice can easily grow it on rolled oats AND !!! It can form a SINGLE CELL 10 feet in diameter!!! Cherry Tree SO: A little story about The History and Ethics of Slime Mold in a true to life story. A little history.... and I promise you get slime mold... and RADIOACTIVE slime mold too! The setting is the Charles F. Kettering Laboratory in Yellow Springs, Ohio. Next to the Antioch college Campus it was ... stress was... a world class reaserch facility. Basically they had three tasks, one, find out how photosynthesis worked... solve a big food problem, two, find out how to make gaseous atmospheric nitrogen into soluable nitrates, for the plants... again food, and, three study cellular differentiation, to solve disease issues. Point three, is where slime mold and I met, for over a year and a half. Some ethics..... the director of all the Kettering labs decided the three tasks did not 'sound cool' at cocktail parties and put the lab up for sale. It was purchased by Batelle ... who thought they were getting a 'bioengineering lab' ... when they discovered no one was slpicing genes, but rather solving fundamental humanitarian issues, the murdered it, as a tax loss. The partially defunct facility was donated to Antioch. To complete this travesty Al "Gruesome" Guskin, the man behind scenes at Antioch Univesity is tearing out what is left of world class biological research labs, and putting in Apples and PC for "real" education in Business Management. Anyone who know Stephen Jay Gould ought to let him know... But, hey, Technology=Computer. SO: We are looking at the slime molds to find out WHAT makes them change from plant to animal. The idea is this may give us some real insight into what might make human cells do things the way they do. We know a chemical messenger cAMP is involved. But is occurs in VERY small amounts ... and there is an enzyme which destroys it as it is being produced and one of the slime mold's favorite foods E. Coli, produces huge amount of the same stuff. We grow the 'bugs' is 18 inch by 10 inch stainless tell deep dish pans on 'bug jello' called nutrient agar. Then the fun begins. The bugs are harvested at the right time.... near the time of change, washed, spread on dialysis membarnes and GALLONS of water is slowly flowed unde the membranes in the hopes of catching some of the cAMP. The water is freeze dried, chromatographed by column and then two dimensionally thin layer chromatographed.... and MAYBE we will be able to detect 1 X 10 neg 14 moles of the stuff.... or not very much. Now we can't touch it, sneeze on it or anything because cAMP is common to almost all of life. And after about a year we are still not there. So we get us out some radioactive phosphorus 32, or P32, with a half life of a few weeks and we mix it into the jello and grow the bugs on 'hot jello'... hoping they will incorporate some of the P32 in the phosphorus part of the cAMP of cyclic Adenosine Mono Phosphate. See didn't I tell you you would get radioactive slime mold? So we take the end product... the 2-D thin layer plates and place them against unexposed X ray film ... wrap it up.... and wait. Two weeks on tenter hooks. We have two sets, one with a marker, and one with the unknown... the "maybe" plate. We go about our busines of growing and processing bugs... wondering ??? Will there be any stuff there? We know where it SHOULD be, if there is oing to be any becasue of the matching reference plate. We hope ... maybe... the little yellow critters have scuked up some P32 and have made a faint ... or dark... autoradiogram and have fogged the fil in the specific location. A lot of work the normal way, much more so, and mildly dangerous, when everything is 'warm'. We unwrap the plates and develop ... and .. there is a VERY faint, but detectable smudge! We yell ... others come to see, they community of maybe 30 plus Phds and all the support people working on their own projects know in this small close knit community the meaning of hard careful work... and success! The house photographer is called in and many photos are taken and then the photgrapher said "This is kind of pale... you now we can re touch it." A few seconds of shocked silence and then the place blew up. It was firmly explained to the fellow you DO NOT retouch data! He was looking at it from the perspective of visibility.... we were looking at Pravda.... Truth! SO: Terren ... I feel you HAVE to know some of the science... and, better yet.... get some science and opinons on the science from both side of the fence... from the middle and from some outsiders. Please. You don't want to be biased.... do you? You would rather be in possession of the facts ... wouldn't you? I myself would find it hard to write about the personal interactions of truckdrivers .... or software engineers .... or firemen ... if I did not know what they were DOING! I may be wrong.... but I think good writing demands good research. JHS Stand by for the treat! In upcoming post[s]. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 21:41:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA18353; Tue, 12 May 1998 21:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 21:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3559154D.3694 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 22:36:45 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Rothwell: artifacts, CETI, Forsley, ESP 05/12/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_4SBI1.0.gU4.EEIMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18669 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 12, 1998 [Murray} McKubre has not proved to him [Blue] that his rare heat excursions are compelling evidence for CF, a position expressed to me by other fairly objective players, which I also hold, because who knows what artifacts might rarely happen in a complex calorimeter. [Rothwell] The calorimeter is fundamentally simple, the heat excursions are not rare, and there are no artifacts. You and Blue cannot say what imaginary artifacts might be. You cannot give a single technical reason to support your claims, so these claims are empty. Waving your hand talking about "who knows what" artifact doesn't count. The instrument is fundamentally simple, and the added complexity only serves to increase credibility and boost the S/N ratio. Nothing will convince you or Blue. Not even six out of six positive runs at Mitsubishi, or 13 out of 14 at the French AEC. You will be convinced when the establishment endorses CF. [Murray] As is clear from my huge body of posts since over two years ago, I have gradually become a pragmatic skeptic, after starting as a naively enthusiatic believer. At LENR-2 in Sept., 1996, I was snowed by all the transmutation claims, but now have reviewed all those papers and found much to criticize, posting all my findings. I started writing critiques in early December, amazed at the poor quality of Miley's two Preprints, once examined in detail. I now quote Kennel's ICCF-7 report, from a knowledgeable expert, very close to the action in Japan for two years, on a one of the variety of complex calorimeter artifacts: In the area of excess heat, during my time in Japan I was troubled by the observation that a single experiment could produce excess heat as measured by an isoperibolic calorimeter, but simultaneously produce zero excess heat as measured by a mass flow calorimeter. I interpret the effect as follows: at high deuterium loading, a state change occurs in the surface of the cathode which causes the open-circuit voltage (as well as the voltage under load) to increase. Under this condition, there is a higher percentage of thermal energy generated at the cathode, and less in the electrolyte. This changes the calibration coefficient of the cell and results in an excess heat signal. Many researchers have observed the loss of excess heat upon switching from isoperibolic calorimetry to mass flow calorimetry (including NHE Lab and the IMRA Japan group). Ed Storms, a key proponent of the excess heat effect and a brilliant researcher whom I have known and respected since the early 1980s, has built a dual calorimeter system and sees the same effect. His interpretation is that the artifact problem does exist, and thus excess heat values of ~10% should be ignored, but higher values are probably due to an actual (nuclear) anomaly. Storms thinks that excess heat results of ~50% are too high to be explained by the artifact observed at NHE Lab. However, my view is that isoperibolic calorimeters have been shown to be unreliable for measuring excess heat in electrolytic cells in which the electrode surfaces are changing, and so I am skeptical of all excess heat data which depends on isoperibolic calorimetry, even for very good setups. This disagreement has not been resolved yet. [End of Kennel quote. Kennel discusses many more calorimeter artifacts.] In short, the nuclear hypothesis is unclear. You may be sure that I will be quickly convinced by any replicable experiment that has been verified by such as Scott Little, Kirk Shanahan, Barry Merriman, Los Alamos National Lab, Pacific Northwest Lab, etc. With respect to the CETI 1000 to 1 heat output Jed Rothwell still support in a post today, at PowerGen in Dec., 1995, I talked for four hours face-to-face in Nov., 1997 with Dr. Dennis Cravens [Dennis wazoo.com], who ran that exhibit, and he definitely did not support that high energy output: he said the cell was a "demo", not an "experiment", and that many people were fiddling with it in a chaotic situation, and that the runs were not long enough to reach thermal equilibrium. His actions certainly support his statements: at the time of our talk, although he was a paid Senior Researcher for CETI, he told me he had not worked with metal coated beads for nearly two years. Why would a talented, independent, creative, ambitious innovator abandon a simple system, firmly espoused by his own employer, that gave even 2 to 1, let alone 1000 to 1, heat output? Even a calorimetric dunce like me is able to put two plus two together and get one as the actual output ratio. No wonder I've been signing off my posts with, "As one," ! Likewise, Scott Little has published on his website a month ago his two careful, detailed CETI RIFEX kit reports, showing no heat output and no convincing evidence for transmutations. I hear that at ICCF-7, Dr. Lawrence (Larry} P. G. Forsley, Manager, Emergent Technologies Division, JWK International Corp., 7617 Little River Turnpike, Annandale VA 22003-2689 703-750-0500, info jwk.com, 72050.2111 compuserve.com, presented careful research disconfirming CETI's radioactive remediation cell. So, I recommend, Jed, to quickly untie yourself from the mast of the sinking CETI ship, for it has always had a built-in hole bigger than the one incurred by the Titantic. [Murray] I have posted the idea, surely outlandish for most, that psychokinetic effects may be involved-- the openminded may want to read Dr. Dean Radin's "The Conscious Universe", for a very competent overview on the results of sober, well replicated "ESP" research. [Rothwell] You believe ESP results are robust and replicated. And you apparently believe the you found a problem in spectroscopy performed at U. Illinois by Miley et al. You are *not* convinced by McKubre's 90 sigma calorimetry, but you *are* convinced by ESP experiments. Very interesting! I think your scientific judgement is flawed, and I am glad you do not endorse cold fusion. I cannot judge your critiques of Miley's spectroscopy, but experts who can have told me you are completely wrong. I can judge your earlier claims about calorimetry and I know that you do not have a clue about that subject. You are the only one so far to post me, challenging my competence on the basis that I am convinced by "ESP" research, and I congratulate you on your frankness. I really like that. It is, of course, ironic, and wonderful, that you thus are to me, as Blue is to you. Even worse, I have repeated confessed that I myself have "ESP" experiences, and much worse, I am a "mystic". In fact, I teach, on a small scale, my innovative Communion Process, a method for joint subjective inquiry. I will post my 20-page manual to anyone interested in the possibilities of subjective scientific method. I shall end by quoting from my recent post on Dean Radin's "The Conscious Universe": May 5, 1998 Jack Sarfatti, Dean Radin, and all, I was astonished and pleased to read Dean I. Radin's "The Conscious Universe" (1997), which made me aware of the impressive extent of competent replication of key "ESP" results. I want to offer suggestions to extend the "Unconscious Precognition" work, inadvertently started in the early 1980s by Holger Klintman of the Department of Psychology at the Lund University, Sweden [pages 116-124]. He proved in five experiments that people have unconscious body reponses, automatically and continuously recorded, a few seconds before, as well as during and afterwards, viewing violent or erotic photos randomly mixed in with serene photos. Radin replicated this "presentiment effect" in a series of experiments at his Consciousness Research Laboratory, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, reported in August, 1996. Prof. Dick Bierman, a psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, replicated Radin's work. With two dozen or more subjects, highly significant results are achieved. The results are robust. This work could be extended to the Internet, by utilizing a Java applet to precisely monitor the speed of mouse clicking for a few seconds before viewing a randonly presented color photo. The subject would be instructed to start clicking his mouse quickly at an audio tone five seconds before seeing the photo, and to keep clicking for five seconds during the viewing, and for five seconds afterwards. Left hand versus right hand use could be compared, and right eye vs left eye vs both eyes. Probably, characteristic changes in the speed and variation of clicking could be correlated with the photos viewed, and given the huge numbers of participants accumulated, very signficant data achieved. A standardized program could be made available for widespread and exact replication, and a CD version sold, with provision for all data to be pooled at one Net site. Even skeptics could be tested. For users who have a microphone, then vocalization, such as an, "OOOOO...,' sound could be studied. Audio stimuli can also be studied. Other life forms can be studied with standard operant conditioning setups. Even paramacia can be imaged during a few seconds of exposure to nonlethal light, sound, and ealectric current. A group of hundreds of paramecia in a two-dimensional cell can be imaged with a digital camera, and the images processed by programs to determine the speed and direction of movement for each time interval. Such an experiment could be run indefinitely on a website, with the images and data processed real-time, available to all viewers. Another step in abstraction would be to create computer life forms, rather like the paramecia, with the program incorporating radioactive random number generators to modulate their approach- avoidance behavior to spots of different color that appear randomly in their two-dimensional world on the screen. What would be the theoretical implications of proving retrocausal effects in such a system? Here is opportunity to quickly achieve robust results with revolutionary implications. Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 12 23:07:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA26706; Tue, 12 May 1998 23:05:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 23:05:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355929E2.2E31 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 00:04:34 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Mizuno & Ohmori MS data from four labs 05/12/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YZyEW1.0.CX6.WWJMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18671 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 12, 1998 Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno: Jed Rothwell today named the four labs that did MS analysis of samples for you and Dr. Ohmori, that showed isotopic anomalies: This was a preliminary paper describing experiments that began a few months ago, so it was quite rough around the edges. It was preliminary report. The isotope shift papers describe data that was taken by O&M and four independent industrial laboratories: Techno Research Laboratory, Hitachi Instruments Engineering Co.; Nissan Analysis and Research Center; Mitsubishi Heavy Industry Co.; and Meidenshya Co. The graphs in the papers were all based on the corporate data, which has better resolution than the university equipment can achieve. Therefore, O&M's ability to detect isotopes is irrelevant. Can you give me the specific labs, scientists, dates, email addresses? Can you provide me with some of the specific raw data or copies of your recent reports at ICCF-7? Could the all Cu-63 anomaly result from molecular interferences: 1Ni-62 1H-1, 2Mg-24 1N-14 1H-1, 1S-32 1O-16 1N-14 1H-1, 1Ti-48 1N-14 1H-1, 2Al-27 1Li-7 2H-1, 2 Al-27 1Be-9, 1K-39 1Na-23 1H-1, 1K-39 1Mg-24, all involving common isotopes? Did you confirm the anomalous presence of Cu and of Fe with chemical tests? Thank you, Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 00:56:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA06692; Wed, 13 May 1998 00:53:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 00:53:53 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <710b7ea5.35594fc2 aol.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 03:46:08 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Ripple voltage calc for H2 Glow Discharge with K Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"61Wvq3.0.Te1.F6LMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18672 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-12 02:18:56 EDT, you write: > Another way to estimate current is using the above figures of sixteen 7.5 W > lamps at 1600 V. The current in the lamps at full brightness is 7.5 W/ 115 > V = 0.065 A, or about 65 mA. Horace, during the run tonight, the ballast lamps were about 1/2 brightness. The lamps go near full bright at higher vacuum. Guess the tube resistance gets much lower hence pulls more thru the lamps. > > The resistance of a single lamp is R = V/I = 115 V/0.065 A = 1763 ohms. > The resistance of the 16 lights is about 28 Kohm, and with 1600 V across > them you should be puttng out about 56 mA. Let's use 70 mA for a round > number. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner Jeez, You are a guru Horace! In the earlier post tonight I measured 46 mA at the run start which fell throughout the run to 36.5 mA at end. For 1500 volts this is around 40 watts...I think. Can 40 watts heat a 4 inch section of 1/4 inch id quartz tube to bright orange heat? Whats going on here? I am either confused, happy or nuts. Again, the glow was a very pale violet. It didn't look hot, The 1/4 inch plexiglass (polycarbonate) shield (3 inches from the tube) began to melt. The current and voltage were measured with Simpson 260 meters. Power is off in the garage/lab, the tube is under 1 psi pressure H2 and I am having a beer trying to sort all this out. Regards, Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 01:43:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA11383; Wed, 13 May 1998 01:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 01:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 00:37:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"bf_Hl1.0.jn2.7nLMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18674 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:58 PM 5/12/98, VCockeram wrote: [snip] >PS(+)------[//////////////]---------(A)------XX--16-lamps--XX-----PS (-) gnd. > |____(V)____| > >[///////////] ----denotes the quartz tube >XX----ect. denotes the 16 7.5 watt ballast lamps >(A)----denotes the ammeter >(V)----denotes the voltmeter > >At the start of the run voltage was 1600 at 46 milliamps. The voltage >and amperage gradually fell during the run, ending up at >1500 volts at 36.5 milliamps. Now for the kicker. >Temperature rose steadly throughout the run which lasted 1 hour to >578.4 C +/- 0.1C. > >Sooo....I'm inputting 1500 volts at 36.5 milliamps into a tube with a gas >fill of 6.0 in Hg and a small lump of K and getting 578 degrees C. >Now I have to figure out if this is a water heater. W = (1500 V)(0.0365 A) = 54.75 W as a rough approximation. This could be way off, of course, due to the power factor, meter response time, etc. However, it is worthwhile to note that application of the correct power factor typically *reduces* the input energy. The slow meter response in realtion to the signal typically works in the opposite direction. Anyway, 55 W is a good ballpark number to work with, as is 37 mA, and 1500 V. Now, to figure out how good a water heater you have, Vince, you might consider using for exactly that purpose. You could enclose your tube in a metal container, like a 4" copper pipe with soldered end cap if it will fit. Include a fan inside to keep the air moving across the tube. Submerse the majority of the metal container in a water bath, e.g a garbage can full of carefully measured water. Fit with a metal top with necessary insulated wires fed trough it. Insulate the outside of the top with fiberglass or some other fire resistant insulating material. An better alternative might be to establish a heating/cooling loop using an insulated flexible luminum dryer vent tubing and a blower. Just run the flexible vent material under water. It has ridges that makes for a large heat transfer surface area. If you insulate the barrel, for short runs you could simply measure the temperature of the water before and after the run to determine heat output. Another way to go is to calibrate the barrel of water as to heat loss as a function of temperature difference between the water and ambient temperatures. The calibration can be done using a water heater heating element. However, it sounds like you are getting an awful lot of heat for 54 W. A very quick calibration might be achieved by putting coiled nichrome wire into the quartz tube, between the electrodes, with H2, and running various known wattages, directly from your variac, through the filament, until the temperature on the external thermister stabilizes. Might be hard to fit enough filament in that tight space though. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 04:49:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA25090; Wed, 13 May 1998 04:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 04:48:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001901bd7e64$814739c0$258cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Pd-Hydrogen and Excited State Catalysis Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 05:43:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"kF40g2.0.y76.9YOMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18677 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex An atom in the excited state A* can cause ionization of another atom or molecule B : A* + B ----> A + B + e- If it can reach the necessary Excitation Potential (Ve): Ve = hc/lambda = E(init) - E(final) >From this, H2 in the Palladium lattice can be dissociated to 2 H at modest temperatures by either the Pd or Hydrogen atoms/molecules drawing low grade thermal energy from the environment. Subsequently the 2 H can recombine releasing energy: 2 H ----> H2 + 4.3E5 joule/mole Low temperature "pumped" energy storage mistaken for O/U over long time spans? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 05:26:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA28095; Wed, 13 May 1998 05:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 05:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355982E8.674A earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 06:24:24 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Part 1/2 05/08/98 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"URgSA3.0.qs6.c4PMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18678 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Received: from rmforall.earthlink.net (1Cust213.tnt23.dfw5.da.uu.net [208.254.197.213]) by italy.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA14423; Tue, 12 May 1998 22:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35591CF3.417D earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 23:09:23 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Elliot Kennel CC: little eden.com Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Part 1/2 05/08/98 References: <199805122245_MC2-3CCF-7DEA compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit May 12, 1998 Sorry, Elliot Kennel, I have multiple copies of the mailing list with various posts, since I use my Netscape "Reply to All" button to reuse the list, so I'll double-check to make sure you're off. Your critique is excellent, a great contribution to the debate. Jed Rothwell posted a long answer on Vortex-L eskimo.com today. He won't let me forward his posts, but if you're interested, you can post him [72240.1256 compuserve.com] or look it up in the Vortex-L archive, available through Logajan's Skypoint CF web site: http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan/ , specifically at: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html I'd like Logajan to post your report on his site, as he did with your ICCF-6 report. [Rothwell comments about Mizuno and Ohmori] Uh, huh. This was preliminary paper describing experiments that began a few months ago, so it was quite rough around the edges. It was a preliminary report. The isotope shift papers describe data that was taken by O&M and four independent industrial laboratories: Techno Research Laboratory, Hitachi Instruments Engineering Co.; Nissan Analysis and Research Center; Mitsubishi Heavy Industry Co.; and Meidenshya Co. The graphs in the papers were all based on the corporate data, which has better resolution than the university equipment can achieve. Therefore, O&M's ability to detect isotopes is irrelevant. Do you have any of the lab names, scientists, dates, email addresses for these four corporations? I'd like to find what the labs say about the Mizuno and Ohmori samples. What do you think of the remarkable Ohmori "lily volcanos" on Au film? Thank you very much! Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 06:40:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA05132; Wed, 13 May 1998 06:37:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 06:37:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355993C4.3CF3 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 07:36:20 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Watkins: 16 PK research reports, WWW experiment 05/13/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mt85r2.0.6G1.C8QMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18680 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 13 1998 http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/ The RetroPsychoKinesis Project Matthew R. Watkins School of Classics, Philosophy and Religious Studies, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/proposal.html http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/ Martial arts students influence the past by Julian Brown (1994) (review) The strange properties of psychokinesis by H. Schmidt (1987) Channeling psi effects by H. Schmidt (unpublished manuscript) Channeling evidence for a PK effect to independent observers by H. Schmidt, R. Morris, and L. Rudolph (1986) Mental influence on machine-generated random events by D. Radin (1981) PK tests with pre-recorded and pre-inspected seed numbers by H. Schmidt (1981) Exploratory PK Tests with a Programmable High Speed Random Number Generator by D.J. Bierman and J.M. Houtkooper (1975) PK Effect on Pre-Recorded Targets by H. Schmidt (1976) Comparison of a teleological model with a quantum collapse model of psi by H. Schmidt 1984) Comparison of PK action on two different random number generators by H. Schmidt (1974) Observation of a PK effect under highly controlled conditions by H. Schmidt (1993) Addition effect for PK on prerecorded targets by H. Schmidt (1985) Can an effect precede its cause? A model of a noncausal world* by H. Schmidt (1978) Collapse of the state vector and PK effect* by H. Schmidt (1981) PK tests with a high-speed random number generator* by H. Schmidt (1973) A radioactivity test of psycho-kinesis by J. Beloff and L. Evans (1961) * Currently abstract only. Retrocausality bibiliography: Klaus Scharff has contributed an extensive bibliography of academic articles relating to the phenomenon of retrocausality (otherwise known as "backwards time causality", "reverse time causality", etc.). These are taken from journals of philosophy, physics, cybernetics, psychology, and parapsychology (from 1837-1996), and taken collectively, suggest an entirely new branch of academic inquiry. A statistical database of all major RPK experiments: compiled by Dick Bierman of The Anomalous Cognition Project (Amsterdam University) Decision Augmentation Theory: Interview with Dr. Edwin C. May of the Cognitive Sciences Laboratory "...DAT leads to the idea that there may be only one underlying mechanism of all anomalous mental phenomena, namely a transfer of information from future to past." (from May, et.al.'s "Decision Augmentation Theory: Toward a Model of Anomalous Mental Phenomena", Journal of Parapsychology, Vol 59, Sept. 1995. Emphasis ours.) York Dobyns of PEARlab offers a summary of his JSE article which argues against DAT. Further commentary from York Dobyns Fotini Pallikari-Viras on DAT Commentary on recent DAT publications (Jack Sarfatti) Interview with Dean Radin of the Consciousness Research Laboratory "Psi reminds us that the world is profoundly richer and more subtle and more intensely numinous than our science or philosophy has imagined, that wonder and awe in the face of the Universe is not a sign of simple minds, but of those rare minds that have not congealed into lumps of paralyzed skepticism." (from Radin's 1993 presidential address to the Parapsychological Association) Brian Josephson: "In view of the increasing importance of the subject..." The Mind-Matter Unification Project was established by Professor Brian Josephson of the Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge. In 1973, Josephson was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics for his theoretical predictions of the properties of a supercurrent through a tunnel barrier (now known as Josephson effects). He currently considers PK, etc. to be sufficiently important to add a parapsychology page to his website. There you can find an article which was published in The Times in which he reviews the BBC2 TV series Heretic (August 12th 1994) a paper published in Foundations of Physics on Biological Utilisation of Quantum Nonlocality (1991) a letter published in Physics Today called "Has psychokinesis met science's measure?" 1992) the complete version of an article coauthored with Jessica Utts and published in The Times, linked to the Tucson II conference: The Paranormal: the Evidence and its Implications for Consciousness (April 5th 1996) A letter recently sent to Nature, together with the rejection note which was returned "What is back-reaction?" A fascinating article posted to the list QUANTUM-D, discussing, among other things, Henry Stapp's controversial 1994 modification of quantum mechanics which accomodates RPK-phenomena. Stapp acted as an independent observer on some of Helmut Schmidt's more recent experiments, which led him to develop this model. HotBits: Genuine random numbers via WWW A Website appeared recently (June 3rd, 1996) which may come to play an important role in the future development of online (retro)PK experiments. Created by John Walker, the HotBits site provides arbitrary quantities of true-random bits generated by a Geiger-Muller tube exposed to a Krypton-85 source and interfaced to a computer. The site provides a request form whereby users can "order" random bits in the format of their choice, plus a test program for randomness, hardware and software descriptions, and an excellent account of how the mechanism works to produce "truly random" data. Interesting Links: Parapsychology sources on the Internet Cognitive Sciences Laboratory/Laboratories for Fundamental Research Consciousness Research Laboratory International Society of Life Information Science (ISLIS), and their Journal Koestler Parapsychology Unit PEARlab (Princeton) Society for Scientific Exploration Towards a Science of Consciousness: The Tucson conferences of 1994/96 Physics & Consciousness Resource Guide Physics/Consciousness Research Group Intuition Network David Chalmers' Contemporary Philosophy of Mind bibliography Jack Sarfatti's version of the Tucson II Conference on Consciousness (April 8-13, 1996) A sceptical look at scepticism More Links (semi-relevant/amusing/bizarre) "I think that many of the problems we have come from a too narrow scientific paradigm or model of reality which creates a split between the mind of educated people and their feelings and experience. This creates a split in our entire culture which is at the root of our ecological crisis and the sense of alienation and loss of meaning. I think a more holistic and inclusive scientific approach will help heal this split and improve our relations with the natural world around us and each other" -- Rupert Sheldrake RPKP wishes to thank Helmut Schmidt for his continuing advice and encouragement, as well as the loan of a noise-based true random generator. Thanks also to Roger Nelson at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research lab, Peter Moore in Theology and Religious Studies (UKC), Sir Robert Bunkum for guidance, spiritual and grammatical, Eldad Druks for graphical assistance, and the Alethea group for technical advice. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 08:26:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA23545; Wed, 13 May 1998 08:24:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:24:08 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:21:21 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"YIMO33.0.pl5.MiRMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18681 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-13 04:38:36 EDT, you write: <> > However, it sounds like you are getting an awful lot of heat for 54 W. Thats what has me puzzled Horace, can 55 watts (or even 100 watts) get the tube that hot? The tube is not insulated (thermally) at all. It sit enclosed in a 6 inch square x 8 inch high plexiglass shield with plenty of holes for ventilation. The shield is open at the rear side and has two 1 inch holes in the front face, one at the bottom and one at the top to allow air in to cool the front of the shield. it's showing signs of melting anyway at the point closest to to the tube hot area. (about 3 inches from the tube) > A very quick calibration might be achieved by putting coiled nichrome wire > into the quartz tube, between the electrodes, with H2, and running various > known wattages, directly from your variac, through the filament, until the > temperature on the external thermister stabilizes. Might be hard to fit > enough filament in that tight space though. I think that can be done. I use a coil of .040 ss wire as an upper electrode support. I wound the wire around a .125 inch mandril and it fit nicely in the tube. Would the resistor I make have to be close to the caculated tube resistance? (whatever that might be), Or some fixed value? Better to use the DC supply to drive the resistor, or as you suggest, just the variac? I will look at the waveform of the output of the DC supply with a scope when under actual operating conditions (glow/H2/K/hot) for spikes ect. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas > > Regards, > Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 08:36:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA25517; Wed, 13 May 1998 08:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3559BC54.658D6A90 ariel.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:29:24 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! References: <199805122318.TAA20107 mercury.mv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Rxbc32.0.YE6.PsRMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18682 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: > > I beg to differ with you Terren, who wrote: > > >In short, you are doing exactly what you accuse all the skeptics of > >doing. Don't expect to be taken too seriously by them. > > No way! It is THEY who threw mud first starting at MIT in late April > 1989. I am merely giving it back to them -- citing THEIR "religious > statements" against CF. They deserve it. I am taken seriously by > thousands of people in this world on the matter of CF (subscribers and > radio and TV listeners) -- how about YOU? What have you done or > investigated in this field? As far as skeptics -- I could care less what > they think of me -- I know very well what they think of me/us. The only > thing I care about is what I intend to DO to them, which is to put them > out of business and prove them wrong-squared. > > Gene Mallove Just be practical for a second. Who would you take more seriously, the objective, clear-headed scientist, or the guy harboring a 9 year grudge? Which is more productive, proving others wrong, or proving yourself right? Peace, Terren Suydam From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 08:56:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA28995; Wed, 13 May 1998 08:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:47:48 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Case reports leak Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805131150_MC2-3CE3-F03B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"ajFeu1.0.u47.G7SMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18684 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Leslie Case was hoping to bring a self sustaining cell to Bow in time for an important meeting tomorrow. He had to make a new cell for this purpose. I think he had to reduce the surface area to prevent heat loss. Unfortunately, he has been delayed a few days by an air leak in his thermowell. He is trying to get a welder to fix the problem. I'll report further developments as they happen. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 08:57:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA28954; Wed, 13 May 1998 08:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:48:04 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805131150_MC2-3CE3-F03C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"cNDHp1.0.K47.97SMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18683 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I mean to make one other point yesterday. Kennel proposed a novel new hypothesis to explain the excess heat: I interpret the effect as follows: at high deuterium loading, a state change occurs in the surface of the cathode which causes the open-circuit voltage (as well as the voltage under load) to increase. Under this condition, there is a higher percentage of thermal energy generated at the cathode, and less in the electrolyte. This changes the calibration coefficient of the cell and results in an excess heat signal. As I said, I do not understand how this mechanism would work. When you change the impedance or other electrical properties of the anode or cathode, it affects overall power consumption, but as far as I know it does not change the percentage of power consumed at the cathode or electrolyte. As I said yesterday, this is a unique interpretation of the results which is unlike anything Storms proposed when discussing the OCV. I would like to add that the experiments prove the hypothesis is incorrect. First of all, the impedance of the electrolyte always changes. It changes constantly, especially with an open cell. It decreases gradually as the water leaves the cell and then it shoots up when the water is replenished. These impedance fluctuations radically change the percentage of thermal energy generated in the electrolyte, but they never affect the calibration coefficient. Second, with a properly constructed isoperibolic cell, even if the thermal energy was magically "shifted to the cathode," it would not affect the calibration coefficient. Let me explain. A typical cell has a joule heater on the bottom, the anode and cathode above that, and the thermocouples placed well above that. The thermocouples must be a good distance from the anode and cathode to avoid problems with mixing, and you must verify this by calibrating the cell carefully. You confirm the water is well mixed by using multiple thermistors. They should all register the same temperature to the limits of precision. To calibrate, you run a joule heater along with a platinum cathode in light water. When you run the joule heater alone, at less than one watt, the water is not mixed sufficiently. Thermal gradients and other problems are readily apparent. One watt or more of electrolysis makes enough bubbles to thoroughly mix the water, so electrolysis alone or a combination of electrolysis plus joule heating both produce an excellent calibration curve, and highly reliable performance. The cell temperature returns to the same spot with the same input, month after month. When you test a cell, you cannot pinpoint the origin of the heat. Heat from the joule heater or electrolysis register exactly the same way (after accounting for gas losses), causing the same temperature increase. You cannot distinguish between the two sources of heat because they are both far from the thermistors. If you put the thermistors too close to the anode and cathode, you *would* see a difference, and you would know the cell is constructed incorrectly. That is the point of the test. Therefore, even if Kennel was correct and some novel mechanism shifted heat production to the cathode, you would not see it. You can shift most heat production a centimeter lower in the cell by turning on the joule heater. The anode-cathode gap is much smaller than the jump to the joule heater below, but even this big jump makes no measurable difference. You can shift heat production to the electrolyte by replenishing the water. No matter where you shift the heat, the thermocouple response remains the same. You cannot see where the heat comes from. Another popular configuration is to put the thermocouples outside the cell touching the cell wall. Typically people use a copper plate outside the wall to even out the heat, with two or three thermocouples attached to different points. Fleischmann used this in most of his later cells and he now recommends it. Miles and others do it this way. This configuration will also blur out the source of heat, making it impossible to tell where, in the cell, the heat originated. Here are some important related questions: How do you know the platinum cathode really is blank? How would you know if it produces excess heat. Or, what happens when people calibrate with palladium in heavy water? They assume it takes a few weeks for the heat to appear, so they think they can safely establish a baseline in the first few days by running palladium electrolysis, or electrolysis plus a joule heater. This is a controversial technique, but it does work. Miles likes it. Fleischmann addressed this issue in his ICCF7 lecture. He showed that with good palladium, low level heat sometimes begins soon after electrolysis begins. People mistake this low level heat for noise. They think the calorimeter is not working. They even conclude that you cannot use isoperibolic calorimetry with electrolysis, which is absurd, because people have been doing that experiment successfully ever since Faraday figured out how much energy it takes to separate H2 from O. The question arises: how do you independently check for excess heat during the early stages of the experiment before a calibration curve is established. Is there some other way to see excess heat? Fleischmann says yes, the trick is to carefully examine at the relaxation curve that follows a joule heater pulse. He showed that this peculiar response is often, in fact, a burst of excess heat promoted by the calibration pulse. He uses complex, first principle physics to determine this, because -- as I said -- he cannot use calibration-dependent analysis at this stage. This *is* the calibration. Most people find it too difficult to analyze to performance of an isoperibolic calorimeter based on first principles alone. Fleischmann also stresses the importance of the calibration curve, but as backup he rolls out complex physics plus the known constants for the cell wall materials (emissivity, the width of the vacuum gap, and so on), and he predicts the calorimeter performance. This task is relatively easy when you look at the relaxation curve. It should fit Newton's law no matter what the heat transfer coefficient of the cell wall is. Passive cooling always works the same way, with the same curve shape, although the curve will stretch out in the x-axis with heavier cell wall insulation. When the curve deviates from the predicted shape, you know that something is happening, and you know this *without reference to calibrations*. That's the key point. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 09:19:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA03458; Wed, 13 May 1998 09:16:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 09:16:57 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: VCockeram Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:12:28 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"udP7A.0.xr.qTSMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18685 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 13-May-98, VCockeram wrote: >> However, it sounds like you are getting an awful lot of heat for 54 W. >Thats what has me puzzled Horace, can 55 watts (or even 100 watts) get >the tube that hot? Vince, Have you considered a run with helium in place of the hydrogen or with hydrogen and another ionized element that does not meet the Mills energy requirement? Having substantially lower temps in either of these cases would lend credence to Mills hydrino theory. ---Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 10:35:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA21693; Wed, 13 May 1998 10:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 09:31:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"pda3S2.0.tI5.qbTMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18686 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: OK, here is another very "quick and dirty" way to measure output heat that might even be more accurate. Place the tube into a closed metal container, say a metal trash can or breadbox, with a low wattage fan. Measure the inside temperature and the ambient temperature and compute the difference. Continue run until the difference reaches equilibrium. Then, replace the tube with a 100 W light bulb and repeat the experiment running the bulb at 50 V, 60 V, ... 120 V using the variac. Measure current also, and then compute calibration wattage. With these numbers you can calculate the J/deg. C calibration constant for your trashcan calorimeter, and thus calculate the heat output for your tube. It might be a good idea to use a house fan pointed at the exterior of the calorimeter to create uniform conditions on the outside. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 11:01:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA27692; Wed, 13 May 1998 10:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:58:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007101bd7e97$81ce8a00$258cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Nuclear Site Mismanaged (http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/DailyNews/hanford_ Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:49:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD7E65.314760C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"B_ERr1.0.bm6.0zTMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18688 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD7E65.314760C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/DailyNews/hanford_980512.html ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD7E65.314760C0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=" Nuclear Site Mismanaged.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=" Nuclear Site Mismanaged.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.abcnews.com/sections/us/DailyNews/hanford_980512.html Modified=805DE468977EBD01FC ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD7E65.314760C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 11:54:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA06405; Wed, 13 May 1998 11:51:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:51:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980513145209.00babd80 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:52:09 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.1.32.19980512103045.0096b860 spectre.mitre.org> <7dfb6867.355771b1 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gHz7U.0.wZ1.YkUMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18689 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:43 AM 5/12/98 -0800, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >Probably true, though considerable energy in _hydrogen_ discharges goes >into breaking the molecules up into atoms, just what Vince wants. Many >(most?) of the atoms recombine at the tube walls. Good point. I'm used to arcs, where due to the self constricting magnetic field most of the energy goes into already heavily ionized plasma. >Re UV transmission through quartz: The main UV emission lines of hydrogen >discharge are at 1216 Angstrom and shorter wavelengths. These are too short >to pass readily through quartz, so are mostly absorbed in the tube wall. >(However, I would still take precautions against UV.) Definitely. In fact, I am more concerned about the potassium spectrum. Singlely ionized spectra are easy, but you will probably have a lot of multiply ionized lines. We now start getting into one of those "undoable" experiments. You would like to know what the actual spectrum is, but you end up extrapolating to correct for all the optical elements in your spectrometer. I'd love to have a tunable detector that I could put inside the aparatus. 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 May 13 12:06:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA08961; Wed, 13 May 1998 12:03:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 12:03:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <41753b3.35591a7c aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 09:59:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"n4rnI2.0.nB2.ovUMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18690 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince wrote lots of stuff. Some comments: >...Indicated best vacuum at run start was 26.8 in Hg. >The Dayton vacuum pump specs are best vacuum 25 millitorr >(25 microns). >... >Looking at the temperature vs fill pressures showed that the highest >temperatures were at a fill pressure between 20.5 and 21.0 in Hg, >which doing a little subtraction comes out to a fill between 5.8 to 6.3 >in Hg. This is a gas pressure of about 0.2 atmoshpere, where you get your highest temperatures. This is a high pressure for glow discharges. You are getting lots of heating in the "positive column," the glowing plasma between the two electrodes, due to the large pressure and all the collisions that brings. This is all consistent with heating your "4 inch section of 1/4 inch id quartz tube to bright orange heat," ie all along the discharge, not just at the cathode (which is where it gets ghot at low pressures). So, I'd say no big surprises so far. With respect to 578 C: I don't remember how you are measuring temperature, but I think it is with a thermocouple in that "shoe" that is in contact with the tube. I presume that the thermocouple plugs into a commercial unit that converts its voltage into a temperature, and that it is matched to the type of thermocouple, (for example, type K thermocouple, type K readout), and we can believe the temperature numbers. Quartz is a POOR thermal conductor, so it is possible for it to be considerably hotter on the inside of the tube than the outside. Red heat starts at about 700 C. I haven't run any numbers yet, but, given the thermal insulation of quartz, mayb it isn't unreasonable to see red heat at 50-100 W. Your DC volts times DC amps is less than the true power input. The Simpson meters indeed measure the DC components. They do not measure the AC component (ie big ripple) of the input. 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 May 13 12:12:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA23750; Wed, 13 May 1998 12:09:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 12:09:14 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:05:40 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Physics high priests are at it again! Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805131508_MC2-3CD8-5B72 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"kTJkP3.0.oo5.O_UMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18692 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Gene; >INTERNET:terren ariel.com Terren, You wrote that Gene Mallove lacks credibility, because he is upset: Just be practical for a second. Who would you take more seriously, the objective, clear-headed scientist, or the guy harboring a 9 year grudge? I think Gene does harbor a grudge. Anyone would, after going through what he did. I understand why you feel this reduces Gene's credibility. In that case I suggest you read papers by other people in cold fusion who do not harbor a grudge, like McKubre, Storms, Oriani, or me. If you would like to judge the objectivity of the opposition, I suggest you compare the Pons and Fleischmann paper in Physics Letters A, 176 (1993) to the article in New Scientist describing that paper. I think you will agree that these people are not serious, objective or clear-headed. Here is another interesting question about credibility. Much of the hard core opposition to cold fusion at MIT and in the DoE comes from hot fusion scientists. Just be practical for a second. Who would you take seriously, a scientist like Gene who objectively evaluated cold fusion in 1989? Or a bunch of people who are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in salaries by the U.S. government to build a competing system, in a project that is 40 years behind schedule? It took Gene and I years to make up our minds (the grudge is 7 years, not 9.) The hot fusion scientists at MIT accused Pons and Fleischmann of fraud in the newspapers a week after cold fusion was announced, and they published fake data a few months later covering up the excess heat in their own cold fusion experiment. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 12:17:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA10180; Wed, 13 May 1998 12:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 12:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:30:31 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Murray: artifacts, CETI, bla, bla Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805131434_MC2-3CD7-FA2B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Mkx98.0.tU2.l_UMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18691 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Rich Murray writes: At LENR-2 in Sept., 1996, I was snowed by all the transmutation claims, but now have reviewed all those papers and found much to criticize . . . In your dreams! You found *nothing*. I started writing critiques in early December, amazed at the poor quality of Miley's two Preprints, once examined in detail. Nonsense. I am amazed at your colossal ego. Every expert who has bothered to look at your spectroscopy "critiques" says they have no merit. I cannot judge them, but I know that your earlier critiques of calorimetry were nonsense. I now quote Kennel's ICCF-7 report, from a knowledgeable expert, very close to the action in Japan for two years, on a one of the variety of complex calorimeter artifacts . . . This "knowledgeable expert" claims that an OCV change in the cathode will magically "shift heat production percentages" to the cathode, and this change will somehow reach out and fool the thermocouples. Neither of these statements is in evidence, as I pointed out in another message. Kennel has made many other mistakes about calorimetry, like as the time he insinuated that 300% excess during a boil off might be an artifact caused by foaming. Kennel knows a great deal about neutrons and particle detection, but he has not published papers or critiques here that give me confidence in his understanding of calorimetry. He and I agree about the dual calorimeter and the Italians who ran at a temperature lower than ambient. As far as I know those were not his original observations or his experiments. (They were not mine either!) You may be sure that I will be quickly convinced by any replicable experiment that has been verified by such as Scott Little, Kirk Shanahan, Barry Merriman, Los Alamos National Lab, Pacific Northwest Lab, etc. Definitive cold fusion experiments have been performed at Los Alamos and published in the peer reviewed literature. If Los Alamos is your gold standard, Storms and Claytor will convince you that the excess heat and tritium must be real. But why on earth would anyone be convinced by Little, Shanahan or Merriman?!? With all due respect, they are not electrochemists. They have no background in calorimetry. They have no qualifications and no relevant experience. They could master the techniques, but they would have to do the equivalent of a PhD course in electrochemistry. I mean that literally: I know some young scientists who have satisfied the requirements for a PhD by doing an experiment and writing a hairy graduate thesis about it. Hundreds of pitfalls, snares and mistakes await those who attempt a cold fusion experiment. There are dozens of ways to fool yourself into thinking you are seeing low level excess heat or transmutations, and there are dozens of other way to miss seeing the evidence. These people know nothing about the potential problems. Mizuno has 30 years experience doing similar experiments, but he struggled for eight months to make a reliable closed cell. Would Shanahan or Little know how to do it? When cold fusion was announced, and a few hundred people attempted to replicate it, only a dozen or so people detected high sigma excess heat or tritium in the first six months. These people were all professional electrochemists. They have told me, again and again, that the experiment is much harder than it looks, and it taxed their abilities. Oriani says it is the most difficult experiment he has done in his 50 year career. When Little, Shanahan or Merriman spend a few years working in the SRI lab alongside McKubre; when they write a thesis that would satisfy Bockris, or master thin films as well as the people at U. Illinois . . . then we will have confidence in their ability to replicate these experiments. Not before. So far, the only work I have seen from them are two pretty good calorimeters from Little and Merriman. That's important, but it is the easy part. Electrochemistry and spectroscopy are the hard parts. When you talk about some other method of loading, you need to look at another group of experts. A. Takahashi knows how to operate the accelerator at Osaka U., whereas Huggins or Oriani do not. For those unfamiliar with it, the accelerator is a $75 million dollar gadget with power supplies bigger than my house. It takes considerable skill to operate. The Japanese edition of Playboy magazine published a marvelous two-page photo of Takahashi posed in the accelerator room. (Yes, he is fully clothed including the dosimeter badge.) Murray has overlooked another serious difficulty. Successful cold fusion experiments generally cost between $100 thousand and $20 million dollars. Little, Shanahan and Merriman do not have that kind of money. They do not have clean rooms or the kind of equipment Claytor designed and built at Los Alamos. They do not have time. A credible cold fusion experiment takes a couple of years, 12 hours a day Saturdays included. As I said, one experiment is a good graduate course in electrochem. And here Murray engages in a classic disinformation campaign, telling half the story to give a false impression: With respect to the CETI 1000 to 1 heat output Jed Rothwell still support in a post today, at PowerGen in Dec., 1995, I talked for four hours face-to-face in Nov., 1997 with Dr. Dennis Cravens [Dennis wazoo.com], who ran that exhibit, and he definitely did not support that high energy output: he said the cell was a "demo", not an "experiment" , and that many people were fiddling with it in a chaotic situation, and that the runs were not long enough to reach thermal equilibrium. . . . On the other hand, Cravens, Patterson and others have run the beads during careful, extended experiments without the chaos -- even with flowmeters! -- and they observed similar results. His actions certainly support his statements: at the time of our talk, although he was a paid Senior Researcher for CETI, he told me he had not worked with metal coated beads for nearly two years. Why would a talented, independent, creative, ambitious innovator abandon a simple system, firmly espoused by his own employer, that gave even 2 to 1, let alone 1000 to 1, heat output? Answer: Because he thinks he has found something better. The deficiencies of the beads are manifest. CETI has had trouble making good batches, and the beads can only be run at modest temperatures. I have talked to Dennis for a lot longer than four hours, I have known him for years, and I am 100% certain he did NOT tell Rich Murray the beads do not work. He would not hint, or suggest, or give anyone the impression he believes that. Murray is using Cravens' name to spread obnoxious lies about CETI and about Cravens' own work. Cravens published in our magazine. He has not retracted. Likewise, Scott Little has published on his website a month ago his two careful, detailed CETI RIFEX kit reports, showing no heat output and no convincing evidence for transmutations. Obviously, Little's experiment produced no transmutations. That does not prove that another experiment with a different set of beads elsewhere did not produce heat or transmutations. You are the only one so far to post me, challenging my competence on the basis that I am convinced by "ESP" research, and I congratulate you on your frankness. I really like that. It is, of course, ironic, and wonderful, that you thus are to me, as Blue is to you. I am open minded towards ESP. I know a little about it. I am not convinced by any means, but I think it is worth investigating. I did not spell out my point, because anyone familiar with CF and serious, scientific studies of ESP will understand what I meant. ESP mensuration techniques are fraught with difficulties, whereas CF *mensuration* is fairly straightforward. ESP is biology, which seldom yields clear-cut results the way chemistry or physics do. You will never see Mitsubishi succeed in 6 out of 6 biology experiments, and anyone who gets 6 out of 6 ESP tests right is cheating. ESP results are close to the noise; the best CF results are over 100 sigma. ESP research depends upon statistical proof from multiple experiments, whereas some CF experiments constitute stand-alone proof. (However CF helium analysis is often based on statistics.) The quality of scientific evidence for CF is much higher than ESP. In fact, I teach, on a small scale, my innovative Communion Process, a method for joint subjective inquiry. I will post my 20-page manual to anyone interested in the possibilities of subjective scientific method. That's grand! Off topic, but marvelous. "Subjective scientific method" is a wonderful contradiction of terms. What else do you teach? Atheistic religion? Acupuncture and massage techniques for the relief of neuralgia in cadavers? The natural history of cribbage? The art of telling an honest lie? - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 12:27:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA12936; Wed, 13 May 1998 12:25:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 12:25:25 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <74533a4e.3559f2ff aol.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:22:38 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"y13hT3.0._93.XEVMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18693 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-13 12:16:48 EDT, you write: > From: peotech frii.com (R. Wormus) > Have you considered a run with helium in place of the hydrogen or with > hydrogen > and another ionized element that does not meet the Mills energy requirement? > ---Ron Ron, I have run: (1) H2 with no K......No large heat output. (2) Ar with K............No large heat output. (3) Ar with no K.......No large heat output. Right now more expense for He I can't afford. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 12:46:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01099; Wed, 13 May 1998 12:39:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 12:39:11 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005601bd7e94$62d49340$258cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Heterogeneous Catalysis Reactions Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:26:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"mA_Ct3.0.VG.PRVMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18694 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex FWIW. A heterogeneous Reaction of D2 + C5H10 on a Chromite catalyst at 200 C: D2(gas) + C5H10(gas)---> D D C5H9 H ---> | | | | * * * * HD(gas) + C5H9D(gas) where the * is the surface adsorption site on the solid catalyst. The energy released would be nil, unless there was a Hydrino-Deutrino or Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutron formed, which should release around 2 Kev as EUV. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 12:47:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01555; Wed, 13 May 1998 12:40:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 12:40:04 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005b01bd7e95$726524e0$258cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: CNN - Satellite tracking - May 13, 1998 (http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9805/13/ Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:34:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7E63.1EFB7520" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"6RobD.0.BO.ISVMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18695 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7E63.1EFB7520 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Slingshot of satellite around the moon today. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9805/13/satellite/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7E63.1EFB7520 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN - Satellite tracking - May 13, 1998.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN - Satellite tracking - May 13, 1998.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9805/13/satellite/index.html Modified=A04DC736957EBD01BB ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD7E63.1EFB7520-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:06:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA18849; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:00:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00d201bd7ea9$3982fb20$258cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:55:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"evSHi.0.Lc4.AlVMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18696 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince wrote: >Right now more expense for He I can't afford. Circus Maximus, Vince. A 50 cent balloon filled with Helium would be more than you need. :-) Keep up the good work. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:10:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA12329; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:05:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:05:43 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:51:12 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Pd-Hydrogen and Excited State Catalysis Resent-Message-ID: <"MR6C-3.0.803.GqVMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18699 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:43 AM 5/13/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >An atom in the excited state A* can cause ionization of another atom or >molecule B : > >A* + B ----> A + B + e- > >If it can reach the necessary Excitation Potential (Ve): > >Ve = hc/lambda = E(init) - E(final) > >>From this, H2 in the Palladium lattice can > be dissociated to 2 H at modest temperatures by either the Pd or Hydrogen >atoms/molecules drawing low grade thermal energy from the environment. > >Subsequently the 2 H can recombine releasing energy: 2 H ----> H2 + 4.3E5 >joule/mole > >Low temperature "pumped" energy storage mistaken for O/U over long time >spans? For this to be a valid explanation of any device ou performance, there would have to be a clearly observable lengthy period of substantially underunity "pumping". Bad calorimetry could hide the pumping period, but then bad calorimetry will do you in anyway. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:11:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA10510; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:00:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:00:26 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:40:32 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: John Schnurer Subject: a treat (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"NxXsq1.0.KZ2.ClVMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18697 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., Some of you out there do 'hardball' research. I do a lot of work in what I call 'transduction' ... or converting some effect into an electrical signal. I have had to, over the years, develop measurement methods and circuits which make the unseen into the seen. SO: Trying to make the ends come closer, maybe not meet , but come closer, I have decided to sell some of my building blocks. These are functional ciruits which I use. Usually they are customized to some specific task. Most run with an output signal of +/- 2.5, or +/- 5... but I will be happy to scale to +/- 15, or whatever you have. You can request a custom of nearly any type. Contact me off forum for any of them. I will now list a few of these building blocks. These are, in nearly every case, a relative measure. You can calibrate to your needs. There are all precision low noise and frequently low power. I usually run battery for isolation. In just about every case the ground is a floating synthetic ground and all are regulated, decoupled and so forth. There are some optical systems that the electronic spec, above, do not apply to. None of this is cheap, but then again are toys either! All specs are conservative. These things will let you "see it" ... whatever the 'it' may be. All can be tailored and we can discuss the trade offs as to speed, power use, noise and so on. It someone wants to build these up as kits or finished elements, I will be happy to license the design at modest cost. These are not in nice neat boxes, but we can do that too, if you want, these are the real deal raw circuits. Almost all are single sided cards, continuous ground plane, using full size surface mounted parts. Many are hybrid discrete-and-IC. Charge: Air: DC to ~ 50 to 100 kcps, ~ 25 to 50 fA ... 10 neg 15 Amps leakage current. Straight single ended, differential, gradiometric 2nd order or higher orders. General gains to ~ 10 and 100 for front ends, noise in the 30 to 70 nV range. Offset adjust. You can of course put more gain on your end. Charge ... non linear.... 1 pA to 1 Ma range, general specs of above. Very cool. This is the result of years of work and compresses symmetrically above and below ground.... Can be mated to other signal source. With 3 inch electrode you can usually get a few volts swing from charge hir comb from 5 to 15 feet. Easily 'sees' the ionzation of candle flame if electrode is put in flame. Charge, fluids. Generally the same as above teamed with very low level current source or sink... capable of diplaying the double layer effect in saline at less than 10 uA and less than 0.5 V Multiple in line element arrays for charge devices. BBD Bucket Brigade Delay line, 1024 elements, 10 uSec to 3 seconds for analog auto correlation and other uses. Linear continuous time 4 pole low pass voltage controled filter. DC to 20 kspc. Two control voltages, one set corner 1:800 ration, the other sets "Q" from poor damping to peaked LPF to oscillation Micropower phase loced loop, mixed signal CMOS, ULF to 1 meg cps Standard Opmp building blocks Wide range of true gain block instrumentation amps. Customs to 5 nV noise floors. Magnetometers with 50 uGauss noise floors. I usually use a 1 V to Gauss range. True thin film permalloy bridge sensors, NOT Hall effect and NOT semiconductor. DC to 3 meg cps flat. Induction coil mags, woth or without regenerative peaking and with or without annealled supermalloy cores. Odd building blocks: Negative R Negative and positve C Negative and positve L Regenerative sferic EM ULF, LF and AF recivers. Bilateral optically coupled FET isolation blocks Several custom isolation methods Short haul RF and optical telemetry NDE for dielectrics and conductors Semicondutor recombination times mearuring circuits Proximity blocks, many types Dual gate MOSFET blocks Band pass, high pass and band reject or "notch", namy types and non linear and tracking filters. AND: Name the custom design. Optical UV conversion phosphors Several types of obscure and-or precision IC and dicrete devices and hard-to-get parts, including germanium devices and custom voltage variable C and L and R Amber NTSC 2/3 inch displays and drivers.... magnetic deflection coils, can be externally driven as X and Y displays. Store is open! JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:11:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11762; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:04:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:04:02 -0700 Message-ID: <3559C80E.35F2 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:19:26 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Rothwell re Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum 05/13/98 References: <199805131150_MC2-3CE3-F03C compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4EFox.0.Rs2.ToVMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18698 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 13, 1998 Hello Jed Rothwell, Thank you for your two detailed, long, civil, and competent responses to Elliot Kennel's ICCF-7 critique. I'm not sure he subscribes to Vortex-L. Would you forward your two posts to him directly? As one, Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:12:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA12990; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:07:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:07:46 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 08:51:09 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"clnvV1.0.3A3.2sVMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18700 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 AM 5/13/98, VCockeram wrote: >Would the resistor I make have to be close to the caculated tube >resistance? (whatever that might be), Or some fixed value? Better >to use the DC supply to drive the resistor, or as you suggest, just the >variac? I think the main problem with calibration is getting a high temperature resistor of the right physical size to fit the space in the tube, yet at a current you can support with the leads into the tube. Most wire wound resistors are going to be very low resistance, leaving you with the need to use low voltage and high current to get the right wattage, about 55 watts. Chances are the resistor you use will be less than one ohm. Looking at the basic formulas for power P in terms of voltage V and current I: P = V*I = I^2*R = V^2/R V = (P*R)^0.5 I = (P/R)^0.5 If you have a one ohm resistor you need to apply I = (55/1)^0.5 = 7.4 A and V= (55*1)^0.5 = 7.5 volts RMS get the required 55 watts for the calibration. If you have a half ohm resistor you need to apply 5.24 volts at 10.4 amps. This is at a limit where even a step down transformer begins to be required. Another problem is getting the current to the filament inside the tube. Anyone have suggestions for a small diameter, small length, 55 watt high temp resistor? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:14:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA13326; Wed, 13 May 1998 05:36:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 05:36:00 -0700 Message-ID: <355985F6.6CA1 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 06:37:26 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Berry: Psi field unification theory 05/13/98 Content-Type: message/news Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"FJlAZ3.0.8G3.mEPMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18679 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Path: nntp.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.mel.aone.net.au!newsfeed-in.aone.net.au!not-for-mail From: Craig Berry Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Psi field unification theory Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:58:23 +1000 Organization: Bay Street Natural Therapies Clinic Message-ID: <3559448F.2547 s130.aone.net.au> Reply-To: bsnt s130.aone.net.au NNTP-Posting-Host: d108-1.cpe.southport.aone.net.au Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="PSI.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I) Content-Disposition: inline; filename="PSI.txt" For a full copy of this paper in PDF format, please email bsnt s130.aone.net.au with "request Psi paper". I will email the full document to you as soon as possible. If you need Acrobat reader 3.0 to read the PDF file, it is available at http://www.adobe.com, or you can request it at the same time as the paper by sending "request paper and reader". For all correspondence, please use my email address bsnt s130.aone.net.au, or snail mail - PO Box 243 Southport Queensland Australia 4215 PSI FIELD UNIFICATION THEORY - A CONCEPT PAPER AUTHOR - CRAIG BERRY (c)1998 Foreword I am not a physicist. Nor am I especially conversant with the theories and musings of the many great minds that have probed our existence. I am someone who has been blessed or cursed, depending on the point of view, with an insatiably curious mind. Now here I will curse my lack of education in the field of physics, and hope that the reader will make some allowances for terms that I might use slightly out of scientifically correct grammatical context. In Ervin Laszlo's book, "The Whispering Pond", he described the logical existence of a theoretical Psi field. Working with his label, in this paper I wish to quantify the existence and nature of the Psi field beyond reasonable doubt. I will not be takin g my examples to the final and most detailed degrees, and exploring every possible proof. This I will, at this stage, leave to you, the reader. In a paper to be released later this year, I will be exploring further the phenomena of the Psi field, and its impact on our concept of our world. The challenges faced by a proto universe are described in Professor Laszlo's book. After exploring the facts of physics and nature as we know them, we arrive at the ultimate conclusion that life (by current standards and knowledge) is highly improbable, and the right conditions developing (unaided) for life to form is even less so. What if life itself, the very force that is the activating principal of conglomerations of unlikely chemical combinations we call 'bio', creates this field? Wouldn't this a nswer some questions. We already know that life is an energy producing (or utilising) phenomena. Some of the energies are easy to see and measure, like heat, sound, and electricity. Other energies are not yet quantified, (but will be just as easy to find in the extremely n ear future, as the measuring devices exist in form, but are not yet being used in the direction this paper might take them). In this paper, I will prove the logic of the notion that life produces, and is maintained by, an energy field that is the very fundamental origin of matter and the other field phenomena observed by modern physicists. To use the term coined by Professor Laszlo in his book, it is the Psi (Psi) field. The possibility of this being the mechanism, or media at least, of an omniscient holographic memory will not be discussed in this paper, but in an upcoming paper, as the use of Psi as a mechanism of space travel will potentially expose its participants to this memory and knowledge store. It is also with some hesitation that I publish this, the first of a series of papers, as the energies and forces described have huge potential for use, and misuse. As Einstein's work developed many aspects of nuclear medicine, and breakthroughs in our c apabilities of observing the universe, it also lead to the development, and use, of weapons of mass destruction. THE PSI FIELD - BASIC CONCEPTS Precept - Life is the creator of the Psi Field. All life is intrinsically and irrevocably interconnected by the Psi field. All matter is of Psi energy, and is reliant upon the Psi field's integrity for its basic existence. All of life, and its resultant matter, is continuously creating and maintaining the Psi field. The possible existence of the Psi field should no longer be under discussion as more than enough experiments conducted in all parts of the world have shown th e interrelated nature of matter, organisms and minds on a micro and macro scale. The Psi field is not a static field, but an extremely dynamic and energetic omnidirectional field as I will evidence shortly. Its dynamic is such that one has to resort to large numbers to place any value to the forces involved. Physicists Akimov, Shipov and Binghi, in their "torsion field theory of the physical vacuum" have measured what they call 'torsion waves' travelling at quantified velocities of 109C. Rather than being a wave in the zero point physical vacuum, their own conclusions would be justified completely if applied to a dynamic Psi field, concluding that what they are measuring are disturbances in the Psi field itself. A 'blank spot' in the mobile dynamic of the field itself. If the Psi field is actually this dynamic, and its energy moves at a billion times the speed of light, or there about, it essentially means that all life and all matter is intrinsically interconnected to the point where something happens in one part of th e universe, it is quasi-simultaneously 'known' (or 'felt') throughout the remainder. For the Psi field to be this dynamic, communication and empathy between one part of the universe and another becomes virtually instantaneous. This sounds all wonderful and warm, but how do we justify and prove its existence? Another point to be made here, as I have already alluded to the omnidirectional nature of this field, is the possibility that forces can operate in counterpoint to each other, cancelling to some degree their effect on objects within their fields, but doin g no harm to the vitality of the individual counterpoised forces. Consider a simple fair ground attraction that provides a centrifugal 'gravity' to its riders, to allow a full 360o vertical loop to be performed. Such a ride does not make gravity itself vanish, or even any less potent, it just provides enough counter-f orce to momentarily cancel the immediate effects of gravity upon the car and its riders. Thus, unlike moving matter opposing moving matter, where collision and energy transformation takes place, forces can and do 'move' in contrary directions, without o ne adversely effecting the vitality of the other, but having profound effect on objects within their combined sphere of influence. GRAVITY - PSI Vs. MATTER Understanding the mechanics of Psi versus matter (matter itself is Psi energy, which we will discuss shortly) is extendable to understanding phenomena like black holes and super masses. The challenge to the educated reader is that this is a "grand unify ing theory" and it is simple. So simple in fact that in many ways, I feel that it has been a case of too many trees occluding the view of the forest. I challenge all who read this to place aside a need for complex theorems, and look at this as a real possibility. The beauty of this concept lies in its simplicity. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:37:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA22737; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:34:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:34:04 -0700 Message-ID: <3559FC24.6529F2AB ariel.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:01:40 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! References: <199805131508_MC2-3CD8-5B72 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pZHN-3.0.yX5.sEWMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18701 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > To: Vortex; Gene; >INTERNET:terren ariel.com > > Terren, > > You wrote that Gene Mallove lacks credibility, because he is upset: > > Just be practical for a second. Who would you take more seriously, the > objective, clear-headed scientist, or the guy harboring a 9 year grudge? > > I think Gene does harbor a grudge. Anyone would, after going through what he > did. I understand why you feel this reduces Gene's credibility. In that case I > suggest you read papers by other people in cold fusion who do not harbor a > grudge, like McKubre, Storms, Oriani, or me. If you would like to judge the > objectivity of the opposition, I suggest you compare the Pons and Fleischmann > paper in Physics Letters A, 176 (1993) to the article in New Scientist > describing that paper. I think you will agree that these people are not > serious, objective or clear-headed. > > Here is another interesting question about credibility. Much of the hard core > opposition to cold fusion at MIT and in the DoE comes from hot fusion > scientists. Just be practical for a second. Who would you take seriously, a > scientist like Gene who objectively evaluated cold fusion in 1989? Or a bunch > of people who are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in salaries by the > U.S. government to build a competing system, in a project that is 40 years > behind schedule? It took Gene and I years to make up our minds (the grudge is > 7 years, not 9.) The hot fusion scientists at MIT accused Pons and Fleischmann > of fraud in the newspapers a week after cold fusion was announced, and they > published fake data a few months later covering up the excess heat in their > own cold fusion experiment. > > - Jed Yes, of course, you're right, They are just as emotional as anyone else. So what? It's like little kids, or worse, political candidates. Everyone's slinging mud when they could be spending their energy in more productive ways. In this business, it doesn't matter how passionately you feel or speak if you're wrong. If someone like Taubes makes a remark, why not just let it go, and let the experiments speak for themselves? Set an example. Terren From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 13:50:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA27602; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:47:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:47:05 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805131508_MC2-3CD8-5B72 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:48:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! Resent-Message-ID: <"-9Udy2.0.Cl6.8RWMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18703 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: >Here is another interesting question about credibility. Much of the hard core >opposition to cold fusion at MIT and in the DoE comes from hot fusion >scientists. As an active "hot fusion" researcher, I know lots of other hot fusion scientists. The vast majority of them simply ignore cold fusion. They do not "oppose" it. They just stopped paying any attention years ago. 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 May 13 14:01:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA29590; Wed, 13 May 1998 13:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980513204214.8079.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:42:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Respect and Civility To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"1C6vm1.0.EE7._SWMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18702 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Looks like it's almost time for adult supervision~! Why do several individuals on this list _insist_ on using insults in their discussions???? It accomplishes nothing. Persuasive writing/speaking 101 normally teaches you -- insulting your audience only alienates them [OK -- I'm making this up....but you don't gain support with insults]. I'm not against good discussion/argument/etc... But these stabs at each other are out-side the scope of discussion. You know who you are. Please stop it. Regards, == Anton Rager a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 14:18:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA02532; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:06:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805131150_MC2-3CE3-F03C compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:44:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Resent-Message-ID: <"kUArN1.0.Qd.5jWMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18704 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I don't want to get deeply into this calorimetry debate, but I have looked into Fleischmann's a couple of times. Jed wrote: >He uses complex, first principle physics to determine this, ... Actually, no. His analysis starts with4 inch section of 1/4 inch id quartz tube to bright orange heat," but he introduces a "fudge factor" into his "on the fly" calibration technique. It's not first principle at all, just a factor to make his cell look like it is working well where it breaks away from "first principles physics." >...It should fit Newton's law no matter what the heat transfer >coefficient of the cell wall is. It should, but Fleischmann's doesn't. That's why there is a fudge factor. 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 May 13 14:20:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA02650; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:13:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:13:00 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001101bd7eb3$9b8e9360$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:10:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"z-gWE.0.If.RpWMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18705 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Schaffer gav.gat.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 2:49 PM Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! >Jed wrote: > >>Here is another interesting question about credibility. Much of the hard core >>opposition to cold fusion at MIT and in the DoE comes from hot fusion >>scientists. > >As an active "hot fusion" researcher, I know lots of other hot fusion >scientists. The vast majority of them simply ignore cold fusion. They do >not "oppose" it. They just stopped paying any attention years ago. You Mean Like, Ignore it, maybe it will go away? :-) Regards, Frederick > >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 May 13 14:27:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA05378; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:19:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:19:27 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001601bd7eb4$982952e0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:17:50 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"pe-GJ1.0.xJ1.UvWMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18706 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Schaffer gav.gat.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 3:09 PM Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Mik Schaffer wrote: > >Actually, no. His analysis starts with4 inch section of 1/4 inch id quartz >tube to bright orange heat," but he introduces a "fudge factor" into his >"on the fly" calibration technique. It's not first principle at all, just >a factor to make his cell look like it is working well where it breaks away >from "first principles physics." The Rumford approach to calorimetry ca 1798. see how much water it can boil off in a given time, might be the easiest for Vince. The vapor could be condensed and weighed as a rough cut. Vince should have a more accurate watch than Rumford had. :-) Regards, Frederick > >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 May 13 14:35:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA08058; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:29:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:29:52 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980513172650.007c3100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:26:50 +0000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum In-Reply-To: References: <199805131150_MC2-3CE3-F03C compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Z91_M2.0.hz1.D3XMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18709 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:44 PM 5/13/98 -0800, Michael J. Schaffer wrote: >I don't want to get deeply into this calorimetry debate, but I have looked >into Fleischmann's a couple of times. Jed wrote: > >>He uses complex, first principle physics to determine this, ... > >Actually, no. His analysis starts with4 inch section of 1/4 inch id quartz >tube to bright orange heat," but he introduces a "fudge factor" into his >"on the fly" calibration technique. It's not first principle at all, just >a factor to make his cell look like it is working well where it breaks away >from "first principles physics." > >>...It should fit Newton's law no matter what the heat transfer >>coefficient of the cell wall is. > >It should, but Fleischmann's doesn't. That's why there is a fudge factor. The issue is whether there can be accurate reconstruction of the heat, and/or putative excess heat, or even an ohmic resistor used a control. A calorimetric system - including equations to operate on the thermometry - can only be believed to the degree that it can accurately reconstruct a simple square wave, for example. We call that thermal waveform reconstruction. Dr. Fleischmann's system and isoperibolic calorimetry in generally when done correctly appear to do this accurately. Some flow calorimetric systems (especially the vertical ones) do not. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 14:39:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06892; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:25:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:25:47 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003601bd7eb5$77e4b6e0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Putting the Squeeze on Hydrogen (http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyN Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:23:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD7E83.22C085E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"gE58O.0.Xh1.P_WMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18708 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD7E83.22C085E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just in http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/hydrogen980512.html ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD7E83.22C085E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Putting the Squeeze on Hydrogen.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Putting the Squeeze on Hydrogen.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/hydrogen980512.html Modified=C095234DB57EBD01B6 ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD7E83.22C085E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 14:41:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA04650; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: "R. Wormus" To: VCockeram Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:24:49 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <74533a4e.3559f2ff aol.com> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"HljmP.0.a81.DyWMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18707 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Ron, >I have run: >(1) H2 with no K......No large heat output. >(2) Ar with K............No large heat output. >(3) Ar with no K.......No large heat output. > >Right now more expense for He I can't afford. >Regards, >Vince Cockeram >Las Vegas Vince, Sorry, I missed the Ar runs. So it seems both H & K are necessary, very interesting. Great work. ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 14:59:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16048; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:50:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:50:49 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:50:51 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"U-Fu9.0.ew3.uMXMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18711 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:59 AM 5/13/98, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >Your DC volts times DC amps is less than the true power input. The Simpson >meters indeed measure the DC components. They do not measure the AC >component (ie big ripple) of the input. For sure! Somehow, based on talk of needing a bunch of diodes I got the impression you had changed to AC Vince. Sorry, just a temporary mental aberration. Your ammeter is a DC ammeter, then, obviously. I went back and looked through a lot of posts to track what was going on with the power supply. I take it you are still using the microwave power supply which has a single HV diode? The ripple calcs are different for single phase rectification. Without a full-wave bridge in there you are going to have a *lot* of ripple. Using your 0.6 mfd we get the approximation: Vr = (0.037 A)/(60(.6x10^-6 F)) = 1027 V = 69 percent ripple. It is probably worse, due to the above being only an approximation. You might consider putting an *AC* ammeter in series with the load as well! You could briefly use a DMM if you have one, just to determine the ratio of AC to DC components of your power. If we assume 70 percent ripple, 30 percent DC, that means the true power is P = 100/30 * 55 watts = 183 watts. That is a different ballpark. The total AC + DC current is way up there also, then, at about 1.23 A. The cheapest quickest fix is probably to use a fullwave bridge and much bigger capacitor. Another alternative to consider is to use a low voltage low power neon sign transformer. They are typically designed to handle operating at the near short resistances of gas discharge tubes. A small one at say 5 kV and 30 mA might work well. If you call around to neon sign makers and explain a bit you might get one free or for a few bucks. They are all center tapped to ground. The circuit might look like: | | WWW ===== MMMMM | | | | | | | | -----|>|-------------------- | | | | | ------------|--- --- | | | --- | | | | ---------|>|--- --------------- The above can obviously be driven with a variac. If the transformer output is rated 5 kV and 30 mA, then the above would produce 2.5 KV rms at 60 ma. The capacitor and diodes would require higher voltage though. You should use diodes rated at at least 10 kV and 100 mA. If you bought a watthour meter, it could be placed prior to the variac, and the filter capacitor would not be necessary for power measurement, but would prevent the discharge from dissapating/restarting. This circuit has the advantage that it is fairly efficient and doesn't require balast. If you decide to go this route I'll send you some 20 kV 100 mA diodes (free of course). Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:04:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18813; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:01:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:01:01 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:00:40 +0000 Message-ID: <19980513220030.AAA573 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"43wMX3.0.rb4.SWXMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18713 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert, I realize now that I was addressing someone who knows a good deal about space exploration. Thanks for the reply. I remember the anxieties about cosmic microbes (The Andromeda Strain) popular 28 years ago. It is also apparent that I am suspicious of any government program existing for the purpose of ulterior political motives (but don't call me paranoid, I KNOW they're out to get me ). My memories of the Mercury program are mainly limited to what my father, an engineer for Martin-Marietta, told me when I was a wee lad. He worked on the Apollo missions and believe me, like most every other kid, I envisioned myself taking those steps on the lunar surface. The Apollo 8 astronauts made one of those >intuitive leaps which requires being there--the human eye is very, very >sensitive to traces of life signs, and when looking at the surface of the >moon, their eyes constantly tracked trying to find something to look at. >When the earth came into view--3000 times farther away--they had no trouble >seeing signs of life. > > There are hundreds of "scientific mysteries" that are open problems >where unmanned observations have raised questions which the robots were >unable to answer. My point was that your objections were to relatively primative robots. Anything the human eye can witness on the spot can be done better with enough equipment remotely. Cameras can look with filtering and at bands that are not visible to humans. With stereoscopic separation, depth perception can be dramatically enhanced. Ultimately, it all comes to human perception anyway. > There is a role for unmanned probes. There is a role for manned >missions. And most important we need to combine them correctly. We have >the technology NOW to build a spaceship which can spend thirty years or >more touring the solar system and gathering knowledge. The cost would be >much less than the hundreds of individual unmanned missions it would >replace. But we can't build an unmanned craft which will do the same thing. > With miniaturization, we can launch many probes at relatively low cost, with much less risk to gather most of the same data in less time, IMO. To spend 30 years touring the solar system, a manned mission would have to have artificial gravity if the astronauts are to ever function on Earth again. And in 30 years, the technology would have become very obsolete. What about all that time being beyond the Van Allen Belt? Do we have much idea of the results? > Let's look from another direction. How many problems on the >successful Mars mission could have been fixed in two minutes by a man on >site, but took several days by remote control? How many of the previous >Mars missions would have been successful if someone had been there to fix >"minor" problems. How much was the Galileo mission hurt by a loose cable >in the wrong place. And that was a particularly costly blunder. The high >gain antenna could have been deployed in LEO, where there was a shuttle >crew doing checkout. NASA decided they would rather design for deployment >after LEO departure. > Point taken. Human missions cannot afford catastropic failure, so it is good that versatile humans are there, but robotic missions are not as critical. Since a major part of the purpose of the mission would be to produce the technology of super-robots, even if it fails without acquiring data, it has been an engineering accomplishment and test with many important spin-offs. I am no foe of human exploration of space. I just think that we must keep our limited resources in mind, as well as our insatiable appetite and need for knowledge. And if inertia can be vacuum engineered, I am all in favor of humans in deep space, because it would not just be possible, it would be practical. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:04:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA14156; Wed, 13 May 1998 14:44:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:44:01 -0700 Message-ID: <355A0659.E0D earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:45:13 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Kennel: html version ICCF-7 critique 05/08/98 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"I_UKh1.0.3T3.WGXMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18710 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Received: from repulse.concentric.net (repulse.concentric.net [207.155.248.4]) by belize.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA13900 for ; Mon, 11 May 1998 07:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spaworks.com (ts019d35.hil-ny.concentric.net [206.173.18.191]) by repulse.concentric.net (8.8.5/) id KAA12659; Mon, 11 May 1998 10:04:47 -0400 (EDT) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay] Errors-To: Message-ID: <3557143F.81CD4A68 spaworks.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 08:07:43 -0700 From: Stacey Yates Organization: Emerald Lake Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Richard Murray Subject: oh...this way easy Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sorry for the delay Richard...I am off to New Orleans...Love to you!! Stacey

Subject: ICCF-7 Conference Report

Author:  Elliot Kennel, Ekennel Apsci.com, Ekennel@Compuserve.com

 I attended the 7th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-7), April 19-24, 1998.  The proceedings are not yet out, so my comments are a bit tentative as they are based on my notes and memory.
 I think that the conference itself was wonderfully organized (thanks to Fred Jaeger et al at ENECO).  They correctly recognized that cold fusion scientists tend to be workaholics, and so amusements were kept to a minimum, and sessions plus workshops allowed a maximum of technical exchange.  The format, with only a few oral presentations but very strong poster sessions worked very well.  In past years, split sessions were tried but many people wanted to attend multiple topics.  At any conference, most of the action is out in the hall anyway, so the poster sessions tended to promote that sort of thing.  So I think the format was nearly perfect.
 There were a few results which I find encouraging and which possibly indicate that some important discoveries are being made.  On the whole, however, I confess that I have become increasingly skeptical about the major claims which have been made in the cold fusion community.  Specifically, while in Japan at the New Hydrogen Energy Laboratory from 1996-1998, I was involved in several experiments which appeared to give positive results in excess heat, tritium, helium and transmutations, but further investigation always showed that the results were likely due to some artifact, and not to a true anomaly.  Accordingly, I wonder if  others are also producing artifacts and not recognizing it, or could it be that they are producing real results while I am failing to discern the difference between my experiments and theirs? Anyway, my personal standard of proof is very high these days.

Excess Heat

 In the area of excess heat, during my time in Japan I was troubled by the observation that a single experiment could produce excess heat as measured by an isoperibolic calorimeter, but simultaneously produce zero excess heat as measured by a mass flow calorimeter.  I interpret the effect as follows:  at high deuterium loading, a state change occurs in the surface of the cathode which causes the open-circuit voltage (as well as the voltage under load) to increase.  Under this condition, there is a higher percentage of thermal energy generated at the cathode, and less in the electrolyte.  This changes the calibration coefficient of the cell and results in an excess heat signal.  Many researchers have observed the loss of excess heat upon switching from isoperibolic calorimetry to mass flow calorimetry (including NHE Lab and the IMRA Japan group).
 Ed Storms, a key proponent of the excess heat effect and a brilliant researcher whom I have known and respected since the early 1980s, has built a dual calorimeter system and sees the same effect.  His interpretation is that the artifact problem does exist, and thus excess heat values of ~10% should be ignored, but higher values are probably due to an actual (nuclear) anomaly.  Storms thinks that excess heat results of ~50% are too high to be explained by the artifact  observed at NHE Lab.  However, my view is that isoperibolic calorimeters have been shown to be unreliable for measuring excess heat in electrolytic cells in which the electrode surfaces are changing, and so I am skeptical of all excess heat data which depends on isoperibolic calorimetry, even for very good setups.  This disagreement has not been resolved yet.
 In Japan, we also found errors in the design of the mass flow calorimeter for the Frascati electromigration cell.  The problem was the estimation of the heat leakage in the calorimeter.  The heat leakage was underestimated, so that when the cell was run at a temperature colder than the surroundings, it appeared to generate excess heat.  The difference between deuterium and hydrogen is that the electrical resistance is different, which changes the losses.  The device produced no excess heat despite the best efforts of Dr. Paolo Tripodi (who, by the way, I consider to be a highly competent engineer).  Dr. Francesco Celani also visited us, and as far as I know agrees that the device sent to Japan produced no excess heat.  Celani also told me that he agrees with my previous criticism of the electromigration effect on theoretical grounds (namely, the formulation he used last year depends upon an infinite medium approximation, whereas the long thin wire he uses in electrolysis will be much more strongly affected by electrolysis rather than electromigration.  Thus, his cell works via pulsed electrolysis, and the electromigration effect is negligible).  Nevertheless, his papers seem to gloss over these problems.
 Unfortunately, CETI did not present much at the conference.  CETI is famous for their claim about reproducible excess heat.  Although I have only a passing familiarity with the system, I am still skeptical about whether mass flow calorimetry is really reliable with a two phase, electrochemically reactive working fluid.  It seems to me likely that the excess temperature effect is real, but perhaps the presence of gas bubbles in the electrolyte (which occurs as soon as the cathode is loaded) may make it difficult to measure the actual density, volumetric flow rate, specific heat and chemical enthalpy change (assumed to be zero) of the working fluid.  So I think it is very likely an excess temperature device, but I am unwilling to believe in excess energy until I see a “normal” calorimeter read the same thing.
 Martin Fleischmann continues to emphasize that a positive temperature coefficient is mandatory in order to see excess heat effects.  His notion is that the NHE laboratory work may have been effective at obtaining very high loading, but it is not sufficient to produce excess heat.  Positive thermal feedback is also necessary, and is provided by the isoperibolic calorimeter.  Thus, Fleischmann regards the calorimeter as an active part of the device, rather than a passive measurement tool.  There is also a long-standing dispute between Fleischmann and the NHE lab guys over the differential equations which are used to describe the calorimeter.  Using Fleischmann’s equations, there appears to be excess heat in several samples.  However, the NHE group argued (I think it was ICCF-5, to which I don’t have immediate access, so I can’t cite the specific reference) that Fleischmann’s methods led to erroneous results.   For my part, however, I am more concerned because calorimeters of the type used by Fleischmann have been shown (to my satisfaction, at least) to give false positives at high loading due to the electrochemical state change which apparently occurs.  This fact overrides Fleischmann’s reassuring rationale that the isoperibolic calorimeter provides temperature feedback needed to make the cold fusion effect switch on.  Then there are other problems associated with open cell calorimetry which have been cited by numerous critics.  I do not understand why he does not use the closed cycle type of calorimeter used by Storms and others.
 If excess heat is going to be recognized as a scientific fact, it needs to be demonstrated in a rigorous, unambiguous way.  Tiny amounts of heat, the existence of which depends on several PhDs in mechanical engineering arguing about hair-splitting differences between the differential equations to describe an imperfect calorimeter, just isn’t convincing.  The argument that ureliable instrumentation is a mandatory requirement for seeing an anomaly is likewise troublesome.  At best it is ambiguous, at worst it is simply wrong.
 Some interesting data was presented by a little-known researcher,  Dr. L. C. Case, who used his a priori knowledge about chemical catalysis combined with an Edisonian approach to studying materials, to identify several material combinations which produce apparent excess heat.  Case claims that Pd and other metals works well on activated charcoal.  He seems very open and willing to share his data, which will simplify evaluation by others.  I think he’s a longshot, but I like his style.
 The DeNinno group in Italy continues to make innovations in loading techniques.  The finding that an electric current enhances gas loading is quite peculiar, and indicates that there is some unusual electrochemical behavior taking place.  Similarly, Storms is continuing to advocate that open circuit voltage must be measured as a way of determining the loading characteristics of the cell.  I wonder if these results can be connected in some way.

Transmutation

 Since the last conference, many persons have gotten very excited about the possibility of transmutation reactions and isotope shifts.  Some of the data looks more convincing than others.
 Some claims are made on the basis of the following rationale:

 a.  The system is known to be very clean.

 b.  Impurities are found on the cathode.

 c.  Since the system is clean, the impurities must be due to a nuclear reaction.

 This seems very weak to me, since it is impossible to show that the system was really clean before the experiment.  Moreover, electrolysis cells are often used to clean up liquid waste streams, because all positive ions plate out on the cathode.  So the fact that a few milligrams of positive ionic crud appears on the cathode, is not surprising to me.
 The presence of isotopic shift seems much more important.  If the cathodic crud is always the same abundance as normal material, it is very likely chemical contamination, since the cold fusion process, whatever it is, is highly implausible that it would just happen to mimic the ultrahigh energy bombardment and subsequent radioactive decay from the creation of the universe during the Big Bang (unless the universe was created by cold fusion instead—of course that assumption ups the ante for cold fusion quite a bit).  On the other hand, if there is an unnatural isotope shift, this is difficult (though not impossible—see below) to achieve via normal chemical processes.
 Some comment is necessary on potential errors in isotope identification.  Secondary Ion Mass Spectroscopy (SIMS) is a technique used by many investigators.  However, there are different types of SIMS,  ranging from completely useless to marginally useful but often misleading.
 With low-res SIMS, it is not possible to separate molecules from atoms.  Thus Mass 102 could be Pd-102, Ru-102, or it might be something like Al2O3.   So everything appears isotope shifted in low res SIMS.  At higher res, most of the apparent shifts are no longer seen, but some persist.  Ru-104 and Pd-104 are examples of elemental interference which is very difficult to overcome.  A good state of the art machine can obtain an m/?m of over 6000, but the m/?m rating required to separate Ru-104 and Pd-104 is about 75,000.
 High-res SIMS is subject to other errors, particularly in non-uniform surfaces (which includes many electrolysis surfaces) because of the SIMS relative sensitivity factor (RSF) which is isotope dependent, and which also depends on the identity of the neighboring atom. The ability to translate SIMS observations to the original concentration of the observed ions is dependent upon the ability to obtain RSF for the element in question.

 IR/Cr = RSFI (II/CI)

where IR is the intensity of secondary ions from the reference atom, usually the majority atom in the target; CR is the concentration of reference atoms in the target; Ii is the secondary ion intensity of the ith element atoms in the target, and Ci is the concentration of the ith element atoms in the target.
 For many problems, the RSF of the matrix is constant, and the other atoms are present only as slight impurities of the host matrix.  In this case, it is likely that the RSF factors will be quite constant for these impurities.
 However, the RSFs are not constants for each atomic species.  They are functions of the host matrix atoms as well.  In a dirty, heavily contaminated sample with substantial lattice strain energy, the RSFs will vary in an unpredictable way, and may in fact vary from isotope to isotope.  In other words,
 
 RSFI = f(CR,CI,U)  ,
 
where U refers to the local lattice strain energy.
 In other words, what you are doing in SIMS is blasting the surface with oxygen and tearing away atoms from the surface.  But the energy required to tear the atom from the surface depends on how big it is as well as how it is bonded to its neighbor.  If you have less than a clean, pure surface, there are going to be substantial variations in the SIMS signature for a given element.
 Annealing the sample can reduce the error due to variation of the RSF.
 There is also a fallacy in trusting the literature values too much.  Not all material adheres to the literature value of abundance.  There can be some variations according to where it is originally mined.
 In addition, some elements are routinely sold in isotope-enriched form.  For example, when you buy lithium, it is normally something like 99% Li-7.  This is because Li-6 is used for nuclear applications, and the Li-7 is sold as the byproduct from the separation process.
 Also, isotopic separation can occur due to the electrolysis process itself, especially for light elements.  In particular, studies at NHE Lab have shown that some degree of separation occurs in the H-D-T system, and some smaller effects may exist in other systems.
 For these reasons, SIMS is proven to be unreliable for identifying isotope shift.
 SIMS apparent isotope shift has been observed with excess heat, and without it, with deuterium and with hydrogen.  Moreover, since the Karabut group reports SIMS shifts due to Xenon bombardment (i.e., no hydrogen, no deuterium, no palladium, no electrolysis), then the link between isotope shift and electochemical cold fusion is much more ambiguous.
 I am also not excited about arguments for a transmutation origin of cathodic crud based on patterns in the distribution of elements.  Electrochemically transported crud should consist mainly of positive ions and not negative ions, and thus will create patterns corresponding to the periodic table (i.e., valence).  The presence of mostly positive ions on the cathode suggests chemical transport rather than a nuclear origin.
 Dr. George Miley and Dr. T. Mizuno have been among the strongest advocates for the existence of transmutation effects.  I like Mizuno’s arguments the best, because he has at least some data which shows a 100% isotope shift in copper (all Cu-63, no Cu-65, according to SIMS), plus he has detected Cu with several other techniques (but unfortunately not yet with NAA as far as I know) .  So this looks like a reasonable argument.  Even though SIMS is not very reliable, 100% vs. 0% is tough to explain.  Still, as argued above neutron activation, rather than SIMS, is probably the preferred technique for observing isotope shift.  However, Cu is a bit of a problem since one of the lines needed to make the identification is 511 keV, which unfortunately is used by several radionuclides.  The half life must be measured to distinguish between several radionuclides.
 On the other hand, Miley’s approach is to use both neutron activation analysis (NAA) and SIMS together.  This is the correct approach, as neutron activation can be compelling evidence for many (though not all) radionuclides.   The main problem with NAA is that it is possible to make mistakes with individual elements because two or more radionuclides often emit at the same gamma energy.  In addition, as mentioned above, some variation in isotopic abundance can occur naturally or in the refining process or during electrolysis.
 Miley’s isotope shift claims are not as spectacular as Mizuno’s, though Miley’s methodology appears to be better.  From my point of view, Miley’s data looks like chemical transport.  The biggest shifts occur for those elements in the smallest abundance, which arouses doubt. If you are willing to believe that the system is dirtier than Miley thinks, then the data is not really very anomalous.  I would like to see a single element with a well-studied, verifiably anomalous isotope shift as revealed by NAA for which all the error mechanisms have been considered and ruled out.  I have not yet seen this yet.
 Mizuno’s data looks much more anomalous, though better measurements are needed to be sure that he really has something.  Maybe he is right that the SIMS data is good enough to conclude that a Cu isotope shift has occurred, but I’m very suspicious of SIMS and would like to see a very good measurement with NAA to corroborate it.  I hope this is possible.
 I think Professor Richard Oriani fell into a trap in his paper, in which he talked about superatoms with weight of over 300.  Mass spec is simply not reliable for this purpose.  I felt badly for him, because my impression has been that he is a very competent mechanical engineer.  But now I suspect someone has sucked him into very dubious spectroscopic research, and he is no longer in his field of expertise.
 I would tend not to accept neutron activation results as proof of isotopic shift unless the shift is greater than about 10-15%  and several sigma for most heavy elements and I don’t accept uncorroborated SIMS at all.  It may be possible to accept lower shifts by NAA if it can be shown that the element in question never deviates from the literature value of isotope distribution no matter what its source; or if the NAA gamma structure allows multiple confirmations of isotopic distribution (i.e., multiple gamma lines) with high confidence.
 There is some possibility that Mizuno or Miley may have something, but I think I would like to see more before concurring with their contentions.   So there is some positive evidence, but it is still resting on some shaky assumptions. In any case, non-transmutation mechanisms, such as unexpected isotope separation should also be kept open, rather than limiting the options to nuclear transmutations or nothing.

 Radiation Detection
 
 In this area, the best results are being obtained by accelerators.  I think Kasagi’s work from the last conference shows that there are some anomalous reactions that happen at low energies (specifically simultaneous three-body D-D-D reactions, resulting in high energy alpha and proton emission which absolutely should not occur.  This is the only part of the cold fusion area which I feel confident in (but I’m not sure that it is at all related to the Pons-Fleischmann effect).  If a theoretical understanding of the effect can be reached, then it may be possible to say whether other claimed observables can actually occur.
 This year’s paper from Kasagi claims an enhanced fusion rate for Lipson’s PdO-Pd-PdO-Au heterostructure foils.  I’m not sure about that one, but I don’t see any glaring errors either.  The only way that I see how it could be wrong is if the control experiment (using pure Pd) absorbed substantially less deuterium than expected, whereas the heterostructure would have to have loaded better.
 Takahashi has attempted to extend the 3-body experiments, although most of the people I talked to felt that he needed to use a better detector in order to be certain that he really has observed a three body reaction.
 I was disappointed by a presentation by Ohmori, in which he claimed that some anomalous effect occurred during high current electrolysis, at which point the electrode becomes hot and generates a plasma.  A fantastic neutron flux (106 n/sec) was claimed, but then Ohmori admitted that this might be due to electromagnetic noise from the plasma.  Since he is not dead from radiation poisoning, the latter explanation is likely.  It seems to me that this is probably nothing more than the burnout heat flux (at a certain point, the heat transfer coefficient decreases, which causes the surface to heat up, which causes the heat transfer coefficient to further decrease, and so on.  This causes flash boiling, similar to what Ohmori observed).  The low quality of this paper frankly shocked me, and may cause me to re-evaluate the isotope shift papers by the Hokkaido University group.  My confidence in their research has been thoroughly shaken.
 Similarly, the work of the Iwamura group at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) was disappointing, as they reported non-reproducible results which have the definite appearance of electronic noise.  Several papers from China also fit into this category.
 There is a mysterious group referred to as the Cincinnati group, which apparently is hoping for fame and fortune via a variant of cold fusion.  They supposedly reduce radioactivity in an electrochemical cell.  Most persons believe that the radioactivity is simply transported to other places in the cell further away (or shielded) from the detector. Anyway, these super-proprietary systems are impossible to evaluate since they are kept so tightly under wraps.  After they win the Nobel Prize and receive a few multi-billion dollar utility contracts, perhaps they will be more forthcoming.  Or perhaps they will be too busy suing everybody who wants to work on their stuff.  However, in the meantime they will be bogged down for years due to the difficulties they have created for others to understand their work.   For some reason, Celani got involved in this research and submitted a “last minute” paper with “preliminary results” on this phenomenon.  If the cold fusion community wishes to be taken seriously, we need to stop supporting these sensational claims based upon sloppy, quasi-secret data.

 Helium

 At NHE lab, I observed helium on a quadrupole mass analyzer (QMA) from a variety of different sources, including leaks, contamination, etc.  One particularly troubling finding was that, if the turbopump got too warm (due, for example to pumping out deuterium from an outgasing sample), it would lose efficiency at low mass numbers, and peaks at Mass 1, 2, 3 and 4 could be observed.  At high resolution, the quadrupole mass analyzer would show a distinct He-4 peak under these conditions.  We checked this out with the maker of the QMA and were told that it is normal.  In other words, simply putting a metal hydride sample in the chamber and pumping down is enough to cause a helium peak to appear, but it is not from the sample, but only residual helium which is not being removed by the turbopump.  I wonder if others have seen this same effect and not realized what causes it.  If so, some of the claims for He-4 may be incorrect.
 Some of the most credible researchers in this area are Mel Miles and Ben Bush.  I talked to Bush a little about his results.  I think he had eight positive results and 6 negative results on control samples, if I’m not mistaken (i.e., 14 samples behaved as expected).  However, the positive results were all done one after the other.  I’d like to see future experiments done with an excess heat loaded cathode first (loaded with D2), and control experiment (maybe some other metal loaded with hydrogen, or something like that), so that the measurements alternate:  live, control, live, control, live, control, etc.  The significance of the result is not the observation of helium, since that is observed often for a number of reasons, but rather the correlation of the helium with what happened in the experiment.  I am not convinced that they eliminated all chances of systematic error.
 Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to sit down with Mel Miles.  I think he is a very careful and competent scientist, so I regret not getting a chance to review his helium data.  We did chitchat some about our experiences in Japan, but unfortunately we did not exchange much technical details.
 Yamaguchi of NTT retracted his helium results.  At the end of the conference, of the speakers (I think it was Bressani) tried to get Yamaguchi to say that his results were really positive, but that perhaps his equipment wasn’t sensitive enough to observe it.

 Tritium
 
 The work of Tom Claytor continues to produce positive results in tritium generation.  Claytor has a very good reputation, and is known as a careful and meticulous scientist.  Therefore, since his data has not been adequately refuted in the past several years, it needs to be taken seriously.
 Romodanov of Luch also continues to report results, but is less forthcoming about how his experiment works.
 However, the QMA observations of mass 5 (presumed to be DT) as suggested by the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries group has been adequately shown to be due to DDH, at least as far as I am concerned, based on experiments at NHE Laboratory.  Opening the chamber to put in the sample allows water vapor to enter, which enhances the DDH “background” temporarily.  The definitive test is a scintillation cocktail procedure, which showed no tritium excess in our experiments.  If there really were enough tritium to be seen on QMA, then we again would need to explain why the researchers are not dead.  However, the MHI guys have not retracted their data.

 Theoretical Work

 I’m not a competent cold fusion theorist, so I can’t really say much in this area. However, Peter Hagelstein of MIT is still saying that it is possible to couple lattice states and individual nuclear states, so I have to believe that experiments such as Kasagi’s are possible. Hagelstein is still interested in the possibility of dispersing nuclear transition energy in the surrounding lattice, as a means of producing excess heat.
 Kim of Purdue has attempted to describe ways by which three body interactions might occur, as well as unexpected shielding effects which might be present.  I wonder if some of his arguments might be applied to Claytor’s data.
 Again, I’m not an expert, but both of these men seemed to have good arguments of how anomalous nuclear reactions could be made to occur (of course they might have slipped a subscript somewhere, but I would never notice).  For that reason, I think that cold fusion research is not foolishness, but should be considered to be a hypothetical possibility at least. However, the burden of proof is on the experimenters to produce a bulletproof experiment that demonstrates an effect.
 The conference organizers did a good job of screening the theory papers, which in past years has been of very non-uniform quality.

 NHE Laboratory
 
 NHE Laboratory is now closing, and the equipment is being assigned to different universities pursuing cold fusion and related studies.  Some expected that there would be a financial windfall for basic research as a result of the lab closing, but as is usually the case, when a development program shuts down, basic research funding also becomes tight.  Similarly, I am amused at some CF advocates in the US who are lobbying for a cutting of hot fusion funds, assuming that that money would be reprogrammed for cold fusion.  Excess heat is not so unbelievable, but believing that the government is going to reprogram money for cold fusion is really a pathological belief!
 The conclusions of NHE Laboratory are generally negative concerning the reality of the cold fusion effect.  In most cases, positive results were achieved but subsequently proven to be due to artifacts or other non-nuclear effects.  I think the cold fusion community in general does not appreciate just how difficult it is to tell the difference between an artifact and a real result, and the conclusions from NHE Lab, though not necessarily the last word, should not be simply swept aside and ignored.
 I was kind of surprised to find myself listed as a coauthor on Lipson’s paper.  I’m not ready to buy into his conclusions because I haven’t been given the data files on the experiment.  I have a little routine for converting Japanese MCA data files into Excel format, which I think is necessary to evaluate the data.  I don’t think Lipson’s manual summaries of the data are adequate.  Still it is encouraging that his samples showed an apparently enhanced fusion cross section in Kasagi’s accelerator experiments, so perhaps something indeed happens.

 Summary
 
 As far as I can see, it looks like there is a good chance that Kasagi has observed some low energy accelerator effects (though they may be entirely unrelated to the Pons-Fleischmann effect).  These results strongly suggest that the nuclear state is coupled to the lattice state in some way which is not yet understood.  Accordingly, it could be a very important result, although perhaps not as wonderful as some would like.
 Similarly, Tom Claytor’s data at LANL continues to look good, and an adequate refutation of his data does not currently exist.  So I think that there is some reason for believing that there is a mechanism for enhancing nuclear transitions which are otherwise not anticipated, and I support further experimentation and theoretical investigations in this area.
 In particular, I believe that a replication of the Kasagi D-D-D experiment should be attempted.  I think that it is likely that if the anomaly is repeated, it will eventually be understood.
 As far as excess heat and transmutation are concerned, I think that the exotic effects are looking less and less likely as more time goes on and more and more ways of making false positives are identified.  Moreover, there are so many separate claims in the field (probably 100 or so) that they cannot all be true.  Thus, in reality most everyone in the field is skeptical about most of the data.  However, I think it probably is worthwhile in continuing to investigate some of the better experiments simply because the payoff is very high, even though the probability of success seems very low to me.
 Thus I think that accelerator experiments hold the key to cold fusion in the near term.  If these are understood, the physics may help resolve some of the other debates in the cold fusion community about what is and is not possible.  Moreover, no less a critic than Douglas Morrison has suggested at ICCF-6 that such research could be of interest, perhaps, in explaining solar processes.
 However, as I’ve become aware of more and more ways to generate false positives, I’m increasingly skeptical of electrochemical cells, excess heat, transmutation, etc.  I do not believe that all researchers performing such experiments are universally incompetent or guilty of pathological science.  On the contrary, I think there are some very good people involved in cold fusion research.  Still, these are very difficult experiments, and there are very subtle artifacts which can be generated.  It takes a lot of time and many, many control experiments to properly identify these artifacts.
 At this point, I tend to accept the results of Kasagi, and am optimistic about Claytor’s results.  The work of Storms, Takahashi, Miles, Bush, Mizuno, Miley, Case, Lipson, DeNinno and others looks interesting enough that it ought to be continued, though I am skeptical about the conclusion that a nuclear reaction is responsible for the unusual observations.
 My general advice in this field is that it is better to measure the same thing five ways, than to measure five different things one way.  Also, if a researcher can’t think of at least ten different control experiments, he or she just isn’t trying.
 

Elliot B. Kennel
Director of Research and Development
  From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:08:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA11748; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:00:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:00:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005d01bd7eba$05e5b940$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:56:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"NGCE71.0.Rt2.zVXMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18712 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: R. Wormus To: VCockeram Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 3:30 PM Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > >>Ron, >>I have run: >>(1) H2 with no K......No large heat output. >>(2) Ar with K............No large heat output. >>(3) Ar with no K.......No large heat output. >> >>Right now more expense for He I can't afford. > >>Regards, >>Vince Cockeram >>Las Vegas > >Vince, >Sorry, I missed the Ar runs. So it seems both H & K are necessary, very >interesting. Great work. There's always the Goodyear Blimp as a Helium source, or almost all of the Car Lots around town, Vince. You could pretend to be interested in a Sports Utility Vehicle. Or, if you are Fleet-of-Foot swipe a balloon off some poor little toddler in a stroller. :-) Several years ago I was helping get my 3 year-old grandson out of his car seat. He handed me the string of his helium-filled balloon, and I made the mistake of letting loose of it for a split-second. I think it crashed over by Roswell. Have you ever tried to placate a toddler when you lost their balloon. :-( Regards, Frederick > >___Ron > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:08:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA19536; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:05:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:05:11 -0700 Message-ID: <355A0B5B.6E15 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:06:35 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Murray: subjective scientific method 05/13/98 References: <199805131434_MC2-3CD7-FA2B compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Gbl6H3.0._m4.MaXMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18714 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 13, 1998 Hello Jed, Well, all human activity, including science, is irreducibly subjective, in that it is experienced directly only as events in personal awareness. So, hypotheses and explanations about awareness only arise within awareness itself, which leads to fundamental difficuties with self-referential paradoxes involving logical circles. So, joint subjective inquiry refers to such processes as meditating together, guided imagery, mutual hypnosis, remote viewing, or lucid dreaming training, in which two or more explorers follow some procedure and report back and forth what is progressively experienced. Thus, moment by moment, mutual agreement and understanding and language can be shared, as awareness shifts and expands. Through written reports, and, even better, videotapes, this exploration can be widely shared. The process of Zen satori training via paradoxical koans, which you may have read about, is an example: "Does the dog have the Buddha Nature?" The version I invented for my friend Sondra: "Does Lassie have the Buddha Nature?" The answer may be, "WU!", which translates as "No," or "Nothing". As one, as none, Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:14:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA21830; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:10:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:10:57 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:08:08 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805131810_MC2-3CE2-4D46 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"bWbcD.0.tK5.kfXMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18715 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I wrote that Fleischmann uses first principle physics to examine the cooling curve. Michael J. Schaffer replied: Actually, no. His analysis starts with 4 inch section of 1/4 inch id quartz tube to bright orange heat," but he introduces a "fudge factor" into his "on the fly" calibration technique. I do not know this refers to. What "quartz tube"? What paper is this from? We must be talking about two different papers. I refer to his examination of the low level heat in various papers, and especially the ICCF7 poster session. "Bright orange heat" sounds like the boil off phase. Even there the cathode does not reach incandescence, so I do not know what you mean. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:18:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22330; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:12:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:12:25 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:08:33 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Physics high priests are at it again! Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805131811_MC2-3CEB-D9FA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"MhrTE2.0.qS5.8hXMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18716 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I said that much of the hard core opposition to cold fusion at MIT and in the DoE comes from hot fusion scientists. Michael J. Schaffer pointed out: As an active "hot fusion" researcher, I know lots of other hot fusion scientists. The vast majority of them simply ignore cold fusion. They do not "oppose" it. They just stopped paying any attention years ago. Quite right. And the vast majority publish attacks in the Boston Globe or the Washington Post in March 1989 either. It took only a few. I expect the majority of hot fusion scientists are decent, ethical people who would never dream of launching a pre-emptive attack on a competing idea. Unfortunately, a handful of unethical scientists near the center of power and funding in Washington exert a lot of influence. This is true of other fields of science, and R&D. Politics, power and money attract unscrupulous people. Scientists outside of hot fusion joined the feeding frenzy. The editors of the New Scientists got a lot mileage out attacking cold fusion, and so did people like Taubes. To give parallel example, in the early 1980s the majority of S&L owners and employees were decent, law abiding people. It took only a handful to steal $200 billion (or however much it was). - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:34:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA15275; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:20:56 -0700 (PDT) X-ROUTED: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:14:30 -0500 X-TCP-IDENTITY: Paula Message-ID: <355A1CC0.98710833 southconn.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:20:48 -0400 From: paula X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"z9pn61.0.Yk3.4pXMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18717 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Maybe am far off here, but what about putting a 60 watt light bulb in the quartz tube, lower the pressure, and seeing what happens to the temperature.....????......steve opelc Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 11:21 AM 5/13/98, VCockeram wrote: > > >Would the resistor I make have to be close to the caculated tube > >resistance? (whatever that might be), Or some fixed value? Better > >to use the DC supply to drive the resistor, or as you suggest, just the > >variac? > > I think the main problem with calibration is getting a high temperature > resistor of the right physical size to fit the space in the tube, yet at a > current you can support with the leads into the tube. Most wire wound > resistors are going to be very low resistance, leaving you with the need to > use low voltage and high current to get the right wattage, about 55 watts. > Chances are the resistor you use will be less than one ohm. Looking at > the basic formulas for power P in terms of voltage V and current I: > > P = V*I = I^2*R = V^2/R > > V = (P*R)^0.5 > > I = (P/R)^0.5 > > If you have a one ohm resistor you need to apply I = (55/1)^0.5 = 7.4 A > and V= (55*1)^0.5 = 7.5 volts RMS get the required 55 watts for the > calibration. If you have a half ohm resistor you need to apply 5.24 volts > at 10.4 amps. This is at a limit where even a step down transformer begins > to be required. Another problem is getting the current to the filament > inside the tube. > > Anyone have suggestions for a small diameter, small length, 55 watt high > temp resistor? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 15:35:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA17389; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:32:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 14:30:49 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"4ZKVY1.0.ZF4.K-XMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18718 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:20 PM 5/13/98, paula wrote: >Maybe am far off here, but what about putting a 60 watt >light >bulb in the quartz tube, lower the pressure, and seeing what >happens to the temperature.....????......steve opelc > It's only a 1/4 inch inner diameter, right? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 16:24:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA00872; Wed, 13 May 1998 15:53:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 15:53:33 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ab01bd7ec1$bd82dd60$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:51:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"FdrDO1.0.SD.iHYMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18719 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 4:32 PM Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode >At 6:20 PM 5/13/98, paula wrote: >>Maybe am far off here, but what about putting a 60 watt >>light >>bulb in the quartz tube, lower the pressure, and seeing what >>happens to the temperature.....????......steve opelc >> > >It's only a 1/4 inch inner diameter, right? So WATT? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 16:55:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07832; Wed, 13 May 1998 16:29:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:29:27 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:23:16 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Respect and Civility In-Reply-To: <19980513204214.8079.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"h1iki2.0.Gw1.LpYMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18720 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thank you Anton. On Wed, 13 May 1998, Anton Rager wrote: > Looks like it's almost time for adult supervision~! > > > Why do several individuals on this list _insist_ on using insults in > their discussions???? It accomplishes nothing. Persuasive > writing/speaking 101 normally teaches you -- insulting your audience > only alienates them [OK -- I'm making this up....but you don't gain > support with insults]. I'm not against good > discussion/argument/etc... But these stabs at each other are out-side > the scope of discussion. > > You know who you are. Please stop it. > > > Regards, > == > Anton Rager > a_rager yahoo.com > > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 17:03:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09978; Wed, 13 May 1998 16:38:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:38:08 -0700 Message-ID: <355A2123.5EE6 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:39:32 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Kennel gets Rothwell responses, RPKP runs 05/13/98 References: <199805131811_MC2-3CEB-D9F9 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"AXhcM2.0.eR2.VxYMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18722 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 13, 1998 Hello Jed Rothwell, Thanks, I'm glad to know you sent Kennel your cogent responses. Many of your points are convincing to me. I just tried two runs with the RPKP Bell Curve experiment [http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/bellcurve/], about 3 minutes a run to see if the cumulative probability shifts to the left or right, while the unique random sequence of 1024 O's and 1's, generated months ago and stored, never seen or used by anyone else, runs along cheerily-- I got completely chance scores. All runs by everyone, if selected for Record ahead of time, are stored into a common cumulative probability database, which can be viewed each day. Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 17:05:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09722; Wed, 13 May 1998 16:37:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 16:37:19 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:31:08 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Resistor Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"N6OwY1.0.kN2.jwYMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18721 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vince, Try cutting small length of, carbon, iron wire, steel, nichrome, ss, and so on.... or, in other words, make your own. You can usually file away at it until you get the probable range... and use of two different materials can lower the sensitivty to heat. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 17:24:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA03441; Wed, 13 May 1998 17:14:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:14:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:13:10 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Resent-Message-ID: <"n2Pge.0.gr.ETZMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18723 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry. I seem to have clicked in a phrase from an old clipboard from a reply to Vince that did not belong here in the discussion of Fleischmann's calorimetry. The correct message is: I don't want to get deeply into this calorimetry debate, but I have looked into Fleischmann's a couple of times. Jed wrote: >He uses complex, first principle physics to determine this, ... Actually, no. His analysis _starts_ with first principle physics, but he introduces a "fudge factor" into his "on the fly" calibration technique, which is not first principle at all, just a factor to make his cell _look_ like it is working well where it breaks away from "first principles physics." >...It should fit Newton's law no matter what the heat transfer >coefficient of the cell wall is. It should, but Fleischmann's doesn't. That's why there is a fudge factor. 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 May 13 18:02:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21849; Wed, 13 May 1998 17:26:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:26:53 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:30:09 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd7eb6$4e50fcc0$3f6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"MvD_x3.0.JL5.CfZMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18725 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince Cockeram wrote: >At the start of the run voltage was 1600 at 46 milliamps. The voltage >and amperage gradually fell during the run, ending up at >1500 volts at 36.5 milliamps. Now for the kicker. >Temperature rose steadly throughout the run which lasted 1 hour to >578.4 C +/- 0.1C. - Hi Vince, This is quite impressive, qualitatively it looks like you are getting more than 50 watts of heat out. You need some form of thermal calibration to get numbers for the heat output. Horace's internal coil heater looks like the easiest method for a crude but possibly sufficient thermal calibration of power input versus thermocouple temperature. The length of the coil should match the gap between electrodes. It will probably be more practical to use a lower DC voltage to heat the coil, since obtaining the high resistance to match the discharge would require too much wire. - You mention the final 578 C temperature, could you provide a few temperature numbers near the beginning of the run to go with the 1600V at 46 ma tube readings? - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 18:03:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21087; Wed, 13 May 1998 17:24:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:24:45 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <41753b3.35591a7c aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:26:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"3Nfip2.0.J95.BdZMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18724 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, You said you want to view your discharge tube voltage with an oscilloscope. Since the scope cannot be connected far from ground potential, you will need to change your circuit. May I suggest: PS(+)---XX--16-lamps--XX------[///////////]----(A)----PS(-) = gnd. |----(V)----| | | | | _______ | |______________| scope |---| |_______| [////////] --- denotes the quartz tube XX---- etc. denotes the 16 7.5 watt ballast lamps (A)--- denotes the ammeter (V)--- denotes the voltmeter The voltage drop across the ammeter is very small and is negligible. 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 May 13 18:12:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA07640; Wed, 13 May 1998 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805140039.TAA25195 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Help on math Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:47:26 -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: <"mXH0X2.0.Ht1.a0aMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18726 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are equal to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 18:29:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA08122; Wed, 13 May 1998 18:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08EF xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 17:55:08 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"UdE2i.0.i-1.3DaMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18727 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince Get a copy of Electronics Now magazine and look in the ads in the back for an A/D converter card for your computer. I bought one for about $100. You can get op-amps from radio shack for a few bucks, and build your own front end for the A/D to measure voltage and current to your device. Talk to some professors of EE at UNLV about this setup, and also the lab tech who runs the basic electronics lab. Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 18:45:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA00822; Wed, 13 May 1998 18:36:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:36:47 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00db01bd7ed8$7b5efba0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:34:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"eGUlQ2.0.PC.igaMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18728 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The incentive behind suggesting this experiment,(which Vince Cockeram was brave enough to get under way)in the first place was predicated on the following possible reaction sequence: 1, K + heat-photons ----> K+ + e- 2, K+ + H2 ----> KH + H+ 3, H+ + e- (collision-lepton pair production) ----> Quasi-Neutron + 2 Kev 4,(very low probability)Quasi-Neutron + H ---> Deuteron + Neutrino + gammas Lithium should serve in place of Potassium, possibly with a higher yield,then: Quasi-Neutron + Lithium ---> 3Li8 + neutrino then in 0.8 sec, 3Li8 ---> 2 He4 + 16.0 Mev The Correa Device (a hydrogen discharge device)is supposedly O/U, but, doesn't use the alkali "catalysts"? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 18:52:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA12637; Wed, 13 May 1998 18:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:41:51 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805132144_MC2-3CF0-8409 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"OgJ5o3.0.M53.FqaMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18730 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Michael J. Schaffer writes: Actually, no. [Fleischmann's] analysis _starts_ with first principle physics, but he introduces a "fudge factor" into his "on the fly" calibration technique, which is not first principle at all, just a factor to make his cell _look_ like it is working well where it breaks away from "first principles physics." I honestly think you misunderstand. That's the excess heat! The "break away" part is what you see with Pd D2O but never with Pt. Read it again and communicate with Martin if you still think there is a fudge factor. Can you cite a sentence or paragraph from, say, the ICCF3 paper so I can tell what you are talking about? (The ICCF3 Blue Book is always right next to my desk.) - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 18:50:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA02872; Wed, 13 May 1998 18:44:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:44:37 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:41:28 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Physics high priests are at it again! Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805132144_MC2-3CF0-8408 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"H26A_2.0.ki.3oaMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18729 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Oops. I meant to type: Quite right. And the vast majority of hot fusion scientists DID NOT publish attacks in the Boston Globe or the Washington Post in March 1989 either . . . Most of them, then and now, seem reasonably open minded to me. I think the people fighting against CF are a minority who are more interested in money than science. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 18:54:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA12927; Wed, 13 May 1998 18:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:42:09 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Respect and Civility Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805132146_MC2-3CE0-78D4 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"IRWtt2.0.v93.AsaMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18731 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To: Vortex Anton Rager writes: Why do several individuals on this list _insist_ on using insults in their discussions???? It accomplishes nothing. Oh, don't be so serious . . . or thin skinned. Trading a few insults, satire and barbed jokes will not hurt anyone. It is human nature. We are not emotionless machines. Besides, I love writing things like: "Acupuncture and massage techniques for the relief of neuralgia in cadavers." Hey it accomplished something -- I got a good laugh out of it. Okay, maybe other people don't appreciate jokes about dead people, but I am a connoisseur of Charles Addams cartoons. The phrase that prompted it was: "the possibilities of subjective scientific method." That's simply hysterical. It's the funniest thing I've seen in weeks. I suspect Rich Murray meant it seriously, because he does not appear to have much of a sense of humor, but too bad for him. Anyone who says *that* is fair game. I have not seen any exchanges here lately that I would consider inappropriate at a physics conference or the Dean's tea party at Harvard or Oxford. That's a reasonable standard. People have come down on Gene for venting his spleen. Again I say: we are not emotionless machines. If you suffered one-tenth of what Gene has been through, you would go postal at the next session of the APS. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 19:18:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA13288; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:14:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:14:16 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:14:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Help on math Resent-Message-ID: <"YWSq93.0.RF3.sDbMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18732 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:47 PM 5/13/98, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are >equal >to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. Hello Robert, I'm afraid you are comparing apples and oranges. The camparison cannot be made without a voltage in the picture. The 33 amp hr refers to total charge delivered, while farads are units of charge stored per volt. The 33 amp hr. refers to a total charge Q delivered by the battery. An ampere is one coulomb per second, which is about 6.025x10^18 electrons per second. The 33 amp hr is 33 coulombs per second for 3600 seconds, or 118,800 coulombs, a very big charge. The charge held by a capacitor Q is a function of voltage V and capacitance C: Q = C*V so to figure out the equivalent capacitor C to deliver the same charge: C = Q/V = (118,800 columbs)/V If the capacitor is charged to 1 volt then it needs to be 118,800 farads. If it is charged to 118,800 volts, it need only be one farad. It takes huge capacitance to match the charge pushing capability of batteries. I suspect you might be more interested in equivalent energies. Here again it is apples and oranges, and you must have the voltage(s) involved. If you are talking about a 1.5 V battery delivering 33 amp hr, then the total energy E delivered is: E = (33 A-hr)(1.5 V)(3600 sec/hr) = 178,200 W-s = 178,200 J There is a problem using capacitors to deliver a fixed voltage, however, because without regulation they deliver a logarithmicaly declining voltage. Let's ingnore that fact and go for equivalent energy anyway. The energy stored by a capacitor is given by: E = 1/2*C*V^2 thus C = 2*E/V^2 So, to store the same 178,200 J in a 1.5 V capacitor would take a capacitance of C = 2(178,200 J)/(1.5^2) = 158,400 farads However, if you store the same energy in a 100,000 V capacitor it only takes: C = 2(178,200 J)/(10^5)^2 = 3.564x10^-5 farads = 35.64 microfarads a very big difference. If you want to pick your own voltage that applies to *both* the capacitor and battery we have: E = (33 A-hr)V(3600 sec/hr) = 1/2*C*V^2 C = 2(33)(3600)/V = 237,600/V so just plug your V into the following to compute equivalent energy holding farads at that voltage: C = 237,600/V farads Hope I got all that right. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 19:21:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA13673; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:15:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:15:21 -0700 From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:14:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: help on math Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"_YBRw.0.TL3.tEbMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18733 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Farads do not represent energy. The energy in joules that can be stored in a capacitor depends on the voltage applied across the capacitor. energy in joules = 1/2 cV V , (this is from memory you may want to double check) one joule = one amp for one second Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 19:25:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17491; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:23:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:23:02 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 18:22:57 -0800 To: "Frederick J. Sparber" , "Vortex-L" From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Cc: "George" Resent-Message-ID: <"_85DC3.0.0H4.1MbMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18734 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:34 PM 5/13/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The incentive behind suggesting this experiment,(which Vince Cockeram was >brave enough to get under way)in the first place >was predicated on the following possible reaction sequence: > >1, K + heat-photons ----> K+ + e- > >2, K+ + H2 ----> KH + H+ > >3, H+ + e- (collision-lepton pair production) ----> Quasi-Neutron + 2 Kev >4,(very low probability)Quasi-Neutron + H ---> > Deuteron + Neutrino + gammas [snip] Is that true? Here I thought he was chasing Mill's hydrino power! Oh well, a rose by any other name... 8^) It sure would be neat if we had some kind of thread tracing capability for the memory impaired like me. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 19:34:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA20640; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:32:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:32:50 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980513223613.00cd8bd0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:36:13 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight In-Reply-To: <19980513220030.AAA573 Default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"45sJs1.0.P25.HVbMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18735 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:00 PM 5/13/98 +0000, Ed Wall wrote: >My point was that your objections were to relatively primative robots. >Anything the human eye can witness on the spot can be done better with >enough equipment remotely. Cameras can look with filtering and at bands >that are not visible to humans. With stereoscopic separation, depth >perception can be dramatically enhanced. Ultimately, it all comes to human >perception anyway. NO! That is exactly my point. Although you would think that imaging technology has far surpassed the human eye, I am an expert on the subject, and it hasn't. The stupid thing is just about any off-the shelf computer nowadays has output graphics much better than needed for average human viewing. But cameras, whether photgraphic or electronic suffer by comparison to the human eye. Consider just one recent project, upgrading the GEODSS satellite tracking cameras. These cameras are basically telescopes with one meter apertures and we were replacing imaging photomultiplier tube technology with a CCD detector built expecially for the purpose and cooled (with LN2) to improve sensitivity. The CCD array is full wafer size, and has four separate arrays each with separate readout circuts, to speed up getting data off-chip. I could go into the details of the image processing computers and software, but I won't bore you. Okay, here is the bottom line. GEODSS works and works well, keeping track of all those satellites up there. But based on real head-to-head tests, someone with good eyesight can outperform the GEODSS cameras with a 8" telescope. Why? Because the human eye has better: Dynamic range--by several orders of magnitude. Human eye, over six orders of magnitude, film best case about three, CCDs, four. Sensitivity--with the GEODSS CCD, as few as fifty photons can be recognized, and only a few hundred are required to generate a good track. These CCDs have almost all the original silicon etched away and are back lighted. Basically think of taking the top few microns of an chip, and flipping it over. This gets the metalization layers out of the way, and allows the chip to collect nearly 40% of the incident photons. As noted above the human eye (dark adapted and using averted vision to avoid the blind spot) is capable of detecting single photons, and integrating them over several seconds... Color sensitivity... I could go on, but why bother. My point about Apollo 8 was that putting those astronauts near the moon returned more data than all the preceding robot missions, and hundreds of years of telescopic observation. Much of the data returned was in the form of photographs, but we had human eyes there to adjust and aim the cameras to get the maximum information. Of course, some of it wasn't, see above about dynamic range. The astronauts could easily see in lunar shadows, but getting pictures was impossible then. On the surface, the cameras could be "brought to the subject" then adjusted for lighting conditions. 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 May 13 19:41:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA22160; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:38:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:38:29 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980513224152.00ccaea0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:41:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Help on math In-Reply-To: <199805140039.TAA25195 neon.prysm.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"QA44x2.0.8Q5.ZabMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18736 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:47 PM 5/13/98 -0500, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are >equal >to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. One ampere for one second equals one farad. So 33 amps for 3600 seconds equals 118800 farads. But the battery and the capacitor still wouldn't be equivalent. 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 May 13 19:46:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA22686; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:42:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <010101bd7ee1$77b78860$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "Vortex-L" Subject: Re: Respect and Civility Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:38:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"DZlMv2.0.LY5.aebMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18738 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 7:51 PM Subject: Respect and Civility >To: Vortex > >Anton Rager writes: > > Why do several individuals on this list _insist_ on using insults in > their discussions???? It accomplishes nothing. Hey, Anton, Jed doesn't get cracking until his blood pressure (systolic) pushes his I.Q. level past 150. Otherwise when he relaxes,both drop to about 100. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Oh, don't be so serious . . . or thin skinned. Trading a few insults, satire >and barbed jokes will not hurt anyone. It is human nature. We are not >emotionless machines. Besides, I love writing things like: "Acupuncture and >massage techniques for the relief of neuralgia in cadavers." Hey it >accomplished something -- I got a good laugh out of it. Okay, maybe other >people don't appreciate jokes about dead people, but I am a connoisseur of >Charles Addams cartoons. The phrase that prompted it was: "the possibilities >of subjective scientific method." That's simply hysterical. It's the funniest >thing I've seen in weeks. I suspect Rich Murray meant it seriously, because he >does not appear to have much of a sense of humor, but too bad for him. Anyone >who says *that* is fair game. > >I have not seen any exchanges here lately that I would consider inappropriate >at a physics conference or the Dean's tea party at Harvard or Oxford. That's a >reasonable standard. > >People have come down on Gene for venting his spleen. Again I say: we are not >emotionless machines. If you suffered one-tenth of what Gene has been through, >you would go postal at the next session of the APS. > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 19:52:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA22448; Wed, 13 May 1998 19:39:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:39:35 -0700 Message-ID: <355A5997.6E8B interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:40:23 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: help on math References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7pXDM2.0.ZU5.bbbMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18737 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC wrote: > > one joule = one amp for one second Frank, you mean: one joule = one amp delivered at one volt for one second, right? Frank S. (Representing the geriatric truth squad) :-) PS: Ease up on those strange women, Frank! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 20:08:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26772; Wed, 13 May 1998 20:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:05:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:03:05 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Berry: Psi field unification theory 05/13/98 Resent-Message-ID: <"6vzFU2.0.CY6.jzbMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18739 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:37 AM 5/13/98, Rich Murray wrote: >PSI FIELD UNIFICATION THEORY - A CONCEPT PAPER > >AUTHOR - CRAIG BERRY (c)1998 [snip] > I challenge all who read this to place aside a need for complex >theorems, and look at this as a real possibility. The beauty of this >concept lies in its simplicity. Unfortunately, the degree of complexity here matches the degree of utility. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 20:07:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA28048; Wed, 13 May 1998 20:04:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:04:08 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <012c01bd7ee4$affeda40$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:02:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"fc6LJ2.0.9s6.cybMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18740 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: Frederick J. Sparber ; Vortex-L Cc: George Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 8:23 PM Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode >At 7:34 PM 5/13/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>The incentive behind suggesting this experiment,(which Vince Cockeram was >>brave enough to get under way)in the first place >>was predicated on the following possible reaction sequence: >> >>1, K + heat-photons ----> K+ + e- >> >>2, K+ + H2 ----> KH + H+ >> >>3, H+ + e- (collision-lepton pair production) ----> Quasi-Neutron + 2 Kev >>4,(very low probability)Quasi-Neutron + H ---> >> Deuteron + Neutrino + gammas >[snip] > > >Is that true? Here I thought he was chasing Mill's hydrino power! Oh >well, a rose by any other name... 8^) You can blame Frank Stenger and Mike Schaffer for suggesting to Scott Little during the Scott's BLP experiments that he run an electrical discharge in the cell to clean it up, for this tangent. R&D can taken many paths, can't it? BTW. The electron-proton collision-created lepton pair should be a Neutrino and an Antineutrino, each with a rest mass-energy of 0.5 to 1.7 ev. The charge (+/-)q' of these will be 90 and 270 degrees shifted phase wrt regular particle charge. I think the mechanism of "QM Tunneling"in HOT or COLD FUSION, is in this mix. > >It sure would be neat if we had some kind of thread tracing capability for >the memory impaired like me. I suppose it"s in the BLP test thread archives. Regards, Frederick >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 20:14:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA28339; Wed, 13 May 1998 20:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:12:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 19:10:42 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode - minor correction Resent-Message-ID: <"7I-d41.0.hw6.m4cMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18741 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: "If we assume 70 percent ripple, 30 percent DC, that means the true power is P = 100/30 * 55 watts = 183 watts. That is a different ballpark. The total AC + DC current is way up there also, then, at about 1.23 A." I slipped a digit (or a digit slipped) on the current calc. The true current should be (100/30)(37 mA) = 0.123 A. Still well in the mA range. The 183 watts still looks right. >From Vince's description of heat damage it seem to me a current reduction is in order for the H2 + K run. If that is done it needs to be done for the H run also. About the quartz (or glass) tube walls thinning, I hope that is not due to hot alkalai washing! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 20:39:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA02820; Wed, 13 May 1998 20:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:35:20 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:32:26 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"-c4EW2.0.uh.pPcMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18742 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-13 17:25:46 EDT, you write: > Vince should have a more accurate watch than Rumford had. :-) > Regards, Frederick I use a grandfathers clock with wood gears to set my digital watch. ;-) Vince From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 20:37:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA06335; Wed, 13 May 1998 20:34:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:34:34 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <64426a0e.355a65d2 aol.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:32:33 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"iji4k1.0.nY1.8PcMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18744 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-13 17:57:47 EDT, you write: <> > The cheapest quickest fix is probably to use a fullwave bridge and much > bigger capacitor. <> > If you decide to go this route I'll send you some 20 kV 100 mA diodes > (free of course). > Regards, > Horace Heffner A while back this from: >> herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer) >> Midwest Surplus >> 1-800 523 3690 >> In Ohio ... GOOD FOLKS! .... about 7 miles from me, go there >> all the time. >> 5.95 each >> Big diode .... I use and they are good. >> 10 kv 750 mA >> part hvp-10 J I will contact them tomorrow. Thanks to John for for the pointer. They hopefully will have some HV oil fill caps too. Plans for the next couple of weeks: (1) Rerun the H2 with K runs to make sure I'm not making errors. Still using the same K fill from Friday, May 8th. The tube is dirty with evaporated W and K, but hey, it still cooks. (2) Clean out the tube and find the "sweet spot" gas fill pressure that will produce the highest temperature with H2 no K. Once I find the best fill pressure, do a hour or so run at that pressure. (3) Do the same as (2) above with Argon.....then, when I get a nice ripple free power source....sigh.....start all over again. (4) Make up a nichrome wire resistor to fit inside the tube. Fill with H2 at the sweet spot pressure, run the tempreature up to 578 C or so and find out how much power it takes to do that. This will be _most_ interesting to me. Will post results of all runs here. Wish list: sombody else try this. BTW, Herbach and Rademan (H&R) 1-800-848-8001 (24 Hrs) stocks the quartz tubes I use for one buck each. Stock # TM91LMP1734. Page 27 of 1998 catalog issue 2. They are 13 1/8 inches long. Just cut one end off, rip out the filiment, (save the W filiment to make the upper electrode), a couple of 5/16" brass fittings at Home Depot, some O-Rings at Pep Boys and you are ready (almost) for fire in the hole. Construction details to any who ask. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 20:39:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA02900; Wed, 13 May 1998 20:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 20:35:39 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <710e610e.355a65d0 aol.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:32:31 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"gHb373.0.Bj.6QcMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18743 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-13 20:28:05 EDT, you write: << snip good resistor stuff >> > You mention the final 578 C temperature, could you provide > a few temperature numbers near the beginning of > the run to go with the 1600V at 46 ma tube readings? > George Holz Sure, here is the run. The first ten minutes I did not record due to getting the pressure right on and anyway the glow is very finicky during warmup. Temperatures measures with a Fluke Model 51 thermocouple meter. Voltage and amperage measured with Simpson 260 meters. M=minutes Tc=degrees C +/- 0.1C VDC=voltage measures across the tube at the tube contacts. Best vacuum at run start 26.8 in Hg indicated. Best vacuum at run end 26.8 in Hg indicated. Thus,H2 fill is 6.0 in Hg. M_____Tc__mA__VDC____Comments________ 0 20.5 46 1600 5 513.5 10 516.0 15 518.0 Tube pressure up slightly to 20.4 20 542.0 45 1585 Adjusted pressure to 20.8 25 547.5 30 548.1 35 549.9 44 1570 40 550.6 45 553.3 43 1550 50 554.0 55 558.2 60 559.4 41 1540 65 561.2 70 562.3 75 562.9 40 1530 80 565.8 85 574.0 39 1525 90 575.6 95 575.7 100 576.0 38 1510 105 578.0 110 578.1 115 578.4 36.5 1500 ======End of Run================= Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 21:22:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA18812; Wed, 13 May 1998 21:19:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:19:24 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355A70D8.2308 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:19:36 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Physics high priests are at it again! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dHydv1.0.jb4.A3dMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18745 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: > > As an active "hot fusion" researcher, I know lots of other hot fusion > scientists. The vast majority of them simply ignore cold fusion. > They do not "oppose" it. I agree completely, speaking as a semi-retired hot fusion researcher (I may go back on the front lines when Bob Taylor's new "Electric Tokamak" being built 60 feet below me is completed next year...). Horace Heffner hit that nail on the head a few days back, to the effect that anyone who even *mentions* the words cold fusion, even in an entirely negative context like Parks or Taubes, is not part of Gene's problem. His real problem is that the vast majority of scientists pay *no attention whatsoever* to the subject. As someone once said, "as long as they spell your name right..." -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 21:23:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA19547; Wed, 13 May 1998 21:21:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:21:01 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 03:24:56 +0000 Message-ID: <19980514032453.AAA28645 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"W3DYQ1.0.Jn4.h4dMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18746 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry wrote: >Ed Wall wrote: >> >> I have to question his motive if he has no interest in >> seriously commenting on McKubre's or Claytor's work for >> only an investment of time, but invests a >> lot of resources in the least likely candidate, >> Joe Champion, with the most outrageous claims. >> Might Barry be irrational? > >The question is "candidate" for what? > >Indeed, of the class of people making claims in the >cold fusion area, I selected Joe as the *most* likely >candidate---the the most likely candidate for a person >who's work I could investigate and definitively figure >out what was really going on. > >There are two things that made Joe an exceptional >choice: (1) his claimed effects were huge, not small, >and theorfore easier to work with. (2) Joe was entirely >willing to work to whatever degree necessary to investigate >his claims. > OK, so right off the bat, did you find ounces of Au? Not that I heard. You found traces, as did Bockris. Look, for all I know, there is some kind of transmutation going on a miniscule scale in his work, but you concured that Joe C. is, if not an outright liar, a 'pathological exaggerator,' I think the term was (though I prefer prevaricator) and you would know, I suppose. >From his writing, I surmised his scientific education was self-taught. I think that you mentioned that his laboratory was not the place to try and avoid contamination, but yet, you poured a lot of effort into trying to find where the ppm quantities originated. I salute your scientific spirit, but unless you could find huge S/N, it seems reasonable to believe that your skills could be better employed. I admit that I supported the idea of your investigating his work and I was wrong, but you're the physics professor. People, including us, are carried away by a desire to believe things that they know are probably not true, out of a perfectly reasonable desire to not miss what might just be true. I know even from my day to day experiences troubleshooting electronics that if something looks really weird, it is probably because I am not using the test equipment correctly or failing to compensate for some unseen subsystem or something that is not as passive or predictable as I thought. Facts tend to dispell excitement, but sometimes, they are the reason for it. >For example, CETI is a (1), but most definitely not a (2). >Same with E-Quest. > >You say Joe's claims were "outrageous". Indeed they were, but: >(a) they were no more fundamentally outrageous than the claims of >many other CF investigators, including "respectable" >folks like Miley who were reporting transmutation, which is >no more nor less than what Joe claimed. As Joe suggested, >if you did it in a test-tube you got Miley's >micrograms, and if you did it in a huge vat, you got >Champions grams. Logical in itself, no? Stipulated, but did he show you grams of product? Did you see anomalous isotope ratios? I think not. What made Champions claims outrageous was his apparent lack of background to come to the conclusions he announced far and wide, not to mention lack of wealth from selling his product. In this context, Miley is not outrageous, particularly because he independently replicated Patterson's (another highly qualified individual). I don't wish to make the mistake of only paying attention to people with doctorates, but I have a fair notion of what it takes to get one. Such individuals tend to know experimental techniques that had to be mastered as part of their academic success. Now, I know you also did an attempted replication of a Patterson bead type experiment. I tried a replication of a Mills cell. These were learning experiences and in my case, nothing to write up. I tend to take Jed at his word because he does admit mistakes and is generally quite consistent and reasonable, IMO. I have read some papers by the notables to whom he makes frequent reference and can understand his difficulty in grasping the subtle elements of calorimetry. You are a novice electrochemist, yes? >And compared to the alternatives in the area of large scale >claims, I found Joes claims relatively tame---at least Joe could provide >credible R&D histories for the development of his techniques, >as opposed to having them dictated by God a 'la the Cinncinatti >Group, for example. Sorry, I don't see a big distinction there. Remember, we're talking alchemy here. Do you know any authorities in the field? >Addressing your main point, as to why I don't investigate >the work of McKubre or Claytor: thats quite easy, I of >course gave this issue serious consideration before follwoing >the Champion track. the simple reason is that a proper investigation >of their work is much more difficult, in terms of the equipment >needed and the scientific expertise needed, and the experimental >protocols, because their claimed results are far more subtle, >and the equipment and materials required for their work >is much more complex. Well, fine, but Jed is trying to develop discussion of the experiments and protocol of these high quality and successful experiments, which is very appropriate for Vortex. He claims that you refused to comment on these experiments. Not that he should direct your input, but my understanding is that tritium detection is not an object of controversy. By all means, educate us if you will, about scintillation counters' failure modes that might invalidate the astounding results of Claytor's highly reproducable work. Tell us about tritium contamination. Maybe you cannot improve the method of McKubre or Claytor, but independent replication is, I am confident you concur, the appropriate next step. If you cannot or do not wish to attempt such experiments for the same reasons that I do not attempt them (money, time, laboratory, talent, knowledge, etc.), what about the Li-based fuel additive that was in IE #18 (you really ought to read this one). If you have the ability to detect alpha particles reliably, this is one simple experiment, IMO, and I would like to know why it is not so simple as it appears, if I am wrong. > >Basically, after failing to get any collaboration going with >CETI (entirely due to their unwillingness to provide any >sort of low cost DEMO unit I could evaluate and show to my colleagues), >I assesed the CF world after Bockris's LENR conferance and saw the >following: (a) the new big claim was widespread transmuation, >a la Miley and Ohmori, etc. (b) there was a bi-modal distribution >of results, which academic scientists claiming very subtle small >scale effects, and non-academic (CETI, E-QUEST, CG, Champion,...) >claiming the same principles gave them large scale "industrial" >effects. Since the small scale results were beyond my easy >ability to investigate, I decide to attack the large scale, >and of those players, Champion had the greatest combination >of accessibility and credibility (the credibility due to >the word of Bockris and others, not Joe himself!). > Well, I have no idea what Bockris said, but anyone can be fooled. He has solid reasons to believe that LENR is real. Maybe Joe saw an easy mark through whom to gain some real credibility. I simply do not know. >So, you had reason to "question my motive", and I explained. Are >you satisfied? Yes. >Now why don't you provide some background on >your research efforts in CF, because I have reason to suspect you of >being a govenrment disinformation agent intent on discrediting >the scientists intent on discrediting CF. ;-) Help! I've been made! Hey, I resemble that remark! I am a serious wannabe CF experimenter with a BSEE and a fascination for physics. Ed Wall wrote: > > We would like to see somebody in your position firmly > rooting some goal-posts. Barry: Goal-posts are not the right analogy, for there is no perfomance hurdle that a given researcher can surmount that "proves" anything. Ed: Huh? Care to rephrase? At the risk of appearing too Jed-like (which is not a bad thing, but I like to think for myself), if a product heats my house and requires only a little D20 once a decade, I think we could define it as proof of more than chemical reactions taking place. Barry: But, the procedure is very simple, and requires no knowledge of physics: (1) Claimant provides working model of his device to a good number of independent researchers, and/or assists them in building their own replications, that in either case the claimant certifies as "functioning properly". (2) Independent researchers verify that the effect is repeatable, and that it truly is "O/U". Seems pretty reasonable to me, no? has anyone done it? Ed: Apparently, you do believe that Miley's replication of Patterson's work does not meet this criteria. Barry: No, because if they had, by definition the experiment would be transmittable from one researcher to the next, and therefore spread like wildfire through the science and engineering community (even if the device itself had to be passed on, due to some inabaility to copy it). Ed: That is an assumption about human behavior, which is risky. There are a multitude of factors, not all of which are known, that would influence the reproducibility issue. Have you asked Miley to lend you his apparatus? Barry: The only thing that ever truly held back CF was lack of repeatability...all else would be inconsequential if the effects were easily repeatable. Ed: Unsupported conjecture. Barry: In the case of Case, he could easily start by providing Jed/Gene and Scott with working models to actually *test*, but he has chosen to proceed by building a self-sustainer. Not the most direct way to get to my "goal posts". Ed: I have to disagree with you here. A self-sustainer running long enough, if it works, is about as direct a proof of something truly novel and valuable and in all likelihood, nuclear, as can be. No quibbling about calibration, pump heating, thermocouple placements, etc. Maybe you are playing devil's advocate on this one to shake out the cobwebs and force us to define the reasons why it would be such proof, like a typical physics professor. In our time, skepticism is held up as the standard and method by which modern science progresses. Chris Tinsley might have said this is a 'reification' (to re-coin a word). It is true that skepticism may keep us from seeing illusions, but if we use it as an unfailing reference instead of a tool of reason, it can keep us from seeing the obvious. Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 21:28:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA12056; Wed, 13 May 1998 21:27:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:27:02 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355A721D.6D2F math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:25:01 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight References: <19980513220030.AAA573 Default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1Fakt2.0.Gy2.JAdMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18747 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > > My memories of the Mercury program are mainly limited > to what my father, an > engineer for Martin-Marietta, told me when I was a wee lad. > He worked on the Apollo missions That's interesting, my wife's father was an engineer at GE, and he worked on the entire series, mercury through skylab. My wife grew up living near Johnson space center in houston, knew a lot of the astronauts kids, and all that. Plenty of good stories... -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:14:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA29224; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:12:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:12:53 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980514000857.00816280 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 00:08:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: tomorrow: Case Run 5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5ZNN31.0.T87.KrdMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18748 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Today I received the sample of "known good" catalyst from Dr. Case. I also modified my gas/vacuum manifold to accomodate a pressure transducer. Run 5 should start tomorrow morning. Look for results by the end of the day. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:17:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA30049; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:16:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:16:07 -0700 Message-ID: <355A7E41.6002 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 01:16:49 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: <64426a0e.355a65d2 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_RWL_1.0.RL7.MudMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18749 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > (snip) > (2) Clean out the tube and find the "sweet spot" gas fill pressure > that will produce the highest temperature with H2 no K. Once > I find the best fill pressure, do a hour or so run at that pressure. Hey, Vince, I don't mean to butt in on your experiment protocol, but I tend to go along with Horace in questioning this quest for high temperature right now. Horace wrote: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Why not simply drop the voltage? "Optimum" operating conditions are not at this point conditions which produce the most heat, but rather conditions which produce the best signal/noise ratio. You want the most reliable H2 vs H2 + K signal. By operating too hot you are reducing reliability, possibly introducing chemical reactions with the quartz or electrodes, and increasing convection in the vicinity of the tube. You thus increase the data variablilty and reduce the signal to noise ratio. When you do the graphs of power range, or input voltage the ratio of H2 temperature to H2 + K temperature across the power or input voltage range might tell you if there is any return for running at a higher power range. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In a nice glow discharge, I assumed it was the ionic and electrical effects in the tube that do the goodies to generate the monoatomic hydrogen. Isn't that the idea - then to make sure you have a copius quantity of H available at the K surface and/or with the K ions in the gas. I wouldn't think the raw thermal temperature your going to see in this tube is the important player, is it? Getting a nice stable glow discharge at a MINIMUM voltage and power would buy you cheaper components for your filtered DC supply and would be easier on the hardware. I'm assuming that you will eventually need some kind of crude calorimeter to work along with your filtered DC power measurement. It just seems that "cooler is better". Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:32:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA20953; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:29:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:29:05 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355A80A7.714C math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:27:03 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF References: <19980514032453.AAA28645 Default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NGU613.0.I75.U4eMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18750 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed Wall wrote: > > >(2) Joe was entirely > >willing to work to whatever degree necessary to investigate > >his claims. > > > OK, so right off the bat, did you find ounces of Au? > Not that I heard. Me, no, never. Other people besides Joe, however, seemed to have much better "luck". Much of my research was directed towards figuring out what these other people were seeing. > You found traces, as did Bockris. Well, actually I never found "traces"---meaning that in my own experiments I never observed any *anomalous* amounts of any precious metals. The traces I did observe on occasion were traceable to specific, repeatable sources of contamination. Bockris on the other hand observed truly anomalous gold production, meaning it was far beyond his background contamination levels. Also, in their most "succesful" experiment, the observed on the order of 1000 ppm, which is *far* above traces, wherever it came from. With gold, trace levels tend to be around 0.1 ppm or less, levels of 1 ppm are easy to detect, and beyond 10 ppm is a huge signal, roughly the equivalent of detecting a 10W heat output from a small sized device. In the future I will indeed give a detailed account, but in the meantime you should presume that given the amount of time I put into Champion & co., there were difficult questions to answer about what really was going on, i.e. it was not simply an issue of deciding who was telling what lies. I saw absolutely nothing that suggests to me that transmutation is real, but I saw plenty of things that demanded some physical explanations. And, if one wants to talk about observing anomalies, I certaily observed things that make a 1000W CETI demo pale in comparison. Absolutely no repeatability though. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:33:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA01333; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:31:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:31:47 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:31:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Help on math Resent-Message-ID: <"GKD6O2.0.lK.27eMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18751 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:41 PM 5/13/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote: >At 07:47 PM 5/13/98 -0500, Robert Calloway wrote: >>Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are >>equal >>to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. > > One ampere for one second equals one farad. So 33 amps for 3600 seconds >equals 118800 farads. > > But the battery and the capacitor still wouldn't be equivalent. > > Robert I. Eachus One ampere for one second equals one coulomb. One coulomb stored, maintainined in equilibrium, at one volt is a farad. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:44:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA23251; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:42:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:42:10 -0700 (PDT) X-ROUTED: Thu, 14 May 1998 01:35:42 -0500 X-TCP-IDENTITY: Paula Message-ID: <355A8453.B70073D6 southconn.com> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 01:42:43 -0400 From: paula X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode (60 watt bulb?) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Tk8CB1.0.Ah5.mGeMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18752 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If normal light bulb to big (no response to Horace suggestion that quartz tube is 1/4 inch diameter), then does anyone know of any miniature, or special purpose bulb that might fit.... maybe automotive ???, any reasonable voltage should work, if most of the power showed up as heat (50 watts).....I believe I have seen small halogen headlight bulbs, but have no idea of the heat output of them....steve opelc Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 6:20 PM 5/13/98, paula wrote: > >Maybe am far off here, but what about putting a 60 watt > >light > >bulb in the quartz tube, lower the pressure, and seeing what > >happens to the temperature.....????......steve opelc > > > > It's only a 1/4 inch inner diameter, right? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:55:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA04769; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:54:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:54:01 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:54:12 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"n0LvL.0.QA1.uReMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18753 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:32 PM 5/13/98, VCockeram wrote: >In a message dated 98-05-13 17:57:47 EDT, you write: > <> >> The cheapest quickest fix is probably to use a fullwave bridge and much >> bigger capacitor. > <> >> If you decide to go this route I'll send you some 20 kV 100 mA diodes >> (free of course). >> Regards, >> Horace Heffner Wow, is the above ever out of context! I said I would send you some free diodes if you decided to go the self-balasting center tapped neon sign transformer route. The 750 mA Midwest Surplus diodes look excellent though. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 22:57:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA25451; Wed, 13 May 1998 22:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:56:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 21:54:15 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"jkz41.0.aD6._TeMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18754 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:32 PM 5/13/98, VCockeram wrote: >brass fittings at Home Depot, some O-Rings at Pep Boys and you >are ready (almost) for fire in the hole. What are Pep Boys and Home Depot? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 23:01:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA06735; Wed, 13 May 1998 23:00:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:00:01 -0700 From: "Jay Olson" Organization: University of Idaho To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:02:32 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Help on math Priority: normal In-reply-to: <199805140039.TAA25195 neon.prysm.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.54) Message-ID: <2C0A31705CA hawthorn.csrv.uidaho.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"vUHji1.0.9f1.WXeMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18755 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are > equal > to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. I presume you want to compare the capacitor to the battery when both are at the same, given given voltage. The energy stored in the capacitor will be 1/2*C*V^2. The energy provided by the battery will be current*V*time thus: 1/2*C*V^2 = 33amp*V*hour or: C = (66amp*hour)/V C = (237600 coulombs)/V Note that as you increase the voltage of both, you need a smaller and smaller capacitor to store the same amount of energy the battery provides in an hour. Hope this helps, JAY OLSON From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 23:31:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA29299; Wed, 13 May 1998 23:28:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:28:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:25:55 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Help on math Resent-Message-ID: <"AUXrG2.0.j97.jxeMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18757 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:02 PM 5/13/98, Jay Olson wrote: [snip] > C = (66amp*hour)/V C = (237600 coulombs)/V > >Note that as you increase the voltage of both, you need a smaller >and smaller capacitor to store the same amount of energy the battery >provides in an hour. Hope this helps [snip] I would like to note that I got the same answer, but expressed it as: C = 237,600/V farads with V being implied to be a dimensionless number representing volts, the way people did it in the old days. 8^) I wasn't sure Robert Calloway understood the units, so provided the final formula in this "specified units" basis. C = (237600 coulombs)/V, as specified by Jay Olson above, is the correct form. Note that a coluomb/volt is a farad. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 13 23:31:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA29275; Wed, 13 May 1998 23:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 22:25:51 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF Resent-Message-ID: <"Lkg6K.0.K97.exeMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18756 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:27 PM 5/13/98, Barry Merriman wrote: [snip] >In the future I will indeed give a detailed account, ...[snip] > I certaily observed things >that make a 1000W CETI demo pale in comparison. Absolutely >no repeatability though. Wow Barry! This is a tale that needs telling! How long do we have to wait? You going to publish? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 00:01:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA17366; Wed, 13 May 1998 23:59:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:59:41 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355A966A.5205 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 23:59:54 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Bird, Wall, Jed, Merriman, CF References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"m9U35.0.BF4.SPfMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18758 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > > I certaily observed things > >that make a 1000W CETI demo pale in comparison. Absolutely > >no repeatability though. > > Wow Barry! This is a tale that needs telling! How long do we have to > wait? The story is not over yet, as I will need this summer to finish out the lines of inquiry that are started. I do intend to get to the bottom of things that should have a bottom. Indeed, now that Joe is in jail, the investigation is easier in many respects, since Joe's constant Paul Bunyan sized exagerations and trolling for major investors were simply added noise from my perspective...and it is clear to me that Joe has absolutely no ability to control his processes, whatever their ultimate explanation may be. But, don't get your hopes up. I strongly doubt the conclusion will be "transmutation is here!"....but I also doubt that it will be that everything surrounding Joe was a shared delusion or a deliberate fraud. There is plenty of room for rational explanation in between. What I find most amazing is that in this "modern" world, Joe really had no great difficulty in finding folks---of some degree of sophistication, mind you---who would pour hundreds of thousands of dollars into work to turn lead into gold. Had you told me two years ago that such large scale alchemical research efforts were going on, I would not have believed it! Truth is indeed stranger than fiction. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 00:07:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA19058; Thu, 14 May 1998 00:05:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 00:05:18 -0700 Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 02:05:03 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805140705.CAA26621 dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: re: Re: Case reports leak To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: aki ix.netcom.com Resent-Message-ID: <"XDWQa3.0.hf4.kUfMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18759 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: May 13, 1998 reposted at midnight since it did not appear at all on my vortex mail. Apologies if it was listed. Hi Jed, you wrote: >Leslie Case was hoping to bring a self sustaining cell to Bow in time >for an important meeting tomorrow. He had to make a new cell for this >purpose. --- Why? 'Gene said the original cell proved itself as claimed. Why not replicate that in other labs to prove out his version of CF? He said it was simple, inexpensive, and anybody can do it. It's patented also. Let's get this CF question and doubts, running over nine years, settled with this marvelous device. Case seems to live close by to 'Gene, you guys should talk to him before he gets more ambitious about an even bigger project. Not trying to be sarcastic. >I think he had to reduce the surface area to prevent heat loss. thermowell. He is trying to get a welder to fix the problem. I wish him well. But now the device becomes complicated, expensive, and not everybody can do it? Whatever became of the other self-sustainer, "The Quantum Generator"? Not that it is related to Case's effort. >I'll report further developments as they happen. As far as NDA's and VC's allow? And what of that other vortex machine that you and 'Gene's been looking at for a year and reported on at the ICCF-7 instead of the scheduled talk? What is the status of that? With the friendliest of support: -AK- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 01:28:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA00338; Thu, 14 May 1998 01:25:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 01:25:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 01:25:25 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Respect and Civility: FORUM RULE In-Reply-To: <199805132146_MC2-3CE0-78D4 compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"s8eKr3.0.C5.bfgMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18760 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 13 May 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Anton Rager writes: > Why do several individuals on this list _insist_ on using insults in > their discussions???? It accomplishes nothing. > > Oh, don't be so serious . . . or thin skinned. Trading a few insults, > satire and barbed jokes will not hurt anyone. It is human nature. We are > not emotionless machines. A vortex-L user has complained about a violation of the rules. VORTEX-L RULE: This is not the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup; ridicule, debunkery, and namecalling between believers and skeptics are forbidden. What level of insults should we shoot for here? I require that we AIM for zero insults and total respect between parties having differing viewpoints. Obviously we will never attain such a condition. But we should not start aiming for some higher level of insults, that opens the way to escalation. Trading insults is not acceptable, if it were, then there's no reason to continue this forum, and we should all move back to newsgroups. If someone complains, then the proper response is to apologize, not to find justifications. Small insults might stay small. Or the other side might retaliate with a bigger, less lighthearted insult, which requires stronger response, etc. On newsgroups some people intentionally cultivate a thin skin in order to launch "justified" counterattacks, and therefor are hoping to receive small insults. I hope this isn't an issue on vortex-L. No one forget, insults traded between the pro and anti camps are banned here. It is trivial to defuse insults. For example, send messages resembling the original "bird" thing privately to Gene or Jed and let THEM post it. Or, if someone really has their dander up, then simply send all messages privately to the target. Namecalling and insults lose their appeal if there's no audience, and it's simple to eliminate the audience by sending messages privately. But private insults lose their appeal, and this points to a good reason to avoid sending even small insults: if we need to do it in front of an audience, then maybe we shouldn't be doing it at all. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Thu May 14 03:52:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA20226; Thu, 14 May 1998 03:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 03:51:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980514104852.006938b8 freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 06:48:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"3xSVS1.0.wx4.PoiMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18761 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:34 PM 5/13/98 -0600, Frederick Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The incentive behind suggesting this experiment,(which Vince Cockeram was >brave enough to get under way)in the first place >was predicated on the following possible reaction sequence: > >1, K + heat-photons ----> K+ + e- > >2, K+ + H2 ----> KH + H+ > >3, H+ + e- (collision-lepton pair production) ----> Quasi-Neutron + 2 Kev >4,(very low probability)Quasi-Neutron + H ---> > Deuteron + Neutrino + gammas > >Lithium should serve in place of Potassium, possibly with a higher >yield,then: > >Quasi-Neutron + Lithium ---> 3Li8 + neutrino then in 0.8 sec, 3Li8 ---> 2 >He4 + 16.0 Mev > >The Correa Device (a hydrogen discharge device)is supposedly O/U, but, >doesn't use the alkali "catalysts"? > >Regards, Frederick > Once Vince proves he has O/U, he certainly should try Li and Na; if these work also, that certainly will put a crimp in Mill's theory. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 03:58:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA12006; Thu, 14 May 1998 03:56:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 03:56:42 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01b601bd7f26$d4c1d700$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 04:55:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"w35AM2.0.Vx2.ftiMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18763 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Edwin Strojny To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 14, 1998 4:50 AM Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode >At 07:34 PM 5/13/98 -0600, Frederick Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>The incentive behind suggesting this experiment,(which Vince Cockeram was >>brave enough to get under way)in the first place >>was predicated on the following possible reaction sequence: >> >>1, K + heat-photons ----> K+ + e- >> >>2, K+ + H2 ----> KH + H+ >> >>3, H+ + e- (collision-lepton pair production) ----> Quasi-Neutron + 2 Kev >>4,(very low probability)Quasi-Neutron + H ---> >> Deuteron + Neutrino + gammas >> >>Lithium should serve in place of Potassium, possibly with a higher >>yield,then: >> >>Quasi-Neutron + Lithium ---> 3Li8 + neutrino then in 0.8 sec, 3Li8 ---> 2 >>He4 + 16.0 Mev >> >>The Correa Device (a hydrogen discharge device)is supposedly O/U, but, >>doesn't use the alkali "catalysts"? >> >>Regards, Frederick >> >Once Vince proves he has O/U, he certainly should try Li and Na; if these >work also, that certainly will put a crimp in Mill's theory. Any theory that leads to positive results is okay by me, Ed. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 04:00:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA11708; Thu, 14 May 1998 03:53:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 03:53:42 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01b101bd7f26$60b373a0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 04:52:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"8zBi03.0.ms2.rqiMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18762 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince wrote: Snip a bunch of good stuff. You could fooled me Vince. :-) Might I suggest that you go over to Grainger's and pick up any one of dozens of models of Electronic Fluorescent Light Ballasts, made by several vendors that power "Glow Discharge Tubes" from a few watts to over 100 watts. For $25.00 to $100.00 you can get dimmer control (0-10 volts)units with a 99% power factor that handle from 17 watts to 80 watts or more, off 120, 240, 277 V.A.C. With one of these and some decent calorimetry you should be able to find out if there is any Hydrino O/U coming out of your setup. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 04:06:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA14496; Thu, 14 May 1998 04:05:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 04:05:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199805141105.GAA23895 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Re: Help on math Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 06:13:55 -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: <"3C8zY2.0.LY3.j_iMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18764 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Horace, Thanks for clearing me up on that matter!! And the formulas also. Again Thanks. Robert. ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Help on math > Date: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 9:14 PM > > At 7:47 PM 5/13/98, Robert Calloway wrote: > >Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are > >equal > >to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. > > > Hello Robert, > > I'm afraid you are comparing apples and oranges. The camparison cannot be > made without a voltage in the picture. The 33 amp hr refers to total > charge delivered, while farads are units of charge stored per volt. > > The 33 amp hr. refers to a total charge Q delivered by the battery. An > ampere is one coulomb per second, which is about 6.025x10^18 electrons per > second. The 33 amp hr is 33 coulombs per second for 3600 seconds, or > 118,800 coulombs, a very big charge. > > The charge held by a capacitor Q is a function of voltage V and capacitance C: > > Q = C*V > > so to figure out the equivalent capacitor C to deliver the same charge: > > C = Q/V = (118,800 columbs)/V > > If the capacitor is charged to 1 volt then it needs to be 118,800 farads. > If it is charged to 118,800 volts, it need only be one farad. It takes > huge capacitance to match the charge pushing capability of batteries. > > I suspect you might be more interested in equivalent energies. Here again > it is apples and oranges, and you must have the voltage(s) involved. If > you are talking about a 1.5 V battery delivering 33 amp hr, then the total > energy E delivered is: > > E = (33 A-hr)(1.5 V)(3600 sec/hr) = 178,200 W-s = 178,200 J > > There is a problem using capacitors to deliver a fixed voltage, however, > because without regulation they deliver a logarithmicaly declining voltage. > Let's ingnore that fact and go for equivalent energy anyway. The energy > stored by a capacitor is given by: > > E = 1/2*C*V^2 > > thus > > C = 2*E/V^2 > > So, to store the same 178,200 J in a 1.5 V capacitor would take a capacitance of > > C = 2(178,200 J)/(1.5^2) = 158,400 farads > > However, if you store the same energy in a 100,000 V capacitor it only takes: > > C = 2(178,200 J)/(10^5)^2 = 3.564x10^-5 farads = 35.64 microfarads > > a very big difference. > > If you want to pick your own voltage that applies to *both* the capacitor > and battery we have: > > > E = (33 A-hr)V(3600 sec/hr) = 1/2*C*V^2 > > C = 2(33)(3600)/V = 237,600/V > > so just plug your V into the following to compute equivalent energy holding > farads at that voltage: > > C = 237,600/V farads > > Hope I got all that right. 8^) > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 04:13:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA16251; Thu, 14 May 1998 04:12:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 04:12:46 -0700 Message-Id: <199805141113.GAA24098 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Re: Help on math Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 06:21:25 -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: <"0OBWj1.0.qz3.j6jMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18765 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks all for the help!!! Robert. ---------- > From: Jay Olson > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Help on math > Date: Thursday, May 14, 1998 2:02 AM > > > > Hello All, Is there anyone out there that can tell me how many "farads" are > > equal > > to a 33 amp hr gel cell battery? Thanks, Robert. > > > I presume you want to compare the capacitor to the battery when both > are at the same, given given voltage. > > The energy stored in the capacitor will be 1/2*C*V^2. > The energy provided by the battery will be current*V*time > > thus: > 1/2*C*V^2 = 33amp*V*hour > or: > C = (66amp*hour)/V C = (237600 coulombs)/V > > Note that as you increase the voltage of both, you need a smaller > and smaller capacitor to store the same amount of energy the battery > provides in an hour. Hope this helps, > > JAY OLSON From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 05:36:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA01535; Thu, 14 May 1998 05:33:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 05:33:49 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:25:36 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <355AE3BB.B54214C0 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:29:47 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Puzzled, serious suggestions needed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eULp-2.0.vN.hIkMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18766 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, This experiment related about resonating coils, and I obtained anomalous observation that I could not found a reasonable explanation. As summary a one turn circular loop formed by a LED and 1N4148 as +-|>|-+ LED | | / \ / \ | . | \ / \ / --|<|-- 1N4148 coupled (getting to proximity) of a coil oscillating above 100 MHz light the LED only in angle but stop when it is turned 90 degree around it axis (passing trough the paper). On the above picture magnetic flux is passing trough the paper. If the cause of the LED lighting were a simple induction, rotation of a loop around it axis should have no effect on induction. I did additional experiments with different configurations, (to test primarily capacitive couplings) and did not found an other coupling to cau se the effect. It's look like a inductive coupling but strange enough. If anyone wish to solve the puzzle, I will send the full setup, and additional mysteries about it. /-------\ / \ / \ |<| . |<| \ / \ / \-------/ Loop rotated by 90 degree could not light the LED I would say the setup not seems be complex, but coils are operating in some resonance mode, strong fields around, could light a miniature florescent tube from 5-10 cm distance. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 06:00:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA00312; Thu, 14 May 1998 05:58:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 05:58:59 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 04:59:09 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"YN0VM3.0.b4.HgkMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18767 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:52 AM 5/14/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >Might I suggest that you go over to Grainger's and pick up any one of dozens >of >models of Electronic Fluorescent Light Ballasts, made by several vendors >that power "Glow Discharge Tubes" from a few watts to over >100 watts. > >For $25.00 to $100.00 you can get dimmer control (0-10 volts)units with a >99% power factor that handle from 17 watts to 80 watts or more, off 120, >240, 277 V.A.C. [snip] This is very interesting Fred. Any idea what the output signal looks like, frequency, voltage, current, ingnition, etc.? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 06:32:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA08583; Thu, 14 May 1998 06:29:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 06:29:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 05:27:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Puzzled, serious suggestions needed Resent-Message-ID: <"2-Gyw.0.-52.v6lMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18768 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:29 PM 5/14/98, Hamdi Ucar wrote: >Hi, > >This experiment related about resonating coils, and I obtained anomalous >observation that I could not found a reasonable explanation. > >As summary a one turn circular loop formed by a LED and 1N4148 as > > +-|>|-+ LED > | | > / \ > / \ > | . | > \ / > \ / > --|<|-- 1N4148 > What is the source of the 100 MHz radiation? Is it a coil, or linear antenna, like an FM radio broadcast station? Maybe the signal is polarized? Possibly each of the two sides of the loop simply are acting as an antenna, and in the horizontal position cancel each other. Looking at it as a dipole antenna: ----------- ----------- | | reinforce mode, normal antenna ----------- | | ----------- cancel mode, normal antenna The circuit could be looked at as two dipole antennas, one for each diode: ---|>|--- Reinforce mode | | | | <----- gap left for clarification | | | | ---|<|--- ---------- ---------- Cancel mode | | --- --- ^ v --- --- | | ---------- ---------- Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 06:52:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA12054; Thu, 14 May 1998 06:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 06:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 16:42:30 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <355AF5C4.6B0A9051 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 16:46:44 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Puzzled, serious suggestions needed References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"efI1g1.0.Gy2.PQlMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18769 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace and all, My previous suggestion to eliminate the capacitive coupling as the cause the anomaly was not strong enough. Additional configurations are showing signs of capacitive coupling which can explain the anomaly. In this scheme there is no inductive coupling but capacitive. I will answer your questions on next letter. Thanks Lot. hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 07:04:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA14687; Thu, 14 May 1998 07:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 07:01:39 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <957ca072.355af8a6 aol.com> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 09:59:00 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"bVVpl1.0.Nb3._alMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18770 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-14 01:55:28 EDT, you write: > What are Pep Boys and Home Depot? > Regards, > Horace Heffner > Pep Boys, a large auto parts chain Home Depot, a very large home and building supply chain with. Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 07:02:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA17052; Thu, 14 May 1998 07:00:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 07:00:05 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 09:58:59 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"GkaHR1.0.KA4.YZlMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18771 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-14 01:55:19 EDT, you write: > Wow, is the above ever out of context! I said I would send you some free > diodes if you decided to go the self-balasting center tapped neon sign > transformer route. The 750 mA Midwest Surplus diodes look excellent > though. > Regards, > Horace Heffner Sorry Horace, I cut in error. I do have a place here in town I might possibly get a sign xfrmr, but am going to try Midwest supply first. Doggone, two years back I dumped a center tapped 22kV 22mA oil burner ignition transformer that I probably could have used now. Thanks, Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 07:32:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA27432; Thu, 14 May 1998 07:30:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 07:30:37 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002c01bd7f44$902cca00$568cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:27:15 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"OpLp_.0.Mi6.C0mMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18772 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 14, 1998 7:00 AM Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode >At 4:52 AM 5/14/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >[snip] >>Might I suggest that you go over to Grainger's and pick up any one of dozens >>of >>models of Electronic Fluorescent Light Ballasts, made by several vendors >>that power "Glow Discharge Tubes" from a few watts to over >>100 watts. >> >>For $25.00 to $100.00 you can get dimmer control (0-10 volts)units with a >>99% power factor that handle from 17 watts to 80 watts or more, off 120, >>240, 277 V.A.C. >[snip] > >This is very interesting Fred. Any idea what the output signal looks like, >frequency, voltage, current, ingnition, etc.? They tell me that the pulse rate is 25,000 to as much as 180,000 per second, so as to get high luminous efficiency, (many times as much as 60 hertz magnetic ballasts). The voltge can run up to 1,000 and if a 4 foot tube is 40 watts I suppose at 40 volts running the current would be 1 amp. I posted the Motorola Application Note web site AN1543 (32 pages) and AN1546 (4 pages) downloadable with the adobe reader, the other day. The AN1543 goes through the whole design theory with graphs, tables schematics,etc., the works. Great stuff. The Grainger handles the Motorola Electronic Ballast units. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 07:51:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA22696; Thu, 14 May 1998 07:43:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 07:43:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355AF4B9.74A2 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:42:17 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com, neonleo@aol.com Subject: RetroPsychoKinesis Experiment Summary Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------10CE4EEB5569" Resent-Message-ID: <"9Abhb2.0.VY5.wBmMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18773 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. --------------10CE4EEB5569 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/summary/ --------------10CE4EEB5569 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Base: "http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experimen ts/summary/" RetroPsychoKinesis Experiment Summary

RetroPsychoKinesis Experiment Summary

Last updated: Thursday 1998 May 14 4:00 UTC

This report is updated daily

Overall Summary

Total experiments:9109
Number of subjects:600
Total tries:9326592
Total hits:4667134
Overall z:2.5135standard deviations

"Subjects" is the number of different E-mail addresses or "handles" in the log file; there is no assurance a given individual may not have entered a number of different identities, either intentionally or by accident. The number of experiments includes only "for the record" experiments, not those designated in advance by the subject as "practice". Since each experiment involves 1024 bits, the total number of "Tries" in the next line is 9109×1024, or 9327616. Examination of the logged bit sequences sent to the subjects shows that 4667134 of the total of 9327616 bits were "Hits"--they agree with the subject's previously-chosen goal. There were, then, 3838 more bits among a total of 9327616 consistent with the subjects' intent to bias the generator. This is equivalent to changing one bit in every 2430 in the direction desired by the subject. The measured bias amounts to 2.5135 standard deviations.

Hit Histogram

The following chart summarises the results of all for-the-record experiments (excluding runs designated in advance as "practice" runs by the subject, which are logged for completeness, but do not figure in the statistical analysis) performed since the RPKP experiments were begun in January of 1997.

RPKP Experiment Hit Histogram vs. Expectation

The blue curve gives the normal distribution for a large number of trials of 1024 events with probability 0.5. (For a number of trials as large as 1024, the binomial and normal distributions are equal on the scale of this plot.) The red boxes show the actual number of experimental runs which resulted in the given number of hits. A "hit" is defined as the number of bits in the 1024 bit stream which agreed with the subject's previously chosen one-or-zero goal.

Cumulative Deviation from Expectation

Any experiment involving a random data source can be expected to, in the absence of perturbing influences, follow a random walk around the most probable value. As the number of experiments increases, overall divergences should decrease. When examining the results of such experiments, it's important to satisfy yourself that any non-chance effect you observe doesn't result from the experimenter choosing to show you results at a peak or trough of a series which is swinging to both sides of the chance expectation with a mean value equal to chance. The following is a deviation plot of the all 9109 RPKP experiments to date; it shows the absolute divergence of the experimental results in the direction of bias preselected by the subject compared to that expected by chance, and the divergence in terms of standard deviations for the cumulative number of trials for a probability of 0.5 on each trial.

RPKP Experiment Cumulative Deviation from Expectation

Runs by Subjects Histogram

The following table shows the number of experiments run by various subjects, and the cumulative results and standard deviation for each number of experiments. Individual subjects who have made a large number of runs appear show up at the bottom of the the table, and the results they obtained can be compared.

Experiments
Run		Number of
Subjects		Hits/Tries z 
1189 96799/193536 0.1409
297 99318/198656 0.0449
378 119843/239616 0.1430
437 75651/151552 0.6422
530 77093/153600 1.4952
621 64701/129024 1.0523
715 54082/107520 1.9640
820 82220/163840 1.4823
98 36958/73728 0.6924
109 45938/92160 0.9355
115 28215/56320 0.4635
1210 61734/122880 1.6774
139 60029/119808 0.7223
149 64483/129024 0.1615
1512 92338/184320 0.8292
161 8233/16384 0.6406
173 25854/52224 2.2580
184 36857/73728 0.0516
191 9750/19456 0.3154
203 30992/61440 2.1947
213 32331/64512 0.5906
222 22501/45056 0.2544
231 11743/23552 0.4301
254 51408/102400 1.3000
292 29633/59392 0.5170
302 30439/61440 2.2673
322 32740/65536 0.2188
332 33885/67584 0.7155
352 36023/71680 1.3670
381 19657/38912 2.0379
391 19865/39936 1.0308
403 61299/122880 0.8045
412 42161/83968 1.2216
421 21655/43008 1.4562
491 25123/50176 0.3125
511 26018/52224 0.8227
521 26813/53248 1.6381
631 32269/64512 0.1024
641 32834/65536 0.5156
1011 51647/103424 0.4042
1491 76391/152576 0.5274
1601 81951/163840 0.1532
1841 94683/188416 2.1886
12611 645933/1291264 0.5298
38211 1957044/3912704 0.6997

Results by Visual Feedback Program

Feedback ProgramRunsHits/Tries z 
bellcurve1969 1009345/2016256 1.7141
clockface5817 2979939/5956608 1.3398
pendulum1322 677850/1353728 1.6949
The table at the right shows results obtained by all subjects, sorted by the visual feedback program they selected.

Results by Goal

GoalRunsHits/Tries z 
01526 782157/1562624 1.3519
17582 3884977/7763968 2.1483
Each visual feedback program allows the user to choose a goal which corresponds to either an excess of zero or one bits in the data stream. The following table gives results by goal, indicating how many times each goal was chosen. The default goal is an excess of one bits.

Control Run Report

Custom Log Report

Experiments Table of Contents

RetroPsychoKinesis Project Home

--------------10CE4EEB5569-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 08:56:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA04033; Thu, 14 May 1998 08:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355B0166.79D5 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 09:36:22 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com, kelvin@fourmilab.ch, TCooper@VPro.com, neonleo aol.com Subject: Murray: seeking Web site for computing random distributions 05/14/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KiNGr.0.f-.t_mMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18774 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: May 14, 1998 Hello Vortexans, John Walker, Topher Cooper, I was struck by the remarkably improbable distribution of z-scores in the data since Jan., 1997 for the RetroPsychoKinesis Project, on the site managed by John Walker. http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/ http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/summary/ RetroPsychoKinesis Experiment Summary Last updated: Thursday 1998 May 14 4:00 UTC This report is updated daily Overall Summary Total experiments: 9109 Number of subjects: 600 Total tries: 9326592 Total hits: 4667134 Overall z: 2.5135 standard deviations "Subjects" is the number of different E-mail addresses or "handles" in the log file; there is no assurance a given individual may not have entered a number of different identities, either intentionally or by accident. The number of experiments includes only "for the record" experiments, not those designated in advance by the subject as "practice". Since each experiment involves 1024 bits, the total number of "Tries" in the next line is 9109×1024, or 9327616. Examination of the logged bit sequences sent to the subjects shows that 4667134 of the total of 9327616 bits were "Hits"--they agree with the subject's previously-chosen goal. There were, then, 3838 more bits among a total of 9327616 consistent with the subjects' intent to bias the generator. This is equivalent to changing one bit in every 2430 in the direction desired by the subject. The measured bias amounts to 2.5135 standard deviations. [End of RPKP quote] [Rich Murray] What is the probability of the above data? The data tables go on to show that there were 45 subjects, of which 30 had z-scores in the positive direction, and 15 in the negative direction. How probable is this result? For data from 17 single, unpooled subjects, 13 are positive and 4 negative. How probable is this result? Can someone help me find a Website to simulate and graph the random distributions for 9109, 45, and 17 binary coin tosses, so I can make quick and dirty comparisons? Comment by Topher Cooper, Voice Processing Corp., TCooper VPro.com, on a metaanalysis of ESP literature by Dick Bierman: http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/topher.html Imagine that you conduct an experiment which results in a "Z-score", i.e., in a value which, if the null hypothesis is true, should vary, from replication to replication, around a mean value of 0 with a standard deviation (amount of "spread") of 1 and should follow a Gausian "bell-shaped curve" approximately. Values very far from the mean will occur very rarely according to the null hypothesis, so a Z-score which is far from 0 can be taken as evidence that the null hypothesis is not what is going on. Imagine now that you have a bunch of different replications of the experiment, each with their own Z-score. Now the null hypothesis says that each of those Z-scores is an independent sample of a Z distribution -- each of them have the characteristics I mentioned above and the value of each one has no influence of the values of the others. How does one go about looking at what all of them together says about the null and alternative hypotheses? The ideal answer takes into account that the different Z scores are based on experiments with a different number of trials. That means that an experiment with just a few trials, which rejects the null hypothesis counts for a lot more than a much larger experiment which rejects the null hypothesis by the same amount. The result is a weighted combination of the Z scores which can then be rescaled so that it to is a Z score. A quick and dirty procedure -- which is valid but weak (it may fail to show something which the above procedure shows clearly) -- is to look at the sum of the Z-scores. If many of the separate Z-scores are high, then the sum will be even higher. We can reasonably ask what distribution we would expect from what the null-hypothesis says is the sum of a bunch of Z-scores. The answer is pretty simple. The sum of N Z-scores is a normal distribution with a standard deviation of sqrt(N). Therefore if we divide the sum by the sqrt(N), we will get another Z score. It looks like Dick made a simple computational error here. The "total Z score" on your page is the result of dividing the sum of the Z-scores by 5 (sqrt(25); Z=5.308) rather than by sqrt(26) (Z=5.205). Imagine now, though, that you were running an experiment where sometimes there was a large positive deviation and sometimes a large negative one. If you were to look at the sum of the Z-scores in this case, the positive values and the negative values would tend to cancel each other out, and you would come out with a rather small and unimpressive "total Z score", even though the large according to the null hypothesis. We would then have a case with a small mean but a lot of variance (i.e., a lot more extreme variation around the mean than expected). One way to create a single number which might detect this is to sum, not the Z scores themselves, but their squares. Large negatives and large positives would both show up as positive additions so that a lot of variance would show up as an exceptionally large sum of squares. Of course, the sum would always be non-negative, so a positive deviation does not mean that something is there. We need to know the distribution of the sum of squares of a bunch of independently distributed z-scores. The answer turns out to be easy. The sum of the squares of N independently distributed Z scores follows a distribution called the chi-square distribution. The chi-square distribution has a single parameter which is called "the number of degrees of freedom" and in this case, that parameter equals N. There is nothing profound about this, because the chi-square distribution with N degrees of freedom is *defined* to be whatever distribution results from the sum of the squares of N standard normal distributions (profundity occurs when the chi-square distribution shows up in other contexts, as it does). The important thing, then, is simply that the chi-square distribution is well characterized. You can find tables of it, for example, in the back of virtually any stat text. The sum of the squares of the Z-scores in this chart is 111.29, which should be compared to a chi-square distribution with 26 (not 25, is this the same error once again? Did Dick miscount the number of Z-scores he was working with?) degrees of freedom. How extreme is this? The odds of this sum being this large is one chance in 630 thousand million (what us Yanks call 630 billion). This is clearly more extreme than the "mere" one chance in 18 million which the "total-Z" indicates. I would say that he was not exaggerating when he said that this is pretty strong evidence that "something" (other than the null hypothesis) "is going on". Whether that "something" is something interesting (e.g., paranormal) depends on an analysis of the tightness of the experimental protocols. Topher Cooper Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 09:12:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09773; Thu, 14 May 1998 09:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 09:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355AF45F.2F6D earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:40:47 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com, neonleo@aol.com Subject: Topher Cooper's explanation of Bierman's remarks Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------15B06C5B1A1B" Resent-Message-ID: <"irjwR1.0.YO2.KQnMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18776 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. --------------15B06C5B1A1B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit TCooper VPro.com http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/topher.html --------------15B06C5B1A1B Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="topher.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="topher.html" Content-Base: "http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/topher.ht ml" Topher Cooper's explanation of Bierman's remarks Imagine that you conduct an experiment which results in a "Z-score", i.e., in a value which, if the null hypothesis is true, should vary, from replication to replication, around a mean value of 0 with a standard deviation (amount of "spread") of 1 and should follow a Gausian "bell-shaped curve" approximately. Values very far from the mean will occur very rarely according to the null hypothesis, so a Z-score which is far from 0 can be taken as evidence that the null hypothesis is not what is going on.

Imagine now that you have a bunch of different replications of the experiment, each with their own Z-score. Now the null hypothesis says that each of those Z-scores is an independent sample of a Z distribution -- each of them have the characteristics I mentioned above and the value of each one has no influence of the values of the others. How does one go about looking at what all of them together says about the null and alternative hypotheses?

The ideal answer takes into account that the different Z scores are based on experiments with a different number of trials. That means that an experiment with just a few trials, which rejects the null hypothesis counts for a lot more than a much larger experiment which rejects the null hypothesis by the same amount. The result is a weighted combination of the Z scores which can then be rescaled so that it to is a Z score.

A quick and dirty procedure -- which is valid but weak (it may fail to show something which the above procedure shows clearly) -- is to look at the sum of the Z-scores. If many of the separate Z-scores are high, then the sum will be even higher. We can reasonably ask what distribution we would expect from what the null-hypothesis says is the sum of a bunch of Z-scores. The answer is pretty simple. The sum of N Z-scores is a normal distribution with a standard deviation of sqrt(N). Therefore if we divide the sum by the sqrt(N), we will get another Z score. It looks like Dick made a simple computational error here. The "total Z score" on your page is the result of dividing the sum of the Z-scores by 5 (sqrt(25); Z=5.308) rather than by sqrt(26) (Z=5.205).

Imagine now, though, that you were running an experiment where sometimes there was a large positive deviation and sometimes a large negative one. If you were to look at the sum of the Z-scores in this case, the positive values and the negative values would tend to cancel each other out and you would come out with a rather small and unimpressive "total Z score", even though the large deviations should not be there according to the null hypothesis. We would then have a case with a small mean but a lot of variance (i.e., a lot more extreme variation around the mean than expected). One way to create a single number which might detect this is to sum, not the Z scores themselves, but their squares. Large negatives and large positives would both show up as positive additions so that a lot of variance would show up as an exceptionally large sum of squares. Of course, the sum would always be non-negative, so a positive deviation does not mean that something is there. We need to know the distribution of the sum of squares of a bunch of independently distributed z-scores.

The answer turns out to be easy. The sum of the squares of N independently distributed Z scores follows a distribution called the chi-square distribution. The chi-square distribution has a single parameter which is called "the number of degrees of freedom" and in this case, that parameter equals N. There is nothing profound about this, because the chi-square distribution with N degrees of freedom is *defined* to be whatever distribution results from the sum of the squares of N standard normal distributions (profundity occurs when the chi-square distribution shows up in other contexts, as it does). The important thing, then, is simply that the chi-square distribution is well characterized. You can find tables of it, for example, in the back of virtually any stat text.

The sum of the squares of the Z-scores in this chart is 111.29, which should be compared to a chi-square distribution with 26 (not 25, is this the same error once again? Did Dick miscount the number of Z-scores he was working with?) degrees of freedom. How extreme is this? The odds of this sum being this large is one chance in 630 thousand million (what us Yanks call 630 billion). This is clearly more extreme than the "mere" one chance in 18 million which the "total-Z" indicates.

I would say that he was not exaggerating when he said that this is pretty strong evidence that "something" (other than the null hypothesis) "is going on". Whether that "something" is something interesting (e.g., paranormal) depends on an analysis of the tightness of the experimental protocols.

Topher Cooper

RetroPsychoKinesis Project Home

--------------15B06C5B1A1B-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 09:17:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09711; Thu, 14 May 1998 09:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 09:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355AF3A5.39C7 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:37:41 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com, neonleo@aol.com Subject: Bierman's Tucson RPK MetaAnalysis Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------137F7997102B" Resent-Message-ID: <"39Dgq.0.eN2.5QnMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18775 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. --------------137F7997102B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/bierman-metaanalysis.html --------------137F7997102B Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="bierman-metaanalysis.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="bierman-metaanalysis.html" Content-Base: "http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/bierman-m etaanalysis.html" Bierman's Tucson RPK MetaAnalysis

RetroPK Database

Compiled and presented at the Tucson II conference by Dick Bierman

Bierman comments "Remark that one of the most remarkable findings is the incredible variance in z-scores. Just try it out for yourself (take the sum of z-squares which should be chi^2 distributed)."

"The across experiments variance has a chi^2 value of over 110 with 25 degrees of freedom. This reinforces an earlier finding of mine that I published in the rather obscure Indian Journal of Psychology where I did a long series of PK [tests] on prerecorded targets with variance as the only dependent variable"

Topher Cooper has provided a very clear explanation of the above remarks.

AUTHORSYEARJOURNALz-score
Bierman, et.al.1975EJP 1-10.89
Schmidt1976JASPR 703.14
Schmidt1976JASPR 704.22
Schmidt1976JASPR 702.90
Millar, et.al.1976RIP 19760.00
Houtkooper1977EJP 1-41.15
Houtkooper1977EJP 1-4-0.28
Broughton, et.al.1977RIP 19770.00
Terry, et.al.1977RIP 1977-3.07
Terry, et.al.1977RIP 1977-1.60
Braud, et.al.1979JSPR-0.10
Gruber1980EJP 3-21.90
Gruber1980EJP 3-23.08
Houtkooper1980EJP 3-33.23
Houtkooper1980EJP 3-30.37
Houtkooper1980EJP 3-3-2.45
Schmidt1985JoP 491.82
Schmidt1985JoP 491.96
Bierman1985EJP 5-1.90
Bierman1985EJP 51.54
Schmidt, et.al.1986JoP 502.71
Schmidt, et.al.1988RIP 19881.66
Schmidt, et.al.1990RIP 19910.62
Schmidt, et.al.1992JoP 571.88
Michels1993Skepsis 61.64
Schmidt & Stapp1993JoP 571.23
TOTAL-z=5.31

EJP=European Journal of Parapsychology
JASPR=Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research
RIP=Research in Parapsychology (yearbook)
JSPR=Journal of the Society for Psychical Research
JoP=Journal of Parapsychology

HOMERPKP Home

--------------137F7997102B-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 10:38:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA25829; Thu, 14 May 1998 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <001201bd7f5d$6bb1c360$255b2bcf ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: , , , , Subject: [Off Topic] Re: Murray: seeking Web site for computing random distributions 05/14/98 Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 12:26:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"sT4pz1.0.TJ6.5eoMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18777 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >The sum of the squares of the Z-scores in this chart is 111.29, which >should be compared to a chi-square distribution with 26 (not 25, is this >the same error once again? Did Dick miscount the number of Z-scores he >was working with?) degrees of freedom. How extreme is this? The odds of >this sum being this large is one chance in 630 thousand million (what us >Yanks call 630 billion). This is clearly more extreme than the "mere" >one chance in 18 million which the "total-Z" indicates. > >I would say that he was not exaggerating when he said that this is >pretty strong evidence that "something" (other than the null hypothesis) >"is going on". Whether that "something" is something >interesting (e.g., paranormal) depends on an analysis of the tightness >of the experimental protocols. > >Topher Cooper I haven't had a chance to look at their experiments that closely, but I did take a 5-minute glance, and here's the problem that I have with it. Their 2.51 sigma deviation agrees with the same deviation that can be calculated from a random number set. standard deviation = sqr(npq) where n = number of samples p = probability of success q = probability of failure Therefore the standard deviation with a sample set of 9327616 and a random, binary probability is: sqr(9327616*.5*.5) = 1527 Divide into their deviation of 3838: 3838/1527 = 2.51 Because this is the same deviation they arrived at, it's clear they're assuming that the normal sample set is random. However, (fore-going Quantum Mechanics), there is no such thing as a random number. 1) So, could there be a bias in the random samples that the subjects might be pre-disposed to agree with? 2) Can you explain more closely, what types of experiments the subjects actually performed? Not the experiments they COULD have performed. In other words, I noticed that there was an experiment allowing a user to persuade the direction of movement of a clock displayed on the screen using a random-number generator. Well, when I decided to do the experiment, I chose to try to persuade the clock to move in a clock-wise direction. It is my belief that MOST people would choose clockwise over counter-clockwise. IF the random number generator has a propensity toward positive, then the mean goes out the window. A deviation from a random number mean of 3838 with a sample size of 9327616 certainly seems plausible when considering that random numbers generated by computers aren't necessarily random. That's a deviation of .04% or 4 in 10,000. Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 11:06:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02441; Thu, 14 May 1998 11:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Comments: ( Received on motgate.mot.com from client pobox.mot.com, sender John_Steck css.mot.com ) Sender: johnste ecg.csg.mot.com Message-ID: <355B30F6.2B6D2357 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 12:59:19 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex , Discussion Group- KeelyNet Subject: To Whom It May Concern Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vbMnM.0._b.86pMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18778 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Going off line until June. See you then. Best wishes with the ongoing experiments, Vince, Scott, etc. John E. Steck ------------------------------------o]{: Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 11:17:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04748; Thu, 14 May 1998 11:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 14:07:15 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: More from Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805141411_MC2-3CF7-3C21 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"asXK.0.6A1.eHpMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18779 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Leslie Case reports that the leak in the new cell is fixed. He filled the new cell with hydrogen, placed it in the large Dewar, and brought it up to 170 deg C with 25 watts input. He increased input to 28 watts and the temperature started to climb rapidly. This was late yesterday so he did not wait for it to settle at a higher temperature. He will make a few more modifications and do some more hydrogen runs today. I suggested he run a few simple calibrations, letting the temperature stabilize at 15, 20 and 25 watts input. I am afraid he will miss our deadline today, which is a shame. He will miss an important meeting. It may be that the cell cannot self-sustain in this configuration, because the insulation may not be sufficient. However, suppose that when he runs with deuterium he finds he can maintain the 170 deg C temperature with only 10 watts input instead of 25. That would indicate the cell is generating ~15 watts. I think that would be fairly compelling evidence, especially with improved, redundant thermometers. With the previous configuration it took 92 watts to maintain the working temperature, and the cell was apparently generating ~7 watts, so if he has "backed off" heater power in this fashion it would only decrease from 92 to 85 watts (8%). That is not as convincing as a 50 to 60% power reduction would be. Scott Little reports that he received a sample of known good material from Case. That's good. If it does not work I suggest thermal cycling with deuterium gas. I would heat it and cool it rapidly five or ten times. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 11:21:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04825; Thu, 14 May 1998 11:14:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:14:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 14:07:26 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kinetic Furnace non-update Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805141411_MC2-3CF7-3C23 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Gl-0k3.0.IB1.0IpMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18780 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Akira Kawasaki asked "what of that other vortex machine that you and 'Gene's been looking at for a year and reported on at the ICCF-7 instead of the scheduled talk? What is the status of that?" The status is we have barely touched it. Gene did a few test runs which produced no excess. The answer came closer to zero than I expected, within 5%. Our HVAC calorimetry appears to be right on the mark. We think it might have been damaged in transport. The temperature refuses to come up to the critical starting point. We are consulting with Pope. We will have much more to report later. Now that the magazine issue is finished, I expect Gene will have time to breath and get back to work on the Kinetic Furnace, unless Case shows up again. Breathing is low priority. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 12:19:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA15422; Thu, 14 May 1998 12:09:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 12:09:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <002501bd7f6b$57c70190$255b2bcf ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: More from Case Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 14:05:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"3yxT_2.0.km3.85qMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18781 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It seems to me it will be VERY difficult to make a self-sustaining Case device in that manner that he's choosing to do it. By simply insulating the device, there is nothing to stabilize the temperature. If the device produces more heat than required by the supplied insulation, the temperature should climb beyond the 250C mark. Should the insulation be less than necessary to maintain the temperature, then then device should cool. For this self-sustaining method to work, (assuming the heat effect is real), then something will be necessary to 'dump' excess heat when a target mark is reached. If he could, somehow, arrange to boil water, or some other chemical, at the target temperature, then this might suffice as a temperature regulator. Else, without a temperature regulator, he will constantly have to watch the device, and somehow manually dump heat when the temperature rises to high. In short, I don't think he'll be able to make a self-sustaining device in this fashion, though he might be able to make a run-away device, good for one run, or so. What am I over-looking? Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 12:34:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA17931; Thu, 14 May 1998 12:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 12:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08F2 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Physics high priests are at it again! Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 12:19:02 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"xygfh2.0.xN4.MKqMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18782 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed The CIA was involved. They used S&L's to fund operatives, and then let them fail on purpose. Lots of evidence on this. Check a series in the San Jose Mercury in the mid 80's Hank > ---------- > From: Jed Rothwell[SMTP:72240.1256 compuserve.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 1998 3:08 PM > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com > Subject: Physics high priests are at it again! > > To: Vortex > > I said that much of the hard core opposition to cold fusion at MIT and > in the > DoE comes from hot fusion scientists. Michael J. Schaffer pointed out: > > As an active "hot fusion" researcher, I know lots of other hot > fusion > scientists. The vast majority of them simply ignore cold fusion. > They do > not "oppose" it. They just stopped paying any attention years > ago. > > Quite right. And the vast majority publish attacks in the Boston Globe > or the > Washington Post in March 1989 either. It took only a few. I expect the > majority of hot fusion scientists are decent, ethical people who would > never > dream of launching a pre-emptive attack on a competing idea. > Unfortunately, a > handful of unethical scientists near the center of power and funding > in > Washington exert a lot of influence. This is true of other fields of > science, > and R&D. Politics, power and money attract unscrupulous people. > Scientists > outside of hot fusion joined the feeding frenzy. The editors of the > New > Scientists got a lot mileage out attacking cold fusion, and so did > people like > Taubes. > > To give parallel example, in the early 1980s the majority of S&L > owners and > employees were decent, law abiding people. It took only a handful to > steal > $200 billion (or however much it was). > > - Jed > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 12:47:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA21707; Thu, 14 May 1998 12:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 12:41:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805132144_MC2-3CF0-8409 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 08:46:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique - addendum Resent-Message-ID: <"HlnsL.0.0J5.UZqMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18783 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry, Kennel's concerns, my concerns. Jed wrote: >Can you cite a sentence or paragraph from, say, the ICCF3 paper so I can tell >what you are talking about? (The ICCF3 Blue Book is always right next to my >desk.) My usual reference to Fleischmann & Ponns calorimetry is: Fleischmann & Pons, "Calorimetry of the Pd-D2) system: from simplicity via complications to simplicity," Physics Letters A 176 (1993) 118-129. I do have the ICCF3 Proceedings. I'll try to look up what F & P have in there. As I hinted in my preface to yesterday's post, "I don't want to get deeply into this calorimetry debate," My reason is not lack of interest, but that I am too busy preparing for a meeting all next week to get deeply into Fleischmann & Pons' calorimetry. I sincerely regret this, because I think it is a most important subject. It is also too complicated to cover quickly, and I don't understand it all myself, so I know it will consume considerable time to do correctly. I even wonder whether vortex-l is an appropriate forum for such a specialized discussion, given that most subscribers won't have the papers and won't be interested in the subject. Anyway, Jed and anybody else interested, let's try to come up with a reasonable way to discuss this subject. I think some other knowledgeable people ought to be invited to participate, too, if we sincerely want to try to reach an understanding. Consider: Ben Bush, Elliot Kennel, Mitch Swartz, Scott Little, Ed Storms, ..... 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 May 14 13:52:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04391; Thu, 14 May 1998 13:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 13:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355B172E.CAD5646F ro.com> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:09:19 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" Organization: NASA Volunteer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keith Nagel , vortex-l Subject: Re: Podkletnov X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <3.0.32.19980514000125.006e27f8 cnct.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KzVtk1.0.S41.iWrMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18784 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Patrick wrote .As far as the superconductors are concerned, the >recipe is embarrassingly simple. >see >http://ro.com/~preavis/Delta-G/My_Experiments/13_Layer_Superconductor.htm > >and >http://ro.com/~preavis/Delta-G/My_Experiments/5_Layer_Superconductor.htm > >anyone with a hydraulic jack and a furnace with a controller can do the >same. Just leave out the layers of Silver, they are apparently not >necessary. Edmund Scientific makes a bundle selling small disks that >don't even apprpach the quality of my recipe, so feel free to start up a >mail order biz. Keith Nagel wrote: > Err, I mean Podkletnovs. Seems he used an induction heater and had gas > > treatment facilities in his furnace. I'll have to reread this > material, > at the moment I have been reading some of Woodwards papers. Familiar > with > this? > > K. Keith, Podkletnov's recipe is as follows; starting with raw powders , yttrium and copper as oxides, Barium as corbonates ( one of NASA's engineers has had success with nitrates) particle sizes: 0.3microns, 50% ; 0.06 microns 25% ; 0.04 microns 25%. (this maximizes the packing factor) saturate powder with alchohol or polyvinyl alcohol (I believe this is called 'slip casting') cold press at 1000 Kgm/cm^2 , slowly over 20-30 seconds, hold for 15 seconds, release slowly, again over 20-30 seconds heat slowly to 930 degrees C max (I didn't get the time profile for the ramp up or the soak, I'll see if any of the others got this info) apply O2 1/2 liters per minute 15 minutes before starting cooldown, end O2 at ambient cool 2 degrees per minute, 3 degrees max to stabilize oxygen content in the disk remove from furnace. pray that it comes out in one piece. finally, I'm not familiar with Woodwards papers. if you have a copy or know where I can download it, I'd be grateful. -- Patrick V. Reavis Student at Large /\ / \ / G \ ~~~~~~~~ DELTA-G From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 14:02:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04838; Thu, 14 May 1998 13:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 13:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355B57F1.F4E668E8 gorge.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 13:45:38 -0700 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge... References: <199805141618.JAA12144 mx2.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"60Ybw2.0.WB1.wYrMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18785 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick wrote: > Electronic Fluorescent Light Ballasts, made by several vendors > >>that power "Glow Discharge Tubes" from a few watts to over > >>100 watts. > >> > >>For $25.00 to $100.00 you can get dimmer control (0-10 volts)units 1. The dimmer switches I have looked at all say no to use with flourescent lights. I assumed there was a compatability problem. 2. If there is not a problem, what do you think of using the combination as the primary in a tesla coil (maybe with a capacitor)? 3. Speaking of Tesla Coils, Tesla produced light, presumably glow discharges, in evacuated tubes, without internal electrodes. sometimes, there was no physical contact with the T. coil driving the lamps, but better efficiency was obtained with one wire from the coil wrapped around the tube. Any ideas? Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 14:43:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16207; Thu, 14 May 1998 14:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 14:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 17:34:29 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: More from Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805141737_MC2-3D01-8090 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"GOn2A3.0.8z3.dIsMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18786 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Craig Haynie writes: It seems to me it will be VERY difficult to make a self-sustaining Case device in that manner that he's choosing to do it. No, it shouldn't be difficult, based on previous tests. By simply insulating the device, there is nothing to stabilize the temperature. If the device produces more heat than required by the supplied insulation, the temperature should climb beyond the 250C mark. Should the insulation be less than necessary to maintain the temperature, then the device should cool. Well, sure. But it is no different with the present configuration. The steel flask is surrounded by an electric heating pad and maintained at the critical temperature. The heating pad has no thermostat. The cells in the present configuration have overheated from time to time. If the cell starts to get too hot with the Dewar, I would open the top and let some air in. The heat seems fairly steady, and changes are slow. This is not surprising. CF devices in heat after death mode have a remarkable "memory" (as Stan Pons calls it). They tend to return to the same power level after fluctuating. They gradually die out, in stages. I assume this is because only a tiny amount of the metal is in a nuclearactive state (as Storms calls it), but this metal *stays* in that state robustly. When you disturb the metal, it goes through perturbations, but it tends to return to the steady state. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 14:52:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA18300; Thu, 14 May 1998 14:41:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 14:41:37 -0700 Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 17:34:48 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805141739_MC2-3D0B-35A1 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"g-TX01.0.7T4._JsMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18787 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Michael J. Schaffer writes: My usual reference to Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry is: Fleischmann & Pons, "Calorimetry of the Pd-D2) system: from simplicity via complications to simplicity," Physics Letters A 176 (1993) 118-129. I do have the ICCF3 Proceedings. I'll try to look up what F & P have in there. It is almost exactly the same. My reason is not lack of interest, but that I am too busy preparing for a meeting all next week to get deeply into Fleischmann & Pons' calorimetry. Good! If you have any questions, be sure to contact Martin. I suggest you fax your questions, then call. He will not answer otherwise. He is wrapped up in his work all day long. I even wonder whether vortex-l is an appropriate forum for such a specialized discussion, given that most subscribers won't have the papers and won't be interested in the subject. Anyway, Jed and anybody else interested, let's try to come up with a reasonable way to discuss this subject. Well, I hope you publish in Infinite Energy, but I do not see any problem with discussing it here. Why not? It should be fun to watch. I myself cannot contribute much, because the hairy parts of that paper -- differential equations and the like -- are over my head. For example, I have no idea what a Kalman filter is, or what that "Beta" thing is in the left side of the first long equation. It isn't defined in the back with the other terms. The paper says it "allows for a more rapid decrease than would be given by electrolysis alone" and below 60 deg C it does not matter. I haven't a clue what it is though. Perhaps this is your fudge factor? I do think I understand the general principles, and many details like: The role of the unsilvered "window" at the bottom of the cell; The reason the temperature continued to register in heat after deal (the cell was mostly filled with water vapor, not air); The use of video to time the last phase, to compute enthalpy. (The French AEC has a better method. They use a water level sensor.) You would be surprised how many people become confused about such relatively simple issues. Many experts who know the trees down to the last leaf have trouble seeing the forest. For example, I expect Elliot Kennel knows Kalman filters and differential equations like the back of his hand, but I still think his "OCV heat shift" hypothesis was incorrect. I think some other knowledgeable people ought to be invited to participate, too, if we sincerely want to try to reach an understanding. Consider: Ben Bush, Elliot Kennel, Mitch Swartz, Scott Little, Ed Storms, ..... . . . and Martin Fleischmann, and Stan Pons. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 15:24:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA25243; Thu, 14 May 1998 15:16:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:16:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004c01bd7f85$3db08b40$738cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge... Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 16:10:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"G2Omd2.0.BA6.8rsMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18788 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Tom Miller To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 14, 1998 2:50 PM Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge... Tom Miller wrote: >Frederick wrote: > >> Electronic Fluorescent Light Ballasts, made by several vendors >> >>that power "Glow Discharge Tubes" from a few watts to over >> >>100 watts. >> >> >> >>For $25.00 to $100.00 you can get dimmer control (0-10 volts)units > > > >1. The dimmer switches I have looked at all say no to use with >fluorescent lights. I assumed there was a compatibility >problem. The "dimmer" that you are referring to, are not the Electronic Ballast packages that rectify the line voltage,then employ an internal oscillator and electronic switches to drive the discharge tubes. Most SCR-TRIAC circuits are a bit fussy about inductive loads. > >2. If there is not a problem, what do you think of using the >combination as the primary in a tesla coil (maybe with a >capacitor)? It might cost you $35.00 to $150.00, Tom. > >3. Speaking of Tesla Coils, Tesla produced light, presumably >glow discharges, in evacuated tubes, without internal electrodes. >sometimes, there was no physical contact with the T. coil driving >the lamps, but better efficiency was obtained with one wire from >the coil wrapped around the tube. This is called "electrodeless discharge" get the same effect with fluorescent bulbs near a radio transmitter, especially above a few hundred megahertz. > >Any ideas? Consult the Radio Amateurs Handbook, Frank Stenger has a copy, I loaned the last one I had to a tv repair guy in 1955 never did get it back. Went to college instead. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Tom Miller > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 15:31:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA25508; Thu, 14 May 1998 15:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08F0 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 11:16:19 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"wfftz1.0.TE6.EssMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18789 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: One of Van Allen's objections was about the effects of extended time in space on the human body. Science Fiction for years has been talking about using rotating space platforms, toroidal shaped vehicles, so that centrifical acceleration would replace gravity. Why haven't this been used yet, and why are we not considering it for a Mars mission? Tracking antennas should be able to cope with communication, even with a rolling station. Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 15:47:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08126; Thu, 14 May 1998 15:42:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:42:17 -0700 Message-ID: <355B7338.771A interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 18:42:00 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge... References: <199805141618.JAA12144 mx2.eskimo.com> <355B57F1.F4E668E8@gorge.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qXotw.0.F-1.0DtMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18791 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tom Miller wrote: > (snip) > 3. Speaking of Tesla Coils, Tesla produced light, presumably > glow discharges, in evacuated tubes, without internal electrodes. > sometimes, there was no physical contact with the T. coil driving > the lamps, but better efficiency was obtained with one wire from > the coil wrapped around the tube. > > Any ideas? Re Fred Sparber's comment, Tom, have fun by putting a small fluorescent tube (a 7-watt, 6" long job works well) in the microwave oven. All kinds of action starts after a couple of seconds. RF glow discharges are fine, Tom, but how the devil are you going to measure the input power? (For small bucks, that is!) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 15:49:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08349; Thu, 14 May 1998 15:42:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:42:57 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <588e8160.355b2a37 aol.com> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 13:30:30 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"Zztfa2.0.k12.eDtMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18792 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-14 06:50:30 EDT, you write: > Once Vince proves he has O/U, he certainly should try Li and Na; if these > work also, that certainly will put a crimp in Mill's theory. > Ed Strojny > I am not trying to prove overunity here. All I wanted was to see was what the differerence was between running a glow in (1) vacuum, (2) Argon, (3) Hydrogen, (4) Potassium in a vacuum, (5) Argon with Potassium , (6) Hydrogen with Potassium. It seems, so far, that the addition of K to a glow in H2 produces much more heat output than any of the other 5 listed glow discharges. Why? I don't know. There probably is a trivial reason and I will continue to look for one, using different input powers, a calibration resistor run ect. I am not qualified to do precision calorimetry. That, I shall leave for other researchers, with the proper equipment. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 15:53:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA00321; Thu, 14 May 1998 15:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355B648D.5891 earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 16:39:25 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: hignly anomalous RPKP results 05/14/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NywN4.0.v4.IBtMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18790 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 14, 1998 Hello all, I was struck by the remarkably improbable distribution of z-scores in the data since Jan., 1997 for the RetroPsychoKinesis Project, on the site managed by John Walker. http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/ http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/summary/ RetroPsychoKinesis Experiment Summary Last updated: Thursday 1998 May 14 4:00 UTC This report is updated daily. Overall Summary Total experiments: 9109 Number of subjects: 600 Total tries: 9326592 [1024 trials per experiment, in ~3 min.] Total hits: 4667134 Overall z: 2.5135 standard deviations "Subjects" is the number of different E-mail addresses or "handles" in the log file; there is no assurance a given individual may not have entered a number of different identities, either intentionally or by accident. The number of experiments includes only "for the record" experiments, not those designated in advance by the subject as "practice". Since each experiment involves 1024 bits, the total number of "Tries" in the next line is 9109×1024, or 9327616. Examination of the logged bit sequences sent to the subjects shows that 4667134 of the total of 9327616 bits were "Hits"--they agree with the subject's previously-chosen goal. There were, then, 3838 more bits among a total of 9327616 consistent with the subjects' intent to bias the generator. This is equivalent to changing one bit in every 2430 in the direction desired by the subject. The measured bias amounts to 2.5135 standard deviations. [End of RPKP quote] [Rich Murray] What is the probability of the above data? The data tables go on to show that there were 45 subjects, of which 30 had z-scores in the positive direction, and 15 in the negative direction. How probable is this result? For data from 17 single, unpooled subjects, 13 are positive and 4 negative. How probable is this result? How probable are these two results, if the magnitude of the z-scores is considered? Can someone help me find a Website to simulate and graph the random distributions for 9109, 45, and 17 binary coin tosses, so I can make quick and dirty comparisons? The data summary by Oct. 8, 1997 is given at: http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/update9.html Since January of 1997, the on-line RPKP experiments have been available to anybody with Web access and a Java-equipped browser. To date, a total of 177 volunteer subjects have performed 2642 "on-the-record" experiments, the results of which are summarised below. For additional details on how the experiments are conducted, please see RPKP Update No. 8 or the RPKP Experiments home page. [end of quote] I noticed when I tried my first five runs, that my attention was galvanized both when the moving vertical line on the bell curve moved to the undesired left side, as when it moved to the desired right side. This suggests that intensity of focused concentration may be the primary factor in generating anomalous results. This intensity of focus may have both positive components of intellectual and emotional arousal, as when I tried to "push" and "pull" the line with rapid circular movements of the mouse cursor, without clicking, and another more subtle dimension of relaxed, deepening and expanding of awareness. Both these awareness skills might well increase with time and practice. This suggests a modification of the experiment: have the moving line disappear when it moves out of the desired right side, and reappear when it returns. Then increased focus will occur only when the line is in the desired region. By having the line appear only when it is in the central area, then an experiment might well show an anomalous deficit of extreme effects, rather like the "goat" effect of statistically improbable null results achieved by ESP nonbelievers in many experiments over the last half century. The effects may be provably stronger when the subject is a group focussing together on the same display. It is probable to me that the effects can be demonstrated with animals, using standard operant conditioning methods. Finally, a subject can be simulated by a software program, designed to react to the moving line's position by "increased focus and activation", for instance, by having the computer's speed increase, with increasing creation of complex patterns and sounds, and increasing utilization of core memory and hard disk memory. It may be that this complex system will also provably demonstrate retropsychokinetic effects, since we ourselves as well as it are part of the mysteriously subtle natural order of things. This would be a fundamental demonstration of great import, and easy to carry out quickly. Comment by Topher Cooper, Voice Processing Corp., on a metaanalysis of ESP literature by Dick Bierman: http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/bierman-metaanalysis.html http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/topher.html Imagine that you conduct an experiment which results in a "Z-score", i.e., in a value which, if the null hypothesis is true, should vary, from replication to replication, around a mean value of 0 with a standard deviation (amount of "spread") of 1 and should follow a Gausian "bell-shaped curve" approximately. Values very far from the mean will occur very rarely according to the null hypothesis, so a Z-score which is far from 0 can be taken as evidence that the null hypothesis is not what is going on. Imagine now that you have a bunch of different replications of the experiment, each with their own Z-score. Now the null hypothesis says that each of those Z-scores is an independent sample of a Z distribution -- each of them have the characteristics I mentioned above, and the value of each one has no influence of the values of the others. How does one go about looking at what all of them together says about the null and alternative hypotheses? The ideal answer takes into account that the different Z scores are based on experiments with a different number of trials. That means that an experiment with just a few trials, which rejects the null hypothesis counts for a lot more than a much larger experiment which rejects the null hypothesis by the same amount. The result is a weighted combination of the Z scores, which can then be rescaled so that it too is a Z score. A quick and dirty procedure -- which is valid but weak (it may fail to show something which the above procedure shows clearly) -- is to look at the sum of the Z-scores. If many of the separate Z-scores are high, then the sum will be even higher. We can reasonably ask what distribution we would expect from what the null-hypothesis says is the sum of a bunch of Z-scores. The answer is pretty simple. The sum of N Z-scores is a normal distribution with a standard deviation of sqrt(N). Therefore, if we divide the sum by the sqrt(N), we will get another Z score. It looks like Dick made a simple computational error here. The "total Z score" on your page is the result of dividing the sum of the Z-scores by 5 (sqrt(25); Z=5.308) rather than by sqrt(26) (Z=5.205). Imagine now, though, that you were running an experiment where sometimes there was a large positive deviation and sometimes a large negative one. If you were to look at the sum of the Z-scores in this case, the positive values and the negative values would tend to cancel each other out, and you would come out with a rather small and unimpressive "total Z score", even though large according to the null hypothesis. We would then have a case with a small mean but a lot of variance (i.e., a lot more extreme variation around the mean than expected). One way to create a single number which might detect this is to sum, not the Z scores themselves, but their squares. Large negatives and large positives would both show up as positive additions so that a lot of variance would show up as an exceptionally large sum of squares. Of course, the sum would always be non-negative, so a positive deviation does not mean that something is there. We need to know the distribution of the sum of squares of a bunch of independently distributed z-scores. The answer turns out to be easy. The sum of the squares of N independently distributed Z scores follows a distribution called the chi-square distribution. The chi-square distribution has a single parameter which is called "the number of degrees of freedom" and in this case, that parameter equals N. There is nothing profound about this, because the chi-square distribution with N degrees of freedom is *defined* to be whatever distribution results from the sum of the squares of N standard normal distributions (profundity occurs when the chi-square distribution shows up in other contexts, as it does). The important thing, then, is simply that the chi-square distribution is well characterized. You can find tables of it, for example, in the back of virtually any stat text. The sum of the squares of the Z-scores in this chart is 111.29, which should be compared to a chi-square distribution with 26 (not 25, is this the same error once again? Did Dick miscount the number of Z-scores he was working with?) degrees of freedom. How extreme is this? The odds of this sum being this large is one chance in 630 thousand million (what us Yanks call 630 billion). This is clearly more extreme than the "mere" one chance in 18 million which the "total-Z" indicates. I would say that he was not exaggerating when he said that this is pretty strong evidence that "something" (other than the null hypothesis) "is going on". Whether that "something" is something interesting (e.g., paranormal) depends on an analysis of the tightness of the experimental protocols. Topher Cooper Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 16:09:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA03586; Thu, 14 May 1998 15:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:56:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jay Olson" Organization: University of Idaho To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 15:55:36 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight Priority: normal In-reply-to: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08F0 xch-cpc-02> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.54) Message-ID: <2D186415990 hawthorn.csrv.uidaho.edu> Resent-Message-ID: <"B3uVX1.0.ut.zPtMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18793 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > One of Van Allen's objections was about the effects of extended > time in space on the human body. Science Fiction for years has been > talking about using rotating space platforms, toroidal shaped vehicles, > so that centrifical acceleration would replace gravity. Why haven't this > been used yet, and why are we not considering it for a Mars mission? > Tracking antennas should be able to cope with communication, even with a > rolling station. > > Hank I'm no expert, but I think the problem is with navigating the thing... But then one could always stop the rotation when one wanted to fire any rockets. Another potential problem would be durability. You might need a massive "wall" on the ship to withstand astronauts stomping away on it for months on end -- and of course one wants to minimise the ship's mass. Just a couple of thoughts... JAY OLSON From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 16:19:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA21572; Thu, 14 May 1998 16:15:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 16:15:53 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980514181558.00a1126c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 18:15:58 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 5 results Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xjbvG1.0.EG5.UitMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18794 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Take a look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run5.html Executive Summary: Our batting average is still .000 and this was with Dr Case's own catalyst! 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 May 14 17:05:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA06008; Thu, 14 May 1998 17:02:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 17:02:29 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: VCockeram Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 18:05:56 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <588e8160.355b2a37 aol.com> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"K8xbh2.0.aT1.9OuMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18795 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 14-May-98, VCockeram wrote: >In a message dated 98-05-14 06:50:30 EDT, you write: >> Once Vince proves he has O/U, he certainly should try Li and Na; if these >> work also, that certainly will put a crimp in Mill's theory. >> Ed Strojny >> >I am not trying to prove overunity here. All I wanted was to see was >what the differerence was between running a glow in (1) vacuum, (2) Argon, >(3) Hydrogen, (4) Potassium in a vacuum, (5) Argon with Potassium , >(6) Hydrogen with Potassium. Vince, Based on a paper on the BLP webpage it might be interesting to do a Argon plus Hydrogen run and see where the temp falls. ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 17:29:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21981; Thu, 14 May 1998 17:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 17:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355B89E0.800 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 20:18:40 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 5 results References: <3.0.1.32.19980514181558.00a1126c mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bWgzv3.0.MN5.5fuMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18796 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Take a look at: > > http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run5.html > > Executive Summary: > > Our batting average is still .000 and this was with Dr Case's own catalyst! > Seems to me it's up to Dr. Case to build his self-sustainer, Scott! "The truth is out there!" Nice effort, Scott - and, fast! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 17:27:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA12825; Thu, 14 May 1998 17:23:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 17:23:38 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08F4 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'Vortex-L'" Subject: FW: NATdS Report #13: Demonstration Vehicle - `Viking 29' Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 13:10:50 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"kMKqA.0.u73.5iuMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18797 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts This might be of interest to the group. This car is running in the Tour de Sol right now. Hank > ---------- > From: Michael H Bianchi[SMTP:bianchi BELLCORE.COM] > Reply To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List > Sent: Saturday, May 09, 1998 6:49 AM > To: Multiple recipients of list EV > Subject: NATdS Report #13: Demonstration Vehicle - `Viking 29' > > The Western Washington University Vehicle Research Institute (VRI) has > brought > another car along, for display, and while it looks somewhat like its > stable > mate, `Viking 23', there is a difference. It runs on light, but not > sunlight. > Instead it is powered by a Thermophotovoltaic (TPV) generator, also > referred to > as Midnight Sun(R), developed by the VRI and JX Crystals of Issaquah > WA. > > Picture a canister a bit smaller than a 1 gallon paint can. Up the > middle of > that can, place a ceramic tube. On the inside wall of the can place > solar > cells. Burn a fuel inside the ceramic tube, making it hot and > therefore it > glows. The solar cells in turn use the light from the glowing tube to > make > electricity. The fuel burns continuously, making the combustion > complete, > clean, and quiet. Since the solar cells are very close to the glowing > tube, > the illumination is much brighter than solar cells on the roof of a > car. > > The silicon carbide ceramic tube glows brightly in the infrared light > spectrum, > at a wave length of about 0.8 to 1.8 microns, and part of the design > challenge > is to match the brightest part of the glowing tube spectrum to most > sensitive > wavelengths of the photovoltaic cells. > > In `Viking 29', there are 8 such canisters, burning Compressed Natural > Gas > (CNG) illuminating gallium antimonide photovoltaic cells at 1700 > degrees > Kelvin. The 10 kiloWatts produced is stored in a 10 kiloWatt-hour, > 260 Volt > pack of Saft NiCad batteries. That drives a Unique Mobility 75 kW > motor > connected through a 4-speed, wide ratio transaxle to the rear wheels. > The > canisters are surrounded by a water jacket which takes the heat to a > large > radiator. All this is surrounded by a body of composite materials in > a vinyl- > ester matrix. > > A car of the future? Michael Seal, director of the VRI thinks it > might be but > it is be too early to tell. The car was finished just before they > left to > come to the Tour, and so only has about 20 miles on it. "The car was > built for > the Department of Energy, and the TPVs were built for the Department > of > Defense. The car is going to Washington to be shown the sponsors." > > What is the overall efficiency of producing electricity this way? > "It's still > very early days in this technology. Right now our best is about 8 > percent. We > guess that 30%, or even more, is obtainable. Our chief competitor is > the fuel > cell, which has an in-built advantage that it is inherently more > efficient than > TPV, but it has to run on hydrogen." But if you add in the cost of > producing, > storing, and transporting hydrogen then TPV can compete. Plus TPV can > run on > any available fuel. > > The Midnight Sun generators have been developed in the past 3 years. > The first > commercial applications are likely to be co-generation for mountain > cabins, > motor homes and yachts, where the waste heat can be used for other > purposes. > > For more information: > Michael R. Seal > Vehicle Research Institute > Western Washington University > Bellingham WA 98225-9086 > > 360 650-3045 > > seal cc.wwu.edu > > - - - - > The above is copyright Michael H. Bianchi. Permission to copy is > granted > provided the entire article is presented without modification and > this notice > remains attached. For other arrangements, contact me at > +1-973-822-2024. > - - - - > For more information on the American Tour de Sol, visit the web page > at > http://www.nesea.org > - - - - > Official American Tour de Sol information is available from the > sponsor, > the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association (NESEA) at 413-774-6051 > and > nesea nesea.org . All media enquiries should be addressed to ... > Jack Groh > Groh Associates > Sustainable Public Relations > email: GrohPR aol.com > (401)732-1551 tel > (401)732-0547 fax > NATdS Report #13: Demonstration Vehicle - `Viking 29' > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 18:32:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA27146; Thu, 14 May 1998 18:30:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 18:30:39 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 17:30:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 5 results Resent-Message-ID: <"Hznxt3.0.-d6.-gvMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18798 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:15 PM 5/14/98, Scott Little wrote: >Take a look at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run5.html > > >Executive Summary: > >Our batting average is still .000 and this was with Dr Case's own catalyst! > Looks looks excellent data. Markedly flat. It's really great to see pressure on there. Are you going to make a temperature cycling run? One another thing of interest might be to put a small amount of D2O in there, if it can be done safely. Case's filling protocol sounds like it is sure to make some. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 19:50:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA16409; Thu, 14 May 1998 19:47:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 19:47:51 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980514225252.006d48f0 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:52:55 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Woodward material on the Web Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"NOzb11.0.__3.LpwMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18799 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Those looking for gravitational theories of J. Woodward, check out this link http://chaos.fullerton.edu/~jimw/general/ And follow the links... K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 21:09:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA01847; Thu, 14 May 1998 21:07:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 21:07:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980515000446.007b7630 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 00:04:46 +0000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Light output from cold fusion cells Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"w-lUX2.0.mS.2-xMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18800 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear vorts: With a crash of windows95, more email has been lost again. However, Gene mentioned our use of cf to light up a visible light source. We did that and learned quite a bit, some of which we might write up further. At 12:05 AM, on 1/28/96, after working on our fifth conversion generator, and several hundredth experiment, Gayle Verner and I achieved a high grade electrical output electric power system actually able to also drive a small light source. The generator, using thermal energy derived secondary to the loading of isotopic fuels into a nickel metal electrode, delivered heat output in excess of what was applied. The peak derived high-grade electrical output was ~0.58 watts [~323 milliamperes]. The input electrical power was 9.8 watts. The output thermal power was about ~45 watts. By Feb 21, '96 with several watts electrical output, we used JET Energy Technology circuits with the Phusor(TM) immersion heating system to light a small fluorescent light. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:05:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA24297; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:02:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:02:13 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <355BCC65.A58 math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:02:29 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Light output from cold fusion cells References: <3.0.5.32.19980515000446.007b7630 world.std.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MfIL02.0.Xx5.KnyMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18801 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > > By Feb 21, '96 with several watts electrical output, we > used JET Energy Technology circuits with the Phusor(TM) > immersion heating system to light a small fluorescent light. > > Mitchell Swartz Congratulations...you reached step 0 on my O/U R&D hierarchy. A great achievement, but step 1 is to let some folks replicate your work.... -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:21:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA12280; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980515001850.008213b0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 00:18:50 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 5 results In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"N5OGr3.0.n_2.y1zMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18802 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:30 PM 5/14/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >Are you going to make a temperature cycling run? First thing I'm going to do is FAX Run 5's data to Dr. Case (he's webless) and invite him to come down to EarthTech to have the heat output of his own apparatus measured with our Versatile Medium-Power Water-Flow Calorimeter. I expect he won't take me up on the offer immediately because he's presently trying to make a self-sustainer. Maybe in a week or so, he'll give me a call. I might do some more work with the present setup tomorrow. One problem I'm having is erratic noise on the signals from the K thermocouples in the chamber. Due to the way I made these thermocouple probes (fused twisted chromel-alumel wires into the end of 1/16" OD SS304 tubing) these thermocouples are grounded. I suspect that this is the source of the problem. Sometimes when I run the turbopump, the thermocouple signals are significantly disturbed (like during the first evacuation in Run 5). Other times they seem immune (like during the subsequent evacuations in Run 5)!? Maybe the turbopump has nothing to do with it...? In previous experiments with this data acquisition system, with factory-made ungrounded thermocouples, I did not have these problems.... Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:29:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA13127; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:27:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980515012458.007c79b0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:24:58 +0000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Run 5 results In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980515001850.008213b0 mail.eden.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"4bDgx1.0.0D3.u8zMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18803 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:18 AM 5/15/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > > One problem I'm >having is erratic noise on the signals from the K thermocouples in the >chamber. Due to the way I made these thermocouple probes (fused twisted >chromel-alumel wires into the end of 1/16" OD SS304 tubing) these >thermocouples are grounded. I suspect that this is the source of the >problem. Sometimes when I run the turbopump, the thermocouple signals are >significantly disturbed (like during the first evacuation in Run 5). Other >times they seem immune (like during the subsequent evacuations in Run 5)!? Another reason to convert from thermometry to calormetry; and to do some serious measurements including thermal waveform reconstruction to check your system. Actually there should be two waveforms reconstructed with any dual type system. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:41:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA31290; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:40:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:40:08 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:39:41 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"BLAaG.0.he7.tKzMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18804 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-14 16:50:48 EDT, you write: > 3. Speaking of Tesla Coils, Tesla produced light, presumably > glow discharges, in evacuated tubes, without internal electrodes. > sometimes, there was no physical contact with the T. coil driving > the lamps, but better efficiency was obtained with one wire from > the coil wrapped around the tube. > Any ideas? > Tom Miller > Hmmm...H&R sels a Tesla coil for 229 bucks. 50 kV output. Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:42:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA31302; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:40:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:40:09 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <305aa25f.355bd525 aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:39:48 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: Verdian aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"-gdib1.0.0f7.uKzMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18805 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, Another run tonight, a short 36 minutes. I positioned the temperature sensor closer to the + end of the tube, about 1 inch below the upper electrode which accounts for the higher temperature. This is about the center of the tube wall bright orange hot area. Observation: In this area the glow is visible as a very pale violet glow. Below this area (where the tube wall is not even red hot) the glow is not visible at all....?? In the tube where the glow is visible, the glow is much smaller than the tube id (.230 inch) about .125 inch or so. Here is all the raw data recorded during the 36 minute run. Note that minute 1 is missing. I had the Fluke Model 51 thermocouple meter selected to Farenheight scale....sorry bout that. :( M=Minutes Tc=Degrees C +/- ).1C mA=Tube current V=Tube voltage Run start and end best vacuum was 26.8 M___Tc__mA____V_____Comments____ 0 23.0 50 1650<--power on. Fill is H2 at 20.8 in Hg. w/K 1 46 1600<--Tc missing..wrong scale on meter 2 488.4 44 1590 3 558.6 42 1585 4 582.5 41 1580 5 590.6 40 1580 6 594.3 40 1580 7 594.5 40 1575 8 594.7 38 1570 9 595.5 37 1560 10 597.0 37 1550 11 598.5 37 1535 12 598.8 37 1525 13 598.8 37 1510 14 598.9 35 1505 15 598.8 34 1500 16 598.8 34 1500 17 598.9 34 1500 18 598.8 34 1500 19 598.9 34 1500 20 598.8 34 1500 21 598.7 34 1500 22 598.8 34 1500 23 598.9 34 1500 24 598.8 34 1500 25 598.8 34 1500 <----Power Off 26 420.0 27 358.6 28 247.7 29 181.2 30 138.3<----H2 fill to 1 atm 31 109.1 32 88.1 33 73.9 34 64.5 35 55.9 36 50.8 End of run 05-14-98 Vince Cockeram h2k51498.wk4 =================================================== Power supply ripple was 60 volts measured 1 ballast lamp up from ground at point shown below: (+)------[//////////]-----(A)----[BALLAST]--------(-) gnd |__(V)___| |______scope Kind of a rounded sawtooth waveform. I _WILL_ get rid of that ripple! The (+) end of the tube shows greatest heat. Next runs will be at various fill pressures of Argon to see if it shows a sweet spot temperature at a particular fill pressure, then a clean tube with no K, to find high temp vs fill pressure for both H2 and then Ar. G'nite folks. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:50:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA00416; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:49:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:49:10 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980515005017.0081cae0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 00:50:17 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Light output from cold fusion cells In-Reply-To: <355BCC65.A58 math.ucla.edu> References: <3.0.5.32.19980515000446.007b7630 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"a59mO3.0.P6.LTzMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18806 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:02 PM 5/14/98 -0700, Barry Merriman wrote (regarding Swartz' claims): >Congratulations...you reached step 0 on my O/U R&D hierarchy. >A great achievement, but step 1 is to let some folks >replicate your work.... EarthTech is ready and waiting... Mitchell wrote: >The input electrical power was 9.8 watts. >The output thermal power was about ~45 watts. Can you reduce this a little, Mitchell? It would make it easier for us to accomodate. If not, then I will just have to restore the active cooling feature of our Versatile Medium-Power Water-Flow Calorimeter. BTW, the excess heat value you mention above would amount to at least an 80 sigma positive result in our calorimeter. You better plan on letting us test it several times. With our luck, it'll no doubt read unity on the first few tests. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 22:57:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA15828; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:55:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:55:35 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:52:59 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"vV78p2.0.Et3.MZzMr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18807 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-14 01:17:29 EDT, you write: > I wouldn't think the raw thermal temperature your going to see > in this tube is the important player, is it? Getting a nice stable > glow discharge at a MINIMUM voltage and power would buy you cheaper > components for your filtered DC supply and would be easier on the > hardware. I'm assuming that you will eventually need some kind of > crude calorimeter to work along with your filtered DC power measurement. > It just seems that "cooler is better". > > Frank Stenger Frank, Horace, You may well be correct on this, however my thinking was, from reading Dr. Mills writups, that the hydrino reaction really gets going in the suns corona. Now I'm not thinking of trying for 11,000,000 degrees F here but maybe the reaction needs high temps. I don't know. Besides, 20 bucks for diodes and a few more for some capacitors (which I need anyway) is not too bad. Hardware? These tubes are only a buck each! And I haven't destroyed one...yet. :-)....Well I did break one but not during a run. Regards, Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 23:01:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA01624; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:57:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 22:57:40 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <78642582.355bd93b aol.com> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:57:13 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Light output from cold fusion cells Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZQAAa1.0.DP.JbzMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18808 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-15 00:07:29 EDT, you write: > The peak derived high-grade electrical output > was ~0.58 watts [~323 milliamperes]. > The input electrical power was 9.8 watts. > The output thermal power was about ~45 watts. > > By Feb 21, '96 with several watts electrical output, we > used JET Energy Technology circuits with the Phusor(TM) > immersion heating system to light a small fluorescent light. > Mitchell Swartz Congratulations Mitch!!! Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 14 23:29:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA07754; Thu, 14 May 1998 23:28:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 14 May 1998 23:28:07 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980515022643.007c0a30 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 02:26:43 +0000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Light output from cold fusion cells In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980515005017.0081cae0 mail.eden.com> References: <355BCC65.A58 math.ucla.edu> <3.0.5.32.19980515000446.007b7630 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"U6VDn.0.4v1.s1-Mr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18809 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott: I showed you where you may have seen excess heat with the KS beads; not did, but may have. Instead, your interest in seeing things robust to disprove everything for your ZeroPointEnergy project is not the science we try to do where things get measured. I may put our analysis of your KSdata on my website soon for others to examine. You should spend more time doing some long term baselines, and extract real data. Try to compare, for example, the catalysts you just examined. Measure them, if you can. If you want to demonstrate a serious interest Scott, I suggest you reconsider some of the suggestions already made to you including long term baselines, and thermal waveform reconstruction of your system. BTW JET Energy Technology has not only repeated experiments of others, and disproven some - but has also published many of the results. JET Energy remains ready to examine others systems if they wish, and if we have facilities available at the time. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 04:44:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA17379; Fri, 15 May 1998 04:43:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 04:43:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 03:41:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: More from Case Resent-Message-ID: <"pn9k12.0.TF4.6f2Nr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18810 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:05 PM 5/14/98, Craig Haynie wrote: >It seems to me it will be VERY difficult to make a self-sustaining Case >device in that manner that he's choosing to do it. By simply insulating the >device, there is nothing to stabilize the temperature. If the device >produces more heat than required by the supplied insulation, the temperature >should climb beyond the 250C mark. Should the insulation be less than >necessary to maintain the temperature, then then device should cool. There seems to be a fairly wide operating range on temperature, say 185 C to 240 C, assuming the result is not an artifact. The thermal conduction is linear with respect to temperature difference, so there should be a built in control provided the heat production is relatively constant. The device should seek an equilibrium temperature. If there is some non-linear blip, then the device would be thermally unstable and active regulation would be required. > >For this self-sustaining method to work, (assuming the heat effect is real), >then something will be necessary to 'dump' excess heat when a target mark is >reached. If he could, somehow, arrange to boil water, or some other >chemical, at the target temperature, then this might suffice as a >temperature regulator. Else, without a temperature regulator, he will >constantly have to watch the device, and somehow manually dump heat when the >temperature rises to high. Boiling water that is a well chosen fixed thermal resisitance from the steel chamber would work, as discussed in earlier threads. It is just a matter of chosing the right insultion between the tank and the water. Could even use an insulated closed low pressure water based "clinker tube". A direct contact clinker type low pressure tube using mercury might work well also. Alternatively, pressurized water could be used in direct thermal contact with steel cell. It seems the bigger problem is getting enough insulation. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 05:15:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA14268; Fri, 15 May 1998 05:13:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 05:13:12 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003f01bd7ffa$990783c0$248cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: High Frequency Glow Discharge with Alkali Cathodes Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 06:10:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"FxsXb.0.rU3.N53Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18811 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The "Art" in High Frequency Sputtering for thin film deposition is well advanced. Incorporation of this technology in a hydrogen-deuterium filled quartz discharge tube at optimum pressure with an alkali metal cathode (Lithium preferred)can accelerate electrons up to several hundred ev in the cathode fall space where they can impact the slow protons or deuterons and possibly form Quasi-Neutrons or Quasi-Dineutrons. With the proper pressure and anode voltage using a sodium cathode the cathode fall potential is about 185 volts for Hydrogen, 80 volts for Helium, and 75 volts for Argon. Lower pressures and higher voltage will generate x-rays as in the Crook's Tube. For minimizing input energy High Frequency Unipolar Pulses would be preferable. Secondly the High Frequency Discharge will produce an abundance of high energy photons that can be used for Photo-Voltaic conversion external to the discharge tube. Fluorescence of a phosphor coating on the inner (or outer) surface of the discharge tube may assist in maximizing the Photo-Voltaic converter output. The "luminous" Anode Fall Column should fill as much of the discharge tube as possible. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 05:19:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA19721; Fri, 15 May 1998 05:16:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 05:16:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805151213.IAA27481 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Light output from cold fusion cells Date: Fri, 15 May 98 08:16:58 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"pT5K83.0.2q4.M83Nr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18812 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mitch wrote: > At 12:05 AM, on 1/28/96, after working on our >fifth conversion generator, and several hundredth experiment, >Gayle Verner and I achieved a high grade electrical output electric >power system actually able to also drive a small light source. Wonderful! Thanks for the info... Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 05:33:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA21285; Fri, 15 May 1998 05:31:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 05:31:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 04:29:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"1vmlv.0.VC5.lM3Nr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18813 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:39 AM 5/15/98, VCockeram wrote: >M=Minutes Tc=Degrees C +/- ).1C mA=Tube current V=Tube voltage >Run start and end best vacuum was 26.8 > >M___Tc__mA____V_____Comments____ [snip] >24 598.8 34 1500 [snip] >Power supply ripple was 60 volts measured 1 ballast lamp >up from ground at point shown below: The resistance of a single lamp is R = V/I = 115 V/0.065 A = 1763 ohms. Your DC current noted in the above table entry above was 34 mA. The DC voltage across the bulb is thus about V = R*I = 1763*.034 = 60 V, so you have 50 percent ripple. This seems very low for the 0.6 uF cap with half-wave rectification. For ripple I get Vr = (0.037 A)/(60(.6x10^-6 F)) = 1027 V = 69 percent ripple. Maybe there is a lot of inductance in the system? Could be bulb dynamics smooth the ripple. If you used DC coupling on your scope probe you should have seen the 60 V DC baseline across the bulb. It is assumed the AC voltage across the bulb measured above was RMS. This gives an AC current of 34 mA also, so the total AC + DC current is 68 mA. The power to the tube is then about P = V*A = (1500 V)(.068 A) = 102 watts. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 06:09:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA23711; Fri, 15 May 1998 06:07:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 06:07:12 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005201bd8002$28b54460$248cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Bill Beatty, others, ESP on topic? Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 07:05:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"CwsLv2.0.No5._t3Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18815 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Friday, May 15, 1998 6:54 AM Subject: Bill Beatty, others, ESP on topic? >Is the discussion of ESP experiments or theory that is not directly related >to energy matters OK for this list? Hardly! But, what more can you expect from a "Kid" with Attention Deficit Disorder? :-) >It just does not seem to me that >saying PK might possibly affect energy measuring experiments is a basis for >endless open ended discussion of ESP. Have you ever been to Santa Fe? Where do you think Tom Claytor and the rest of the troops at Los Alamos get their ideas? :-) > >Although ESP, flying saucers, etc. are all very interesting, it sees like >there are better places for discussion of >those things. Would you settle for Roswell? >Brief off topic >diversions, especially those designated as off topic, are well tolerated by >most here, including me, I hope, but there appears to be developing a >regular cross-posting type discussion of PK, etc., brewing. Spill-over from the Compuserve ENCOUNTERS FORUM, you think? > >I'd like to ask Rich Murray to stop cross-posting that stuff here, but >would like to see if others feel the same first, and see if such a request >is appropriate based on the charter. I doubt that an Act of Congress could accomplish that. AS ONE,What? Frederick :-) > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 06:29:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA29099; Fri, 15 May 1998 06:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 06:28:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 05:26:09 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Bill Beaty, others, ESP on topic? Resent-Message-ID: <"Xof041.0.Z67.dB4Nr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18817 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I wrote: "Sorry about miss-spelling Bill Beaty's name!" Sorry about misspelling "misspelling." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 06:55:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA00589; Fri, 15 May 1998 06:52:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 06:52:24 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980515085248.00c07a74 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:52:48 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: 9.8 watts in - 45 watts out In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980515000446.007b7630 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cexu_3.0._8.MY4Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18818 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 00:04 5/15/98 +0000, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >The input electrical power was 9.8 watts. >The output thermal power was about ~45 watts. Mitchell, if you can produce a cell with this performance, then you are the hero that cold fusion research has been waiting for. You were at ICCF-7. You heard Martin Fleischman say "no cold fusion demonstration apparatus exists today". That is the biggest problem that cold fusion research has faced throughout its turbulent 9+ year history. If we just had a cell that reliably worked half as well as you claim above, EVERYTHING would change....and FAST. If you will come forth with this cell and allow independent replication of your observations, I am certain that it would spawn major cold fusion research programs in the national labs within 6 months. Hell, Tom Claytor would have it running in his lab at LANL in 6 days!!! Mitchell, I strongly urge you to respond directly to this vital issue. The world is waiting to hear more about your fantastic CF cell. 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 May 15 07:16:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA05855; Fri, 15 May 1998 07:13:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 07:13:52 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980515080620.00aed440 popmail.esa.lanl.gov> X-Sender: claytor_t_n popmail.esa.lanl.gov X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:06:20 -0600 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: Re: 9.8 watts in - 45 watts out Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"aPq0M.0.BR1.Vs4Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18819 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, Maybe not in my lab, but in the lab down the street, the so called National Calorimetry Laboratory. They assay radionuclides for heat at the Watt, milliwatt and microwatt levels. Could probably detect heat after death for days. Tom At 08:52 AM 5/15/98 -0500, you wrote: >At 00:04 5/15/98 +0000, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > >>The input electrical power was 9.8 watts. >>The output thermal power was about ~45 watts. > >Mitchell, if you can produce a cell with this performance, then you are the >hero that cold fusion research has been waiting for. > >You were at ICCF-7. You heard Martin Fleischman say "no cold fusion >demonstration apparatus exists today". That is the biggest problem that >cold fusion research has faced throughout its turbulent 9+ year history. >If we just had a cell that reliably worked half as well as you claim above, >EVERYTHING would change....and FAST. > >If you will come forth with this cell and allow independent replication of >your observations, I am certain that it would spawn major cold fusion >research programs in the national labs within 6 months. Hell, Tom Claytor >would have it running in his lab at LANL in 6 days!!! > >Mitchell, I strongly urge you to respond directly to this vital issue. The >world is waiting to hear more about your fantastic CF cell. > > > >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) > > http://www.nde.lanl.gov/staff/claytor/claytor.htm Thomas N. Claytor Claytor_t_n lanl.gov Los Alamos National Laboratory ESA-MT, MS C914 Los Alamos NM, 87545 505-667-6216 voice 505-665-7176 fax From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 08:01:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA11078; Fri, 15 May 1998 07:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 07:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 10:51:56 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: ESP on topic? / Possible Case error Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805151055_MC2-3D21-233D compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"s-XPf.0.zi2.jV5Nr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18820 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Horace Heffner wants to know if messages about ESP and PK are on topic. Only if you think CF is caused by psychokinesis. That would make it a form of subjective science, y'see. Defined as: "science you subject other people to, willy-nilly." I refer you to the American Heritage definitions for "subject" (verb) numbers 3 and 5: 3. To expose to something: "The patients on that ward were subjected to infection." 5. To subjugate; subdue. Fred Sparber asks: "AS ONE,What?" Answer: As one who would subject you to psychokinesis. Okay? I hope that clears up these questions. Moving on to a slightly more serious topic, I have been thinking about the puzzling and disappointing results reported by Scott Little, and about the equipment Case has used until now and the results Gene Mallove observed. Could this be an artifact? If it is, where should we start to look for it, assuming anyone thinks it is worth pursuing? Various hypotheses have been proposed here about things like thermal gradients in the catalyst materials, or the placement of the cell in the electric blanket. I think these hypotheses are improbable because they cannot explain why Case conducted tests for many years and saw no significant difference between the temperature with hydrogen and deuterium, and they cannot explain why the effect seems to be dependent upon the catalyst and the choice of hydrogen or deuterium. All along I have felt the most likely weakness is the difference in conductivity between hydrogen and deuterium. Mizuno had great difficulty with his gas calorimeter because of conductivity differences. A tiny amount of air contamination caused a large change in conductivity. Oriani had so much trouble with his gas calorimeter he abandoned it and made a Seebeck calorimeter instead. He built it from scratch! It took a year as I recall, so I recommend you buy one. Anyway, I said that the gas conductivity explanation seems weak because the catalyst material is thermally coupled to the steel, so most heat transfer goes by that path. I have now learned that the various catalysts look different, and they have different density. Some are in large chunks, some small, some in a powder form. Perhaps -- maybe -- the ones that Case is using now are good insulators. They are not well thermally coupled to the steel, so heat transfer goes from the steel wall, to the gas, to the thermocouple. The biggest problem with this hypothesis is that hydrogen conducts heat better than deuterium, so if anything the temperature should be higher with hydrogen; the thermocouple should be less well insulated when surrounded by a blanket of hydrogen . . . but perhaps air or other impurities play a role. Or do I have it backwards . . . Maybe better conductivity means the temperature should be lower? Here is an example from Mizuno's data. This situation is reversed: the heat is going from the center of the cell to the outside, rather than from the electric blanket to the inside. Mizuno places a ceramic heater in the center of the gas cell. The heater is attached to a copper heat sink, and the thermocouple is attached to the copper. With 20 watts input the thermocouple registers ~440 deg C in a vacuum. With 13.8 Torr D2 gas it registers ~310 deg C. With 12.0 Torr H2 it registers ~280 deg C. He has a similar spread of data points for 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 watts. Other tests show that pressure difference (13.8 versus 12.0 Torr) will have no effect. Anyway, the test Case is now attempting will settle all questions. When you have doubts about an issue like gas conductivity, you can deal with them two ways: 1. Try to measure gas conductivity and account for it. 2. Redesign the experiment to eliminate the issue. Oriani went to a Seebeck calorimeter, Case is trying to go to a self-sustaining device. I prefer method # 2. Eliminate the problem whenever possible, rather than finessing it, managing, measuring or reducing it. Wipe it off the slate. I think the test Case is now performing will do that. Let me point out one other thing, while I am on the subject. Suppose I am right, and the thermal conductivity of the catalyst is the key -- a hypothesis someone else already proposed, by the way. As I said, I latched on to this because I learned that the various catalysts look different, they have different density, some are chunks, some are powder. I learned that because Case, Little and Claytor described catalysis in detail, and because I now have some photographs of materials. This demonstrates the importance of *describing materials in detail* and *seeing* materials. It demonstrates the importance of photographs and the advantages of e-mail transmission of images. Most of all, it demonstrates the importance of *sharing information, sharing materials, and cooperative research efforts.* All too often -- FAR too often -- mistakes and absurd experiments in cold fusion experiments have dragged on for years because the scientists doing the work have not described their instruments, materials, and techniques in detail. It has to be meticulous and boring detail. People should have that lesson ground into them by elementary and high school science courses, but often they do not. When I page through ICCF proceedings, I ignore or dismiss many papers because they do not have enough detail for me to judge, and the authors could not or would not tell me more and show more data during the poster sessions. If we are able to quickly resolve the Case experiment one way or the other, it will be because Case is totally open and totally cooperative with us and with Scott Little. If he is making a mistake we might save him five more years of squandered effort. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 08:05:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17135; Fri, 15 May 1998 08:04:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:04:30 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980515110150.007bf100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:01:50 +0000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: 9.8 watts in - 45 watts out In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980515085248.00c07a74 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980515000446.007b7630 world.std.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Tw61a3.0.eB4.yb5Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18821 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:52 AM 5/15/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >You were at ICCF-7. You heard Martin Fleischman say "no cold fusion >demonstration apparatus exists today". That is the biggest problem that >cold fusion research has faced throughout its turbulent 9+ year history. >If we just had a cell that reliably worked half as well as you claim above, >EVERYTHING would change....and FAST. Dr. Fleischmann was correct that people no longer share all (and some not even any) of their data and information. That is what he meant. You have failed to inform vortex and others that repeatedly quote your post that you have been deliberately misquoting Dr. Fleischmann out-of-context from the first sentence of his one hour talk. Why dont you summarize all of his comments, Scott? I suggest again, Scott, that you realize that science is slow methodical process, and that you attempt to MEASURE things with your equipment. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 08:24:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA20909; Fri, 15 May 1998 08:20:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:20:40 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:21:48 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge... Resent-Message-ID: <"8NN5C3.0.W65.7r5Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18822 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Re: >> 3. Speaking of Tesla Coils, Tesla produced light, presumably >> glow discharges, in evacuated tubes, without internal electrodes. >> sometimes, there was no physical contact with the T. coil driving >> the lamps, but better efficiency was obtained with one wire from >> the coil wrapped around the tube. >> Any ideas? >> Tom Miller >Hmmm...H&R sels a Tesla coil for 229 bucks. 50 kV output. Tesla coils make lots of pretty light and lots of electromagnetic noise. But it is extremely difficult to measure anything quantitatively. Your present glow makes lots more atomic H than a Tesla coil would. A Tesla coil would just distract you. My recommendation---avoid it. 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 May 15 08:51:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA27068; Fri, 15 May 1998 08:47:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:47:36 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 08:48:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"qDvi62.0.bc6.ME6Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18823 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace wrote: >The resistance of a single lamp is R = V/I = 115 V/0.065 A = 1763 ohms. Actually, the resistance of the W filament depends on its temperature. The above value is indeed its resistance at design operating power and temperature. At room temperature its resistance will be several times smaller. Measure it with your ohmmeter! In Vince's ballast the filament temperature and resistance will be at some intermediate value. In order to view his tube current _quantitatively_ with his oscilloscope, Vince needs to insert a low value resistor in series with the tube. It can be 10 ohm, say, though even 100 ohm is not overly perturbing to his system in its present configuration. 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 May 15 09:22:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA00932; Fri, 15 May 1998 09:18:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 09:18:22 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980515122137.00bf9430 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 12:21:37 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: RE: [off-topic]Manned vs. unmanned space flight In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08F0 xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"mmXeN.0.PE.Ch6Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18824 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:16 AM 5/14/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > One of Van Allen's objections was about the effects of extended >time in space on the human body. Science Fiction for years has been >talking about using rotating space platforms, toroidal shaped vehicles, >so that centrifical acceleration would replace gravity. Why haven't this >been used yet, and why are we not considering it for a Mars mission? >Tracking antennas should be able to cope with communication, even with a >rolling station. Hasn't been used because it hasn't been needed. Upping the potassium in astronauts diets--mainly in juice drinks--eliminated most of the long term effects of zero gee. The three remaining concerns are radiation, calcium loss (similar to post-menopausal women) and space adaption syndrome, which affects some astronauts during their first few days in space. Rotation can't help with radiation exposure, and may or may not help with the calcium loss, but it really makes SAS much worse... Projections are that a rotating structure would need to be at least 200 or more feet in diameter to be tolerable. I'm sure that such structures will be built, initially in the form of two spacecraft connected with cables. But right now it is not a high priority. The real issue is the big fallacy of space travel. Space stations in earth orbit are a dead end. The real future of space travel goes through or around the moon. You read about the satellite stranded in the wrong orbit that Hughes just fixed? How did they fix the orbit? By sending it around the moon. The difference in space travel between LEO (low earth orbit) and leaving the earth gravitational pull completely is time and a little bit of fuel. For many orbital maneuvers in LEO, the cheapest way there is around the moon, etc. Once there are reusable lunar landers on or around the moon, lunar orbit is a much better place to put space stations--if you still need them. That is why the Apollo mission used lunar rendezvous but no earth orbit rendezvous. Much cheaper that way. 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 May 15 10:32:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA15102; Fri, 15 May 1998 10:26:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 10:26:55 -0700 Message-ID: <355C6D23.373B earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:28:19 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: relevance of ESP research 05/15/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FO_Gp1.0.ph3.Th7Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18825 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 5, 1998 Hello Vortexans, I won't be posting more ESP items, except for the rare ones of outstanding significance, scientifically and statistically. Those interested can join the RetroPsychoKinesis Project discussion: send message "subscribe" to rpkp-request fourmilab.ch, and messages to rpkp fourmilab.ch . However, naturally I can't resist stating that ESP research is highly relevant to CF research, as well as to all of science. ESP research is characterized by rigorous, boring, painstaking studies that accumulate huge sample sets to establish and repeatedly replicate confirmations that have probabilities far above chance levels. That's "probable", not "probabble". Remote viewing indicates that direct study of nature is feasible. Subjective and objective methods will be practically, and eventually theoretically, integrated. Psychokinesis indicates that the "Experimenter Effect" is real, and its magnitude of effect on delicate, subtle, long-running physical experiments, common in CF research, may be profound. Randomness itself, basic to theory and practice of measurement and experimentation, can no longer be blindly assumed and taken for granted. Precognition overturns the basic concept of casuality that has framed three centuries of science. Expansion of awareness opens up the reality of receiving valid scientific inspiration and guidance from subjective communication with more evolved awarenesses. As the scientific and broader human communities start to publicly acknowledge and explore these revolutionary openings, then the overall climate will be more supportive of relatively minor heresies like CF. "As one" really means, "As ONE": we are individualized facets of an infinite, singular creative ONE. Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 11:14:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA27036; Fri, 15 May 1998 11:09:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:09:33 -0700 Message-ID: <355C8509.66EE interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:10:17 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ESP on topic? / Possible Case error References: <199805151055_MC2-3D21-233D compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cXkGS.0.Jc6.SJ8Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18826 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > (snip good musings about thermal conductivity) They are not well thermally coupled to > the steel, so heat transfer goes from the steel wall, to the gas, to the > thermocouple. The biggest problem with this hypothesis is that hydrogen > conducts heat better than deuterium, so if anything the temperature should be > higher with hydrogen; the thermocouple should be less well insulated when > surrounded by a blanket of hydrogen . . All good points, Jed. I was just thinking that since the density of D2 is twice that of H2, the Reynolds number would be greater with D2 than with H2. Now, the Reynolds number, given by: R_e = D * v * rho / mu where D = characteristic length of flow - like pipe diameter v = fluid velocity rho = fluid density mu = fluid vicosity impacts the flow regime such as laminar, turbulent - and so effects the details of convective heat transfer - as in the space over the catalyst. Then you have yer Prandtl number, yer Nusselt number, yer XXXXX number, etc. I agree, the self sustainer's the acid test - especially if Case does it himself and then permits it to be tested in detail. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 11:32:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA11470; Fri, 15 May 1998 11:27:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:27:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 10:25:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ESP on topic? / Possible Case error Resent-Message-ID: <"MssI6.0.5p2.1a8Nr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18827 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:51 AM 5/15/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: >Moving on to a slightly more serious topic, I have been thinking about the >puzzling and disappointing results reported by Scott Little, and about the >equipment Case has used until now and the results Gene Mallove observed. Could >this be an artifact? If it is, where should we start to look for it, assuming >anyone thinks it is worth pursuing? Various hypotheses have been proposed here >about things like thermal gradients in the catalyst materials, or the >placement of the cell in the electric blanket. I think these hypotheses are >improbable because they cannot explain why Case conducted tests for many years >and saw no significant difference between the temperature with hydrogen and >deuterium, and they cannot explain why the effect seems to be dependent upon >the catalyst and the choice of hydrogen or deuterium. [snip] Jed, I still think you should give more thought, or investigation with Case, with regard to the idea that the problem is due to a systematic error introduced by manual handling of the container during filling. It surprizes me the post of this idea 5/13/98 under title: "Case: Channel Artifact and Manual Technique" received no comment. This explanation could meet all the criteria, due in part to the fact that the handling methodology should be very similar in all of Case's tests, unless he reorganized his lab during the period of investigation. Thus a very slight variation in manual proceedure could thus produce systematic error. The most critical circumstance is probably the location of the D2 and H2 bottles in relation to the test location. Extra credence to this notion is given by the fact that all of Case's work has been based on relative heat produced, not a calibrated measure of absolute energy. In the many tests which failed, it is only necessary that the catalyst lie in a similar position during the H2 and D2 runs. The device could have actually been overunity for *both* H2 and D2 and Case would never have known it. It could be that a systematic difference in handling, sufficient to produce the 5 C temperature difference between H2 and D2 runs, was only recently introduced. It could be that it was "psychologically" introduced. It could be that it happened periodically in the past, but the catalyst involved was not granular or thermally conductive enough to make the effect over 5 C. It is very clear that results from the very granular catalysts used by Scott are sensitive to how the catalyst granules lay relative to the thermistor. One possible explanation for Case's "discovery" after a long period of negative results is simply a hard to notice and very minor change in the manual routine during gas filling that causes a systematic difference in the lie of the granules between H2 and D2 filling. The best way to prevent this kind artifact, as mentioned earlier, is to restrain the catalyst with a mesh. It should also tend go away if a greater depth of catalyst is used. Quotes of prior posts follow: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - At 10:24 AM 5/13/98, Brendan Hall wrote: [snip] >Could someone have a look at the particle size distribution of the >particles that lodge onto the thermocouple during the run? Can we compare >the particle size distributions for i) those that did get a reaction >(temperature difference) to ii) those that didn't get a reaction when >introducing the deuterium? At 3:58 PM 5/11/98, Scott Little wrote: >Gene, > >As the only Vortex eyewitness to Case's technique, can you comment on the >technique he uses to remove and replace the chamber in the heater nest >during each filling? It seems at least possible that he could be >subconsciously pressing the chamber into the heater nest harder after the >D2 filling than after the H2 fillings. If so, the improved coupling could >account for the higher chamber temp observed at the same heater power. [snip] 5/13/98 under title: "Case: Channel Artifact and Manual Technique" I posted: Another item to consider, along the same lines as both the above two concerns, is the method used to assure the catalyst lays in exactly the same way on the bottom of the cell in each run. Unlike Little, Case has used a thin layer of catalyst. Such a thin layer would be very susceptable to variations in how the material lay from filling to filling. Possibly the high density of the catalyst, or particle size distribution as suggested above, used in the positve Case runs is especially sensitive to its position in the cell. We already have some evidence of the importance of this from Scott's anomaly. Uniformity of the lay of the catalyst in the cell might only be achieved by following a rigorous, almost ritualistic protocol. Without extreme attention to the minutest details of the manual procedure, the simple fact that the H2 bottle is located somewhere different than the D2 bottle might affect, in a systematic way, through the motions of the experimenter, the final lay of the catalyst, in relation to the internal thermocouple. At minimum, some well defined ritual for shaking and evening the lay of the catalyst is necessary. Alternately, some corrective device, like a holding screen, might be employed in the cell to maintain catalyst posistion between H2 and D2 runs, or the catalyst might be used in greater depth, like Scott has done. Since Scott has negative results so far, that approach does not sound favorable for reproducing the Case results. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 11:39:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA00029; Fri, 15 May 1998 11:35:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:35:54 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 10:36:00 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ESP on topic? Resent-Message-ID: <"uA69N1.0.H.9i8Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18828 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:51 AM 5/15/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex > >Horace Heffner wants to know if messages about ESP and PK are on topic. Only >if you think CF is caused by psychokinesis. If I recall correctly, Patterson used a "foranimous mesh", though by some to be cut from ladies nylons, in the CETI cell to separate the platinum anode from the Pd coated beads. I hypothesize that the excess heat was from the mesh, not the cathode, and was due to the psychosexual energy entrained in the mesh. Does this mean we can now dedicate lots of bandwidth to discussing styles in ladies underwear, or more importantly, the psychsexual prowess of those who wear them? I guess we better get some good graphics archiving capabilities going! 88888^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 11:53:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04119; Fri, 15 May 1998 11:50:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:50:36 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 10:50:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: 9.8 watts in - 45 watts out Resent-Message-ID: <"4GjyA.0.G01.xv8Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18829 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:01 AM 5/15/98, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >At 08:52 AM 5/15/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >> >>You were at ICCF-7. You heard Martin Fleischman say "no cold fusion >>demonstration apparatus exists today". That is the biggest problem that >>cold fusion research has faced throughout its turbulent 9+ year history. >>If we just had a cell that reliably worked half as well as you claim above, >>EVERYTHING would change....and FAST. > > > Dr. Fleischmann was correct that people no longer share all >(and some not even any) of their data and information. >That is what he meant. You have failed to inform vortex >and others that repeatedly quote your post that you have been >deliberately misquoting Dr. Fleischmann out-of-context from the >first sentence of his one hour talk. Why dont you summarize >all of his comments, Scott? > > I suggest again, Scott, that you realize that science is slow >methodical process, and that you attempt to MEASURE things with >your equipment. > > Best wishes. > Mitchell Swartz Mitchell, It appears you are attempting to duck replication of your device by knocking Little's calorimetry. If you don't like Little's calorimetry, surely you would find the calorimetry of a national lab acceptable? Is there some reason you can not or will not share your information with a national lab? If you really have such a device this is wonderful and phenominal news! Surely 27 months hs been enough time to veryify your numbers. Isn't site visitation to share the information and train others long overdue? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 12:43:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA12309; Fri, 15 May 1998 12:32:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 12:32:36 -0700 Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <355C41F4.3CB5B235 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 13:24:04 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ESP on topic? / Possible Case error References: <199805151055_MC2-3D21-233D compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"ShzAU2.0.F03.KX9Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18830 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: ... Moving on to a slightly more serious topic, I have been thinking about the puzzling and disappointing results reported by Scott Little, and about the equipment Case has used until now and the results Gene Mallove observed. Could this be an artifact? ... Anyway, the test Case is now attempting will settle all questions. When you have doubts about an issue like gas conductivity, you can deal with them two ways: 1. Try to measure gas conductivity and account for it. 2. Redesign the experiment to eliminate the issue. Oriani went to a Seebeck calorimeter, Case is trying to go to a self-sustaining device. I prefer method # 2. Eliminate the problem whenever possible, rather than finessing it, managing, measuring or reducing it. Wipe it off the slate. I think the test Case is now performing will do that. ... Hi Jed, Even a highly skilled surgeon attempting to do something like a hip replacement for the first time ever will practice on cadavers and dogs. Often the first "for-real" attempts are not highly successful -- heart replacement "successes" lasted more than 100 days. Suppose the technique is refined to a success rate of 9 out of 10. How is this technique transmitted? The student would be another highly skilled surgeon who observes the inventing surgeon in the same operating room and, later, who wields the scapel under the inventing surgeon's direct supervision. Since Professor Case is willing to reveal all, he should be extended the latitude and discipleship that are necessary for achievement in other fields. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 13:06:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA21623; Fri, 15 May 1998 13:02:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 13:02:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 13:03:07 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: list physics teaching Subject: electrostatic charging via condensation?! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_8ed2.0.nH5.jz9Nr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18831 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's something I received recently: > wrestled with this idea for years. Ever since the day I was standing on > a rubber mat degreasing air craft parts. The freon in the tank was hot. > There were refrigerated coils around the top of the tank to condense the > freon vapors and return the liquid to the tank. As I placed my left hand > into the tank, torrents of freon condensed on and ran off my hand. As > long as the left hand was in the freon vapors a small spark steadily > jumped from my right fore finger to the tank. More at : http://members.tripod.com/~LYNN_MILLS/index-2.html Lynn Mills This is a very strange phenomenon. Condensation is not known to cause electrostatic charging! If it did, then the opposite charge must go into the air, in order to balance the charge which appears on the condensing surface. As Lynn points out on the above webpage, if condensation involves electrostatic effects, then perhaps this is the true explanation of the mechanism which produces lightning (and perhaps tornados.) Perhaps a simple electrostatic generator could be based on this effect. Hang a cold metal plate over a hot liquid while measuring the microamps out of the plate to earth-ground. Or boil some liquid in a suspended metal pot, and measure microamperes to ground. Electrostatic generators based on the latter effect already exist. These were called "hydroelectric generators" in the mid 1800's. They took the form of a steam boiler suspended on insulators, with a jet of steam escaping from a specially constructed nozzle. Electrostatic effects from a flash-cloud? The body of the water tank would attain an extremely high voltage, with an opposite charge presumably on the steam cloud. They were thought to operate via collision of water droplets with the inside of their wooden nozzles, but perhaps this explanation is wrong, and these devices hold a mystery. I wonder, does the effect work more strongly with freon than with water? If so, then that would explain why no one has stumbled across it by now. If it is very feeble when water is used (and only would become significant for enormous amounts of condensation), then tabletop testing might not reveal it, even though it would easily drive thunderstorms. If the key is to use an insulating liquid, then perhaps Kerosene would also work (easier to obtain!) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Fri May 15 14:22:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06614; Fri, 15 May 1998 14:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:16:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 21:13:57 +0000 Message-ID: <19980515211353.AAA24024 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"U3kWe2.0.Cd1.i2BNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18832 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed wrote: >You would be surprised how many people become confused about such relatively >simple issues. Many experts who know the trees down to the last leaf have >trouble seeing the forest. For example, I expect Elliot Kennel knows Kalman >filters and differential equations like the back of his hand, but I still >think his "OCV heat shift" hypothesis was incorrect. > > > I think some other knowledgeable people ought to be invited to > participate, too, if we sincerely want to try to reach an understanding. > Consider: Ben Bush, Elliot Kennel, Mitch Swartz, Scott Little, Ed > Storms, ..... > > . . . and Martin Fleischmann, and Stan Pons. > This would be great to see. If certain individuals, distinguished by their accomplishments, were to exchange information in a forum that could be seen but not easily penetrated by the less informed (like me), we would see a lot less venting of emotion and trivia and more of what most of us really want. If someone in the bleachers really has a burning question or issue, it could perhaps be submitted through some sort of filtering process. Of course, we all know we can pummell Jed with email, but that is not fair to him and he, like everyone, has biases. Maybe we could indicate in message headings to the open forum (Lower Vortex) that we wish to be considered for posting in the closed forum (Upper Vortex). If enough people in Lower Vortex agree, a steady din would erupt and a member of both forums would either post it in Upper Vortex or explain why it is not particularly relevant (something Jed does a lot of already). I am rusty, but at one time, was well-trained in mathematics. I even studied Kalman filters (remember nothing of that), being a digital control systems major. I have a really tough time with ASCII math. I usually don't even try. I am already plagued with confusion, having not solved a differential equation in a long time, but with cryptic notation, I am lost. Besides Mathematica or MathCad, I know of no suitable emailable format. Is there a shareware program that could be used to transfer non-ambiguous mathematical formulations? Ed Wall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 14:46:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA05621; Fri, 15 May 1998 14:43:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:43:10 -0700 Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 14:45:11 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: Re: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry In-reply-to: <19980515211353.AAA24024 Default> X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199805152143.OAA24761 smtp1.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gTb003.0.jN1.iRBNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18833 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:13 PM 5/15/98 +0000, you wrote: >Besides Mathematica or MathCad, I know of no suitable emailable format. Is >there a shareware program that could be used to transfer non-ambiguous >mathematical formulations? > >Ed Wall > Yes, there is such a widely available free program. It is called TeX "pronounced teck". Unfortunately, there is a bit of a learning curve associated with it both installing the program and learning how to use it. It is a typesetting program written by the well known computer scientist Dr. Knuth and widely used in mathematics and other technical disciplines. A TeX source file is a simple ASCII text file with statements like: $y = int_a^b f(x) dx$ or $f(x) = {x^2 - 9 \over x^2 + 9}$ The $ signs indicate mathematical expressions. Such files are compiled into device independent files that can be viewed on your PC or printed and they come out looking textbook quality; indeed, many textbooks are nowadays typeset in TeX. With TeX, it is easy for authors collaborating on a paper to simply e-mail the ASCII TeX file for their work to others, who can in turn examine it, modify it, and send it back. The mathematics department (and probably many other departments as well) of any university will have many people who could help you get set up if you are interested. --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 16:07:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA31553; Fri, 15 May 1998 16:04:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 16:04:48 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980515180529.00c09154 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 18:05:29 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case anomaly! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"0ZXFz3.0.ri7.FeCNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18834 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In conducting Run 6 today, I discovered that what I had thought was an electrical noise problem on one of my K thermocouples turned out to be actual temperature oscillations occurring in the gas above the catalyst bed!!! >From the data gathered so far this oscillatory behavior is limited to a pressure region from about 45-55 psi. Above and below that region, the temperature is steady. Within that region, however, the temperature oscillates up and down with an amplitude of about 5C and a period that is loosely directly related to pressure and varies between 13 seconds and several minutes. At the higher frequencies, the waveform looks like the output of a full-wave bridge! Yesterday, I thought this phenomenon was noise because the oscillation frequency is roughly the same as my sampling rate. As a result, aliasing turned the orderly variations into meaningless hash. Today I monitored the oscillating temperature signal with a digital oscilloscope and recorded several of the more interesting traces. I will attempt to compile an understandable presentation of this data over the weekend and post it on our web site. One other point: It appears that D2 gas behaves significantly differently that H2 gas in this phenomenon. I will cover that issue in detail in the presentation. The bad news: The Pin and Pout traces from my calorimetry indicate that these interesting temperature excursions have nothing to do with excess heat...:( 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 May 15 17:18:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA20931; Fri, 15 May 1998 17:15:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 17:15:25 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0901 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Case anomaly! Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 17:11:13 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"-PuuI2.0.v65.OgDNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18835 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Too bad Scott, I was hoping as I read your post that Cold Fusion would be an AC phenomena. Hank > ---------- > From: Scott Little[SMTP:little eden.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, May 15, 1998 4:05 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Case anomaly! > > In conducting Run 6 today, I discovered that what I had thought was an > electrical noise problem on one of my K thermocouples turned out to be > actual temperature oscillations occurring in the gas above the > catalyst bed!!! > > From the data gathered so far this oscillatory behavior is limited to > a > pressure region from about 45-55 psi. Above and below that region, > the > temperature is steady. Within that region, however, the temperature > oscillates up and down with an amplitude of about 5C and a period that > is > loosely directly related to pressure and varies between 13 seconds and > several minutes. At the higher frequencies, the waveform looks like > the > output of a full-wave bridge! > > Yesterday, I thought this phenomenon was noise because the oscillation > frequency is roughly the same as my sampling rate. As a result, > aliasing > turned the orderly variations into meaningless hash. > > Today I monitored the oscillating temperature signal with a digital > oscilloscope and recorded several of the more interesting traces. I > will > attempt to compile an understandable presentation of this data over > the > weekend and post it on our web site. > > One other point: It appears that D2 gas behaves significantly > differently > that H2 gas in this phenomenon. I will cover that issue in detail in > the > presentation. > > The bad news: The Pin and Pout traces from my calorimetry indicate > that > these interesting temperature excursions have nothing to do with > excess > heat...:( > > > > 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 May 15 17:28:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA05274; Fri, 15 May 1998 17:26:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 17:26:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 16:24:06 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"NShnE3.0.KI1.WqDNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18836 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:48 AM 5/15/98, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >Horace wrote: > >>The resistance of a single lamp is R = V/I = 115 V/0.065 A = 1763 ohms. > >Actually, the resistance of the W filament depends on its temperature. The >above value is indeed its resistance at design operating power and >temperature. I am very aware of resistance avrying with temperature, BTW. I would have mentioned something about it, but noticed the DC + AC amps is 68 mA, so the lamp must be just slightly above the design operating current of 0.065 A, at least within the precision of the values used in the calculation. I figured it would only confuse the issue to bring up the variable resistance at that point. Still agree with your assesment that a 10 ohm "current sensing" resisitor in the circuit next to ground would be the right way to go. The 50 percent ripple value still seems low to me for such a small filter capacitor. Could be the arc dynamics? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 17:51:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA29570; Fri, 15 May 1998 17:46:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 17:46:44 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F08FE xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 16:55:23 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"LRnMg1.0.uC7.h7ENr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18837 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed, Ed I was waiting for someone more expert to expand on Kalman filters, but no one has yet, so I will try. Basically they are filters to reduce the effects of noise on servomechanisms, and other feedback systems. They also have an analogy in communication theory. In some sense they are a digital equivalence to Norbert Wiener's "Yellow Peril", his treatise on "Extrapolation, Interpolation and Smoothing in the presence of Noise" which came out in WW2, to help design Radar systems. Jed is right, they involve lots of differential equations and Matrix theory and stuff. The most usefull application of them I know is the calculation of the exact orbits of satellites, so we know just where they are at any time, and our estimate of their positions is constantly getting more accurate over time. Hank > ---------- > From: Ed Wall[SMTP:ewall-rsg worldnet.att.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, May 15, 1998 2:13 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry > > Jed wrote: > > >You would be surprised how many people become confused about such > relatively > >simple issues. Many experts who know the trees down to the last leaf > have > >trouble seeing the forest. For example, I expect Elliot Kennel knows > Kalman > >filters and differential equations like the back of his hand, but I > still > >think his "OCV heat shift" hypothesis was incorrect. > > > > > > I think some other knowledgeable people ought to be invited to > > participate, too, if we sincerely want to try to reach an > understanding. > > Consider: Ben Bush, Elliot Kennel, Mitch Swartz, Scott Little, > Ed > > Storms, ..... > > > > . . . and Martin Fleischmann, and Stan Pons. > > > This would be great to see. If certain individuals, distinguished by > their > accomplishments, were to exchange information in a forum that could be > seen > but not easily penetrated by the less informed (like me), we would see > a lot > less venting of emotion and trivia and more of what most of us really > want. > If someone in the bleachers really has a burning question or issue, it > could > perhaps be submitted through some sort of filtering process. Of > course, we > all know we can pummell Jed with email, but that is not fair to him > and he, > like everyone, has biases. Maybe we could indicate in message > headings to > the open forum (Lower Vortex) that we wish to be considered for > posting in > the closed forum (Upper Vortex). If enough people in Lower Vortex > agree, a > steady din would erupt and a member of both forums would either post > it in > Upper Vortex or explain why it is not particularly relevant (something > Jed > does a lot of already). > > I am rusty, but at one time, was well-trained in mathematics. I even > studied Kalman filters (remember nothing of that), being a digital > control > systems major. I have a really tough time with ASCII math. I usually > don't > even try. I am already plagued with confusion, having not solved a > differential equation in a long time, but with cryptic notation, I am > lost. > Besides Mathematica or MathCad, I know of no suitable emailable > format. Is > there a shareware program that could be used to transfer non-ambiguous > mathematical formulations? > > Ed Wall > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 19:06:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA18367; Fri, 15 May 1998 19:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 19:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 04:56:08 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <355CF2D2.5999257C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 04:58:42 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case anomaly! References: <3.0.1.32.19980515180529.00c09154 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qGlP_3.0.tU4.7GFNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18838 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi all, I think an important methodology is required on OU experimentation, in general. As the OU phenomenon is not confirmed on any area of research, researchers first aim to find a strong proof for the OU while conducting their experiments. It is generally the Pin/Pout balance, most of efforts is done to observe these power figures. This i s wrong! even the experiment is a replication. On any experiment based to find an OU, experimenters should look to every anomalies, observe any artifacts, and probe different behaviour of target, even not thought be related to the phenomenon. I believe th e OU in any platform could be obtained in a very narrow window of conditions, and there obviously no clue to converge this window. Only way is observing everything and not only the targeted effect. May a efficient converging parameter is already there, bu t it remain unobserved or hidden. For example a clean sign of anomaly and differentiation could be present on absorption of some of wavelength of EM radiation by the material or acoustic velocity trough the gas. We don't know.! If we have a inexpensive way to monitor some other aspects of the experiment we should try it. May the clue will come from a totally unexpected way. Secondly, we should to throw away results which show so signs of targeted observation. The phenomenon could be present but not leading the assumed result. We should throw away all our assumptions try alternate models to not blind our eyes. My past professional work was mainly based on reverse engineering in computer hardware/software. It was hard, and there is obviously no clear procedures to do this job. I needed to look every information could I interpret in very limited fashion. Only a f raction of the puzzle parts are accessible and I could only build a small part of the picture and guess the remaining. If one assumptions fails lets create an other and try. May tens or hundreds models should be tried to find the most fitting model and ad vance to next step in building a usable model to understand the data. Physics is the same. We never know the exact mechanism of the nature. We are suggesting models and try. It is not possible to understand the nature in straightforward steps unless we are its author.:-) Fortunately, the nature seems be more logical than the programmers arts, which accumulate all errors, bugs, patches, stupidities and wrong algorithms and wrong logic present on libraries, sick inheritances of previous programmers, etc. At least we expect the nature was created by one hand, more consistently. :-) Good luck to all experimenters, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 19:38:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA22179; Fri, 15 May 1998 19:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 19:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980516023253.28227.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.88.91.176] From: "John Allan" To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: DC March Update Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 19:32:53 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"DQC452.0.TQ5.fjFNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18839 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have been following the progress of Richard Lasken, the 21 year old man organising a " Million Man " type march outside of the Senate in support of renewable, new energy and cold fusion technologies that is to feature speakers such as Gene Mallove, Jeane Manning, Hal Fox and others. He has developed the idea to extend to co-ordinate future donations to go to help energy related development work but is struggling to secure the initial $10,000 the authorities are asking for security, and so on, by the end of the month. I have not read much support of his work since Jerry Decker's first mention, so could I raise the issue here again? I do not know how many subscribers are on vortex-L and related sites but it would seems a worthy investment to pass a few dollars his way or offer some other support. Someone mentioned a thousand plus to me? If it comes off succesfully it would surely be a major step forward in public awareness of the field and build useful bridges between the environmental lobby and new energy. Otherwise, it would probably be good to help manage it well in order that it *does* present good PR. Are the magazines, journals and networks behind it? Can anyone pull in good political support? Has it been discussed? Last time I spoke to him he was feeling under a lot of stress , very unsupported and in need of some big guns to pull in the poeple. How good are the Infinite Energy Hollywood contacts? Are they engaged? Regards, John Allan, London Their sites: http://www.indax.com/peace http://www.inform.umd.edu/Student/Campus_Activities/StudentOrg/PeacefulEnergy/ email: Richard Lasken ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 20:05:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA24697; Fri, 15 May 1998 20:02:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 20:02:59 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Disconnecting from the net Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 03:02:46 +0000 Message-ID: <19980516030215.AAD9683 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"ry_nX1.0.p16.Y7GNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18840 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortex: I am moving to Arkansas and will be disconnected from phone service for an indefinite period. I'd rather not miss any major breakthroughs while I'm gone, but I suppose I can't exactly ask you to hold back... Bye. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 22:21:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA08732; Fri, 15 May 1998 22:19:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 22:19:53 -0700 Message-ID: <355D21F7.51213A15 gorge.net> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 22:19:51 -0700 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ESP, or Blue Smoke? References: <199805152006.NAA23722 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9dfrL.0.M82.u7INr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18841 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: One does not need to study the ongoing argument between Rich Murray and Jed Rothwell (et al) very long to realize that it will never be resolved. It boils down to Rich and his allies saying that CF experimenters who report findings with which he doesn't agree are either fools or liars. Then Jed and his allies say that Rich, et al. are either fools or liars. Although they usually use more polite language. Only someone who Has studied all of the papers cited could make a reasoned judgement as to which side is right. It is unlikely that either side will convince the other of anything. Nor is it likely that anyone else will be convinced by the arguments of either side. Has this long-running bandwidth waster brought us any closer to determining whether what experimenters have found IS Cold Fusion, or what?? Or, what mechanism is involved? I am willing to be corrected, but I see no sign of it. On the other hand, Vince, and now Case, and of course, Scott (to mention only three) have done experiments which may have brought us near a breakthrough. Now, Rich brings up ESP. So now there will be two more questions which will never be resolved: Is ESP real, and does it cause CF phenomena? But wait, allow me to propose an experiment which should be proof positive. Go to Vince, or Case, or ?? anyway, someone who has reported an obvious large anomaly. Then make twenty runs, always using the same reactants, containers, power settings, procedures, EXACTLY the same. But, have the original experimenter be in charge on the even numbered runs, and a skeptic be in charge on the odd numbered runs. Do not allow the skeptic to change ANY of the parameters of the experiments. IF the even runs "work" and the odd runs don't, then maybe ESP has some validity. Until then, I, personally, will consider this thread as a red herring, and a waste of bandwidth. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 23:18:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA13308; Fri, 15 May 1998 23:11:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 23:11:15 -0700 Message-ID: <355D2E01.82CA8D99 gorge.net> Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 23:11:13 -0700 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge... References: <199805152006.NAA23722 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NFeeE2.0.nF3.2uINr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18842 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Tesla coils make lots of pretty light and lots of electromagnetic noise. > But it is extremely difficult to measure anything quantitatively. Your > present glow makes lots more atomic H than a Tesla coil would. A Tesla coil > would just distract you. My recommendation---avoid it. > > Michael J. Schaffer I agree, for now. It would seem that *most* T. coils are made just to make big sparks. 1. I think Vince should keep going with what seems to be working, at least until it can be determined what is happening. 2. At some future point, It will be interesting to see if the effect is maintained without electrodes, and, if so, whether it is maintained without adding H2; ie. whether the H2 is consumed, or recycled. 3. IF, and it is a *BIG* if, the glow with H2 and K without electrodes, and without adding H2, produces serious amounts of heat, maybe it would work with ceramic tubes. Then, thermionics, thermophotovoltaics, or a water jacket to make steam could convert the heat to electricity. 4. Then, the question would be: How many such tubes could one T. coil power? Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 15 23:49:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA17851; Fri, 15 May 1998 23:44:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 23:44:22 -0700 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 02:00:30 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: a treat Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"QNX6k1.0.nM4.5NJNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18843 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., Some of you out there do 'hardball' research. I do a lot of work in what I call 'transduction' ... or converting some effect into an electrical signal. I have had to, over the years, develop measurement methods and circuits which make the unseen into the seen. SO: Trying to make the ends come closer, maybe not meet , but come closer, I have decided to sell some of my building blocks. These are functional ciruits which I use. Usually they are customized to some specific task. Most run with an output signal of +/- 2.5, or +/- 5... but I will be happy to scale to +/- 15, or whatever you have. You can request a custom of nearly any type. Contact me off forum for any of them. I will now list a few of these building blocks. These are, in nearly every case, a relative measure. You can calibrate to your needs. There are all precision low noise and frequently low power. I usually run battery for isolation. In just about every case the ground is a floating synthetic ground and all are regulated, decoupled and so forth. There are some optical systems that the electronic spec, above, do not apply to. None of this is cheap, but then again are toys either! All specs are conservative. These things will let you "see it" ... whatever the 'it' may be. All can be tailored and we can discuss the trade offs as to speed, power use, noise and so on. It someone wants to build these up as kits or finished elements, I will be happy to license the design at modest cost. These are not in nice neat boxes, but we can do that too, if you want, these are the real deal raw circuits. Almost all are single sided cards, continuous ground plane, using full size surface mounted parts. Many are hybrid discrete-and-IC. Charge: Air: DC to ~ 50 to 100 kcps, ~ 25 to 50 fA ... 10 neg 15 Amps leakage current. Straight single ended, differential, gradiometric 2nd order or higher orders. General gains to ~ 10 and 100 for front ends, noise in the 30 to 70 nV range. Offset adjust. You can of course put more gain on your end. Charge ... non linear.... 1 pA to 1 Ma range, general specs of above. Very cool. This is the result of years of work and compresses symmetrically above and below ground.... Can be mated to other signal source. With 3 inch electrode you can usually get a few volts swing from charge hir comb from 5 to 15 feet. Easily 'sees' the ionzation of candle flame if electrode is put in flame. Charge, fluids. Generally the same as above teamed with very low level current source or sink... capable of diplaying the double layer effect in saline at less than 10 uA and less than 0.5 V Multiple in line element arrays for charge devices. BBD Bucket Brigade Delay line, 1024 elements, 10 uSec to 3 seconds for analog auto correlation and other uses. Linear continuous time 4 pole low pass voltage controled filter. DC to 20 kspc. Two control voltages, one set corner 1:800 ration, the other sets "Q" from poor damping to peaked LPF to oscillation Micropower phase loced loop, mixed signal CMOS, ULF to 1 meg cps Standard Opmp building blocks Wide range of true gain block instrumentation amps. Customs to 5 nV noise floors. Magnetometers with 50 uGauss noise floors. I usually use a 1 V to Gauss range. True thin film permalloy bridge sensors, NOT Hall effect and NOT semiconductor. DC to 3 meg cps flat. Induction coil mags, woth or without regenerative peaking and with or without annealled supermalloy cores. Odd building blocks: Negative R Negative and positve C Negative and positve L Regenerative sferic EM ULF, LF and AF recivers. Bilateral optically coupled FET isolation blocks Several custom isolation methods Short haul RF and optical telemetry NDE for dielectrics and conductors Semicondutor recombination times mearuring circuits Proximity blocks, many types Dual gate MOSFET blocks Band pass, high pass and band reject or "notch", namy types and non linear and tracking filters. AND: Name the custom design. Optical UV conversion phosphors Several types of obscure and-or precision IC and dicrete devices and hard-to-get parts, including germanium devices and custom voltage variable C and L and R Amber NTSC 2/3 inch displays and drivers.... magnetic deflection coils, can be externally driven as X and Y displays. Store is open! JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 00:25:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA10401; Tue, 12 May 1998 13:27:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:27:11 -0700 Message-ID: <19980512202130.36.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:21:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Case, CETI, and the problem of signal loss To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"BoSyS3.0.5Y2.Q2BMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18654 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello All, This bickering is starting to get old -- Why don't you folks just sit on your hands a bit longer until an active Vortex participant can replicate some of the devices being debated? Scott Little seems to be giving it some effort for the Case device. I'm sure he'll have an answer [one way or the other] soon. -- Anyone looking into what it would take for duplicating that little ultrasonic device? All this hand waving about "so&so said that so&so said that so&so observed".....and such is making me weary.... Where's the signal? More content -- less noise! FWIW -- I'm not a pro or con CF person. Just a curious bystander. Regards, == Anton Rager a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 01:07:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11231; Tue, 12 May 1998 13:29:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 13:29:30 -0700 From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <77e5e736.3558b09f aol.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 1998 16:27:10 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Wharton's coments Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"e8AoB1.0.hk2.U4BMr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18655 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; There seems to be some problem of communication with Jed Rothwell here. I have made the claim that entire CETI like systems that were producing large amounts of alleged excess energy, have been put into closed insulated containers and the temperature rise of the entire system has been measured. Moreover I have claimed that the temperature rise is consistent with only the total energy input and with zero excess energy production. Now that is .............................................................................. ............................... I was at Power Gen when the CETI cell was demonstrated. With Jed abut at another demo. The deg C through the cell was 15 with a flow of cooling water through the cell in at a rate (from memory) of about one liter/minute. I checked the flow with a flask and the temp with a thermometer that I brought with me. I blank cell was also placed next to the test cell with the same flow rate. The delta-T through the blank cell was -.5 deg C. The loss was due to heat flow out to the ambient. The energy delivered to both cells through fluid friction was about the same. The active cell had 1/4 watt of electrical energy going into it. I verified it with a meter I brought along with me. The CETI effect did produce a lot (one KW) of thermal energy. No special dewars are required to detect kilowatt level heat flows. The only thing that I can't attest to is if the thermal energy produced was beyond chemical. The test only ran for about 15 minutes and the heat may have had a chemical origin. I have the whole demo on tape. I asked Miley about that and he told me had had a cell running for longer periods at UIUC. The heater was in the bath at a point before the inlet temp measurement. It heated the fluid going into both the active and the control cell. It was only used while bringing the CETI unit up to operating temp. That was in Dec 95...what is taking so long to introduce the first commersial units? The JAVA language was introduced about the same time and now it's universal. Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 08:06:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA11053; Sat, 16 May 1998 07:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 07:59:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000501bd80da$c0388f80$418cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Glow Discharge Parameters Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 08:55:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"70vmz.0.Zi2.OdQNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18844 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The current for the "Normal Glow" region for a gas at pressures around 4 Torr or less at a constant voltage ranges from about 1.0E-7 amperes to 1.0E-3 amperes. From 1.0E-3 amperes to about 0.5 amperes the voltage must be increased, and at about 1.0 ampere an arc or spark occurs. At 0.1 Torr, in the normal glow current range the Mean Free Path and thus the Cathode Fall or Dark Space for H2 is about 1.0 centimeter and the potential across the Dark Space or Cathode Fall is about 185-200 volts or most of the voltage applied to the electrodes. In order to apply more current to the discharge tube without getting into the high abnormal glow or arc-spark region at a given pressure, the area of the tube-electrodes Must Be Increased which will spread the current over a larger area so that the current density will be about 0.1 amperes/cm^2. With an alkali metal or Lithium Hydride cathode it might get a bit tricky getting a stable "spread" current density surface. The bottom line is; Cut and Try. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 08:28:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA04857; Sat, 16 May 1998 08:27:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 08:27:04 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980516102810.0082c5d0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 10:28:10 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 6 posted Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cBzoW1.0.oB1.71RNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18845 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Please take a look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run6.html I have described the Tgas anomaly in considerable detail and would like to hear some opinions on it. On the face of it, it does not explain Dr. Case's observations but it sure does raise some new questions and possibilities. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 08:43:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08751; Sat, 16 May 1998 08:42:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 08:42:25 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <7c64a834.355db3b6 aol.com> Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 11:41:41 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: ESP, or Blue Smoke? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"PSM_m1.0.B82.TFRNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18846 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-16 01:21:24 EDT, you write: > But wait, allow me to propose an experiment which should > be proof positive. Go to Vince, or Case, or ?? anyway, someone > who has reported an obvious large anomaly. Then make twenty runs, > always using the same reactants, containers, power settings, > procedures, EXACTLY the same. But, have the original experimenter > be in charge on the even numbered runs, and a skeptic be in charge > on the odd numbered runs. Do not allow the skeptic to change ANY > of the parameters of the experiments. > > IF the even runs "work" and the odd runs don't, then maybe ESP > has some validity. Until then, I, personally, will consider this > thread as a red herring, and a waste of bandwidth. > > Tom Miller > I don't have a problem with that. Vince Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 10:31:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA30601; Sat, 16 May 1998 10:25:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 10:25:34 -0700 Message-ID: <355DCC3E.D08 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 13:26:22 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted References: <3.0.5.32.19980516102810.0082c5d0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8h07A2.0.3U7.DmSNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18847 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > Please take a look at: > > http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run6.html > > I have described the Tgas anomaly in considerable detail and would like to > hear some opinions on it. On the face of it, it does not explain Dr. > Case's observations but it sure does raise some new questions and > possibilities. Scott, you said: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Perhaps the oscillations are due to an unstable convection pattern enabled by the increased gas space in these runs. If so, it is interesting that the instability is so sensitive to pressure and other factors (i.e. gas density). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I like your explanation - the thermal gradient exists to drive the convection and the chamber space is generous. And, again, flow parameters like Reynolds no. are functions of fluid density. What other oscillator could there be? - how about oscillatory loading and unloading of the catalyst resulting in a "breathing" of the H2 into and out of the bed - but the bed temp holds steady - what could drive unloading? Naw, go with convection instabilities. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 12:04:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA08491; Sat, 16 May 1998 12:03:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 12:03:09 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 11:03:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted Resent-Message-ID: <"KugRD1.0.V42.iBUNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18848 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:28 AM 5/16/98, Scott Little wrote: >Please take a look at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run6.html > >I have described the Tgas anomaly in considerable detail and would like to >hear some opinions on it. On the face of it, it does not explain Dr. >Case's observations but it sure does raise some new questions and >possibilities. Scott, It looks like you have discovered what is going in with the Case cell! You wrote on the run6 web page: "However, it must be noted that the two sensors in the catalyst bed, where Dr. Case has his temperature probe, show essentially no sign of these temperature excursions." Note that Case's thermocouple well comes in from the top, thus is *mostly* exposed to the gas regime temperature. Only the tip of his well lies in the shallow catalyst. Thus an 8 C *change* in the gas temperature must have a major impact on Case's temperture reading for the catalyst. Stainless steel conducts heat pretty well compared to the gas, and probably compared to a grainy catalyst, which only makes contact at points. The instability would affect Case's catalyst temperature readings, while it does not affect yours. A convection instabilty, sensitive to gas density, explains the D2 vs H2 results. It does not explain why this specific catalyst is so effective in creating the instability, however. This needs more explaining. Also, in run6, at hour 7.5, it looks like a lesser instability (possibly a kind of harmonic?) was developing at 23 psia, about half the pressure of the main instability. This seems to be a further indication of the presence of a convection instabilty. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 13:07:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15446; Sat, 16 May 1998 13:04:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 13:04:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 12:02:30 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted Resent-Message-ID: <"kKAzp.0.Gn3.B5VNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18849 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: One reason this specific catalyst is so effective in creating the instability might be that the granual size closely matches the convection cell size. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 13:32:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA17831; Sat, 16 May 1998 13:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 13:30:44 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:27:47 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"xzm001.0.VM4.nTVNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18850 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, Digging around I have found the following *AC* electrolytic capacitors: Qty_____Microfarads_______Voltage Rating____ 4 5 660 vac 2 6 660 vac 1 8 660 vac These are commonly used as motor start capacitors. Figuring maximum DC supply voltage as 3kV my question are: (1) Can the AC electrolytics be used at all? and, if they can be used; (2) What would be the best way, most mfd value, and safest voltage rating), to wire them into my power supply? Thanks in advance folks. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 14:10:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA21547; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:07:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:07:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004c01bd810e$1e38b500$418cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Case Run #6 Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:03:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"xevaF3.0.ZG5.a0WNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18851 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I think a thermal instability is quite tractorable, Particularly the Barnyard instability. In my youth as a farm kid we were cautioned against stepping in them. On one occasion I scooped some up in my hand and showed my mother what I almost stepped in. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 14:10:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA21719; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:08:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:08:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:06:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <199805162106.OAA05075 joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted Resent-Message-ID: <"BQGRb1.0.EJ5.N1WNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18852 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I took a quick look at your data---my first guess would be that, as suspected, you are seeing a instability induced by thermal bouyancy (i.e. Rayleigh-Bernard instab.). This sort of instability would show a clear "isotope" effect, too, because you only get it if thermal conductivity of the gas is low enough, and indeed, D2 has lower thermal conductivity than H2, thus encouraging this effect. Porosity of the catalyst also would encorage the effect, since it provides for greater heating of the gas near the bottom (since heat can be passed more effectively from the catalyst to the gas by convective trasnport through interstices.) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 14:26:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00817; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:24:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:24:37 -0700 Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 17:18:28 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"uyFJK3.0.hC.KGWNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18853 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Woa! Stop the car! You want to be very careful using series caps to smooth your supply. It all may work BETTER AC... who knows? SO: One of the ways to smooth your supply is to use a series inductor, and then the capacitors can be much smaller. One such type inductor that could be used is the secondary of an auto ignition coil. Then you can use small caps. Roge at Midwest has come nice 0.01 3 kv and 5 kv units. Another type is the type used by the power companies to load the HV lines... calling all Vos with connections in power companies. You CAN make caps and inductors.... but make sure you have some technical aid in dealing with charged HV caps. Copper plate or aluminum heavy foil and glass is OK for caps.... and 5 KV wire is OK for inductors. You really need to find a ham radio guy who would have or might know someone who has a transmitter tranny... with maybe one of the windings gone... On Sat, 16 May 1998, VCockeram wrote: > All, > Digging around I have found the following *AC* electrolytic capacitors: > > Qty_____Microfarads_______Voltage Rating____ > 4 5 660 vac > 2 6 660 vac > 1 8 660 vac > > These are commonly used as motor start capacitors. > > Figuring maximum DC supply voltage as 3kV my question are: > (1) Can the AC electrolytics be used at all? > and, if they can be used; > (2) What would be the best way, most mfd value, > and safest voltage rating), to wire them into my power supply? > > Thanks in advance folks. > > Regards, > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada > Another good trick is to use a ladder of inductor... cap... inductor... cap.... and at each stage you cut out more ripple. ALSO: You can, with help, built a HV regulator, just a simple pass element one, single stage. I am alos guessing once you get the plasma going you do not need to be at 3 kv ... in which case a 1500 V transistor ... or several... on heat sinks, may do the job. Any Air nat'l guar Guard folks out there who might have access to obsolete radar supplies? AND: Think about a combo regulator and inductor-cap ladder... J > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 14:27:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00985; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:25:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:25:54 -0700 Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 17:19:44 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Power measure for Vince Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"68VGj.0.DF.XHWNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18854 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vince, Try the following: A moderate power resistor, say 10 ohms is placed between ground and the tube. Voltage drop is sensed across this. A voltage divider, ie., 100 ohms to ground and 100 K ohm, is used to sense voltage across tube. The output of each goes to the low cost AD 737 RMS to DC converter, and Analog Devices will let you have samples at no charge, especially is you say you will mention them in write ups. The AD 737 is a low power part and the output is inverted in sign. You now have DC amps' signal and DC volts' signal. Couple of cheapo DVMs and there you have it. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 14:42:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA25770; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <355E074E.108 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 17:38:22 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Y1pZa3.0.ZI6.GVWNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18855 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > > All, > Digging around I have found the following *AC* electrolytic capacitors: > > Qty_____Microfarads_______Voltage Rating____ > 4 5 660 vac > 2 6 660 vac > 1 8 660 vac > > These are commonly used as motor start capacitors. > > Figuring maximum DC supply voltage as 3kV my question are: > (1) Can the AC electrolytics be used at all? > and, if they can be used; > (2) What would be the best way, most mfd value, > and safest voltage rating), to wire them into my power supply? > Vince, I think they could be used for DC BUT!!, the Radio Amateurs Handbook (RAH) warns that you should series only IDENTICAL TYPES for good results. You'll still get variation in unit capacitance so: YOU MUST SHUNT EACH CAP WITH A RESISTOR - the RAH says about 100 ohms per volt across each capacitor. So, if the 4, 5 MFD units are identical, in series they would only give you 2640 volts 5/4 MFD. You would need to shunt each cap with 660 x 100 = 66 kohms, 6.6 watt - say 10 watt resistors. Fifty kohm, 10 watt would probably work. So, you would wind up with a 40 watt bleeder resistor overall. These are not easy resistors to come by. Seems like a lot of trouble for 1.25 MFD at 2640 volts. This is ironic, Vince, with your original high frequency flyback transformer filtering would be a piece of cake! But, its voltage was too high, and current too low - sigh! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 14:50:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA27488; Sat, 16 May 1998 14:47:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:47:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980516164639.00828240 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:46:39 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hC0A13.0.Pj6.1cWNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18856 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:03 AM 5/16/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >Note that Case's thermocouple well comes in from the top, thus is *mostly* >exposed to the gas regime temperature. Wow, Horace! Good thinking. Case's thermocouple could easily be highly influenced by the gas temperature, especially if the catalyst layer is shallow. Didn't Jed report that Case says the catalyst layer needs to be shallow? Case has never mentioned that to me but it sure does fit this artifact model. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 15:05:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08412; Sat, 16 May 1998 15:00:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:00:30 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:00:48 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted Resent-Message-ID: <"oXFi33.0.M32.znWNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18857 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: There still remains the mystery of the helium level detected. The lack of control or basline data could be used to "dismiss" the high helium reading, but "dismissing" data is not a good idea IMHO. It still seems to me the Case device is well worth scientific pursuit, though the odds of commercial success are suddenly looking much lower. Will be interesting to hear the results of Case's efforts. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 15:06:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08946; Sat, 16 May 1998 15:04:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:04:11 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980516180936.006ee128 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 18:09:39 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAB08921 Resent-Message-ID: <"AUZ3a2.0.dB2.QrWNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18858 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:06 PM 5/16/98 -0700, you wrote: > >I took a quick look at your data---my first guess would be that, as >suspected, you are seeing a instability induced by thermal bouyancy >(i.e. Rayleigh-Bernard instab.). This sort of instability would show >a clear "isotope" effect, too, because you only get it if thermal >conductivity of the gas is low enough, and indeed, D2 has lower >thermal conductivity than H2, thus encouraging this effect. Except that the effect occured with H2 and not D2. From the page... *In fact, the oscillations essentially stopped when the chamber *was filled with D2 (at hour 4.0)…and the gas temperature *rose about 5° C. Later, at hour 6.2 when the chamber was *again filled with H2, the oscillations resumed and the *temperature fell. The bulk raising and lowering of the gas temperature seems more likely an artifact which could lead one astray. Tip of the hat to Scott for his calorimetry; remarkable how a few experiments cut through the skeptic/believer bickering... Sounds like this is the point where Dr. Case needs a real energy measurement taken of his experiment. I for one would like to see the thing work, but clearly sticking a temp probe in the tank will not answer the question. K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 15:48:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA13659; Sat, 16 May 1998 15:47:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:47:02 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 14:47:20 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 6 posted Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA13640 Resent-Message-ID: <"TKvvA3.0.KL3.bTXNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18859 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:09 PM 5/16/98, Keith Nagel wrote: >[snip] >Except that the effect occured with H2 and not D2. From the page... > >*In fact, the oscillations essentially stopped when the chamber > *was filled >with D2 (at hour 4.0)…and the gas temperature > *rose about 5° C. Later, at >hour 6.2 when the chamber was > *again filled with H2, the oscillations resumed >and the > *temperature fell. > Keith, That is right, but the instability causes a gas temperature *drop* for the H2. The D2 just plugs on along flatlined. The *difference* in gas temperature would affect Case's measurement of the catalyst temperature, showing D2 runs to be hotter. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 16:10:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA17667; Sat, 16 May 1998 16:08:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:08:54 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:09:05 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince Resent-Message-ID: <"sQw6Y.0.zJ4.5oXNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18860 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:19 PM 5/16/98, John Schnurer wrote: > Dear Vince, > > Try the following: > > A moderate power resistor, say 10 ohms is placed between ground >and the tube. Voltage drop is sensed across this. A voltage divider, >ie., 100 ohms to ground and 100 K ohm, is used to sense voltage across tube. > > The output of each goes to the low cost AD 737 RMS to DC >converter, and Analog Devices will let you have samples at no charge, >especially is you say you will mention them in write ups. The AD 737 is >a low power part and the output is inverted in sign. You now have DC >amps' signal and DC volts' signal. Couple of cheapo DVMs and there you >have it. It is an unfortunate fact that the product of true RMS voltage times true RMS current is not necessarily equal to true power. You need to sum a very fast I*V. Once you have a fast I*V analog signal it is then OK to average (smooth) the output before doing the A/D at a much slower sampling rate. The Analog Devices AD633JN recommended by George is a great idea. Even the 1 MHz analog mutltiply rate of the AD633JN is low for some applications, as George mentioned. Would be nice to know a part number and good mailorder supply house for a very fast or even a similar chip in the USA. I suspect there is more than one of us interested in being able to cheaply measure power input across a wide range of parameters, and financially desperate enough to try to make one. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 16:32:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09868; Sat, 16 May 1998 16:29:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:29:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 19:21:32 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: torsion fields ? In-Reply-To: <19980412.181802.9742.1.tv juno.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_7PeA3.0.5Q2.p5YNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18861 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Tim, did you ever get any good answers for this? J On Sun, 12 Apr 1998, Tim D Vaughan wrote: > How do you generate a torsion field ? > How do you modulate it ? > How do you detect it ? > > Tim > > ( tv juno.com ) > > _____________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com > Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 16:38:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA10414; Sat, 16 May 1998 16:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:35:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003701bd8122$c6400f00$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Antique Trader Article About Neon (http://www.neonsign.com/antique_trader_artic Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 17:29:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001F_01BD80F0.2C51B2E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"cDLyO1.0.ZY2.LBYNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18862 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01BD80F0.2C51B2E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Some Neon Sign History. http://www.neonsign.com/antique_trader_article.html ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01BD80F0.2C51B2E0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Antique Trader Article About Neon.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Antique Trader Article About Neon.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.neonsign.com/antique_trader_article.html Modified=2090FE5C2281BD016B ------=_NextPart_000_001F_01BD80F0.2C51B2E0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 17:00:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA27010; Sat, 16 May 1998 16:56:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 16:56:07 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 15:56:17 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"01nxz.0.xb6.MUYNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18863 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:27 PM 5/16/98, VCockeram wrote: >All, >Digging around I have found the following *AC* electrolytic capacitors: > >Qty_____Microfarads_______Voltage Rating____ > 4 5 660 vac > 2 6 660 vac > 1 8 660 vac > >These are commonly used as motor start capacitors. > >Figuring maximum DC supply voltage as 3kV my question are: >(1) Can the AC electrolytics be used at all? > and, if they can be used; >(2) What would be the best way, most mfd value, > and safest voltage rating), to wire them into my power supply? > >Thanks in advance folks. Vince, You would be a lot better off with a capacitor of the right voltage. Michael J. Schaffer said he would rummage around looking for one. His price (free) may be one you find hard to refuse! I'll send you the (free) five 20KV 100 mA diodes if you will send me your address. That's enough for a 12 KV 100 mA fullwave bridge, or 12 KV 200 mA center tapped supply, with a spare just in case. John Schurer's suggestion of adding an inductor in series with the DC supply is terrific. You could even use an old neon sign transformer secondary, but you would have to watch out for the case iteself then because they are center tapped to the case. You might not even need a bigger capacitor then. A large secondary coil used for the inductor might also eliminate the need for balast resistors. I printed off the 32 page Motorola Lamp Balast design document as recommended by Fred Sparber. It is chuck full of all kinds of information. If you can't print pdf files I'll be happy to send you a copy of that with your diodes. Fred is right. Using an electronic balast has the advantage of being efficient, and provides an input power factor of about 0.98, meaning it is easy to measure electric input power. The disadvantage is the ouput is HF AC, but it is not known if that would hurt your application, but it could help. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 20:42:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA21053; Sat, 16 May 1998 20:40:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 20:40:39 -0700 Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 23:34:30 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: John Schnurer Subject: vince Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"XIUA83.0.o85.smbNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18864 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince, What, exactly, is the primary 'brute force' supply? If it is a 60 cps transformer, what are the specs? Since you have these light bulbs for ballast then probably your best bet is to hit the full wave bridge and then go L R [light bulb} C... then L R C ... then L R C....... how many lamps do you have? Then finally L C and L C. Whateever the transformer is you can use the secondary only of the same kind, or auto coils ... I have used auto coils and they work good. A 'C' of 1/8 'single weight' window glass, say 12 by 12 or 12 by 18 .... and copper roofing sheeting works very well. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 20:54:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA22345; Sat, 16 May 1998 20:52:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 20:52:56 -0700 Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 23:46:46 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: vince Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aOZIe.0.3T5.NybNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18866 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vince, Put all the LRCs on the plus end.... on the ground end put current sense resistor ... and divider across tube. You can hang scope on the CSense resistor. After you knock down the ripple you will have a maybe 5% power accuracy measure... What percents ripple do you have now? +----{bridge} ----coil-------lamp----- A [TUBE]--- SenseR--NEG - AND GND - CAP - - GND Divider goes from A to GND Safe and low ripple, reasonable accurate Off line, send me phone and facsimile, please From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 16 20:55:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA22027; Sat, 16 May 1998 20:50:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 20:50:04 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980516225111.0082a480 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 16 May 1998 22:51:11 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"iRRyZ3.0.5O5.hvbNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18865 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:09 PM 5/16/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >I suspect there is more than one of us interested in being able to cheaply >measure power input across a wide range of parameters, and financially >desperate enough to try to make one. I've been doing a little research on this issue. Both Analog Devices and Burr Brown make a "precision 4-quadrant multiplier" that is advertised to achieve 0.25% accuracy with a 1MHz bandwidth. Both carry the number "534" in their part names. The Analog Device unit is described at: http://products.analog.com/products/info.asp?product=AD534 and Burr-Brown's is: http://www.burr-brown.com/Products/DataSheets/MPY534.html Digi-Key sells the Burr-Brown part at: http://www.digikey.com/D.DKS$348608H25397 for $47.50 each. This is not real cheap as IC's go but, man, what a package it is! It's got differential inputs that can handle +/- 10 volts. We'd need to work up a decent voltage divider for the voltage monitor and a current viewing resistor (CVR) for the current monitor. The latter is what bothers me. Say you wanted to set it up for 120VAC power up to 1500 watts. That's 13 amps. With a 0.1 CVR, you'd only get 1.3 volts (only 13% of the input range, which is not great) but the dissipation in the CVR would be 17 watts! Should we use a smaller CVR and an op amp to boost the signal going into the 534?... I hate to start introducing more chances for error... Suggestions? Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 01:32:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA25001; Sun, 17 May 1998 01:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 01:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 00:27:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince Resent-Message-ID: <"XK8Ay2.0.Z66.u_fNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18867 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:51 PM 5/16/98, Scott Little wrote: [snip and thanks for the parts info] >This is not real cheap as IC's go but, man, what a package it is! It's got >differential inputs that can handle +/- 10 volts. We'd need to work up a >decent voltage divider for the voltage monitor and a current viewing >resistor (CVR) for the current monitor. The latter is what bothers me. >Say you wanted to set it up for 120VAC power up to 1500 watts. That's 13 >amps. With a 0.1 CVR, you'd only get 1.3 volts (only 13% of the input >range, which is not great) but the dissipation in the CVR would be 17 >watts! Should we use a smaller CVR and an op amp to boost the signal going >into the 534?... I hate to start introducing more chances for error... Probably need an op amp - but once you have one there are lots of advantages as far as scaling and calibration goes. Also opens the possibility of adding current shunts for much bigger amp ranges. How about a hall effect device? Might be worth the extra expense just to be able to get a "clip on probe" that can handle a large DC component. Very low impedence though, a big advantage even without clip-on. Don't know about limits to frequency response for hall effect devices. It seems like 0 - 1 MHz is an OK range. I think there might be a need for repeated calibration for hall effect devices as well. Is this just wild dreaming? BTW, "four quadrant multiplier" means a quad IC, i.e. 4 separate mutlipliers? If so, a quad package sounds great. A two channel device would be very nice for measuring power in vs power out for some devices. Could just ignore the other two multipliers, or apply them to a specialized use. Your DIGIKEY web page reference pointed to the DIGIKEY catalog, page 157. I noted there "Wide Bandwidth Precision Analog Multiplier", for $16.69 qty 1, part number MPY634KP-ND, 14 pin DIP, Burr-Brown Li-480-ND in 1996 linear databook. Don't know how specs compare to AD534 specs. Just food for thought. I'm pretty clueless about electronics. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 03:09:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA23948; Sun, 17 May 1998 03:08:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 03:08:28 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007d01bd817b$8eaced20$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 04:06:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"9Jj1j2.0.1s5.SShNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18868 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 16, 1998 9:51 PM Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince Scott wrote: >At 03:09 PM 5/16/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > >>I suspect there is more than one of us interested in being able to cheaply >>measure power input across a wide range of parameters, and financially >>desperate enough to try to make one. > >I've been doing a little research on this issue. Both Analog Devices and >Burr Brown make a "precision 4-quadrant multiplier" that is advertised to >achieve 0.25% accuracy with a 1MHz bandwidth. > >Both carry the number "534" in their part names. > >The Analog Device unit is described at: > >http://products.analog.com/products/info.asp?product=AD534 > >and Burr-Brown's is: > >http://www.burr-brown.com/Products/DataSheets/MPY534.html > >Digi-Key sells the Burr-Brown part at: > >http://www.digikey.com/D.DKS$348608H25397 > >for $47.50 each. > >This is not real cheap as IC's go but, man, what a package it is! It's got >differential inputs that can handle +/- 10 volts. We'd need to work up a >decent voltage divider for the voltage monitor and a current viewing >resistor (CVR) for the current monitor. The latter is what bothers me. >Say you wanted to set it up for 120VAC power up to 1500 watts. That's 13 >amps. With a 0.1 CVR, you'd only get 1.3 volts (only 13% of the input >range, which is not great) but the dissipation in the CVR would be 17 >watts! Should we use a smaller CVR and an op amp to boost the signal going >into the 534?... I hate to start introducing more chances for error... > >Suggestions? Seems to me that using a Millivolt Shunt on the input side would be a bit cheaper. A 1.0" wide piece of Printed Circuit Board with 0.002" thick copper with pick-up leads spaced about 3" apart would be a one-milliohm shunt, thus one millivolt/amp. PCB's with copper on both sides make fairly decent high voltage capacitors t oo, especially if you etch the copper back from the edges with nitric acid using masking tape to set the boundaries. The Opto-Electronic devices as simple as an Ne-2's or an incandescent lightbulb (or LED's)and a photo-conductor work good for "remote-isolated viewing" on the high voltage side. Regards, Frederick > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 04:09:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA03089; Sun, 17 May 1998 04:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 04:06:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008b01bd8183$56f46cc0$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 05:02:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"aGgZF3.0.Bm.5JiNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18869 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Using Neon-Tube Sign technology, but with Hydrogen-Deuterium as a working gas with quartz tubing along with a K or Li cathode,seems like an easy way to get set up for calorimetry, and monitoring the length of the cathode (Crooke's)dark-space. At 1.0 Torr using H2, the width of the dark space is about one millimeter and the H+ ions are bombarding the cathode at an energy of about 125 ev. At the same time the electrons liberated from the cathode Might possibly be hitting some of the incoming H+ ions at the dark-space boundary and forming the Hydrino or Quasi-Neutron with emission of some 2 kev of EUV energy. The Hydrino-Quasi-Neutron can then hit the alkali cathode which should contain an abundance of H or H+ and M or M+ atoms/ions, thus possibly doing some Hot Fusion stuff too. Using either a standard neon sign transformer, or an Electronic Ballast would tend to simplify things. By varying the pressure and voltage-current,one could look for Deuterium Stripping (Quasi-DiNeutrons) and neutrons in the dark-space also. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 06:36:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA08498; Sun, 17 May 1998 06:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 06:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980517083316.00809410 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 08:33:16 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Ka_Ao2.0.i42.TTkNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18870 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:27 AM 5/17/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >BTW, "four quadrant multiplier" means a quad IC, i.e. 4 separate >mutlipliers? No, it's only one multiplier. 4-quadrant refers to the fact that the device can multiply I & V signals in all 4 quadrants (i.e. +I*+V=+P, +I*-V=-P, -I*+V=-P, -I*-V=+P)...a necessary capability for proper handling of reactive power computation. >I noted there "Wide Bandwidth Precision Analog Multiplier", for $16.69 qty >1, part number MPY634KP-ND The 634's data sheet can be found at: http://www.burr-brown.com/Products/DataSheets/MPY634.html (again it seems that Burr-Brown and Analog are supplying interchangeable parts) The 634 achieves only +/- 0.5% accuracy...but that's still pretty good, no? >How about a hall effect device? Might be worth the extra expense just to >be able to get a "clip on probe" that can handle a large DC component. I think those devices are not as accurate as we might like...but you're right they are convenient. Take a look at: http://www.fwbell.com/html/current_sensors.html Then Fred S wrote: >Seems to me that using a Millivolt Shunt on the input side would be a bit >cheaper. A cheaper resistor, yes, but a 13 amp current would then produce a 13 millivolt signal. We'd still need an amplifier to boost that up to the 534/634's +/- 10 volt input range. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 11:16:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA00216; Sun, 17 May 1998 11:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 11:14:36 -0700 (PDT) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 10:55:54 -0700 Subject: Re: torsion fields ? Message-ID: <19980517.105736.8830.0.tv juno.com> References: X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-29,31-35,37,39-45,47,49-50,52-59,61-66,68-74,76-103 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"z-q9O.0.E3.AaoNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18871 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Dear Tim, > > did you ever get any good answers for this? > > J > >On Sun, 12 Apr 1998, Tim D Vaughan wrote: > >> How do you generate a torsion field ? >> How do you modulate it ? >> How do you detect it ? >> >> Tim >> >> ( tv juno.com ) >> Hi John, Not much infomation available but here are few things on the web But a good intro from Bill Beatty is at http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/tors/ a supposed torsion field generator is shown at http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/tors/spin1.html It does not say how to detect them though. He has a link to a web page that introduces the mathematical basis of torsion fields as developed by the mathematician Elie Cartan: http://www22.pair.com/csdc/car/carfre2.htm the intro says, "From 1899 to 1945, Elie Cartan, a son of a blacksmith, developed a set of extraordinary mathematical ideas that have yet to be fully exploited in the physical and technical sciences. This WWW site is dedicated to certain applications of Cartan's methods to problems of dissipative, radiative, irreversible systems. Although emphasis herein has been placed on hydrodynamic, thermodynamic, and electromagnetic applications, Cartan's techniques can be used on micro and cosmological scales as well. Cartan was the inventor of Spinors, spaces with Torsion, a champion of Projective Geometries , and the developer of a system of calculus called Exterior Differential Forms." also checkout the Falaco Solitons (long duration paired vortices in water) at http://www22.pair.com/csdc/car/carfre10.htm#TOPTORSION another intro found at http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_2.html interesting article on using capacitors to detect gravity wave (torsion waves ??) http://www.t-link.net/~aquarius/gwrphome/gravwave.htm Reminds me of Rick Montverdes electric rock experiments. I still don't know if torsion waves are real. Maybe if capacitors and rocks can detect such waves maybe they can also generate them. Tim ( tv juno.com ) On Sat, 16 May 1998 19:21:32 -0400 (EDT) John Schnurer writes: > > > Dear Tim, > > did you ever get any good answers for this? > > J > >On Sun, 12 Apr 1998, Tim D Vaughan wrote: > >> How do you generate a torsion field ? >> How do you modulate it ? >> How do you detect it ? >> >> Tim >> >> ( tv juno.com ) >> >> >_____________________________________________________________________ >> You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >> Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com >> Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] >> >> > > _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 11:55:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA07551; Sun, 17 May 1998 11:53:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 11:53:03 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000b01bd81c4$c0dfafa0$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Westergaard Year 2000 (http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/) Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 12:50:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8192.763D9E80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Wk70-.0.qr1.E8pNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18872 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8192.763D9E80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What will happen to your investments? http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8192.763D9E80 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Westergaard Year 2000.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Westergaard Year 2000.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/ Modified=A00EB974C481BD01DE ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01BD8192.763D9E80-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 14:26:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA20002; Sun, 17 May 1998 14:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 14:25:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01eb01bd81d9$a901dd80$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Tunguska (http://bohp03.bo.infn.it/tunguska96/index.html) Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 15:20:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01E8_01BD81A7.5E5E45C0" Resent-Message-ID: <"mX9k5.0.Su4.qMrNr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18873 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01E8_01BD81A7.5E5E45C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Matter-Antimatter Explosion? Matter 5A - 2Z "quarks" 2A "up" (+) 2A - Z "down" (-) A - Z antineutrinos Z external (-)electrons Antimatter 5A - 2Z "quarks" 2A "down" (-) 2A - Z "up" (+) A - Z neutrinos Z external (+) electrons (positrons) BANG! WHEN THEY MEET? See 1996 Krasnoyarsk conference. http://bohp03.bo.infn.it/tunguska96/index.html ------=_NextPart_000_01E8_01BD81A7.5E5E45C0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Tunguska.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Tunguska.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://bohp03.bo.infn.it/tunguska96/index.html Modified=8024DFE5D781BD017E ------=_NextPart_000_01E8_01BD81A7.5E5E45C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 17 21:13:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA23347; Sun, 17 May 1998 21:09:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 17 May 1998 21:09:14 -0700 Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 00:03:01 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Thermionic Vince... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"GF_Qb2.0.ei5.gHxNr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18874 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: It is time for the Vos to make suggestions for inexpenisve work function metals to allow Vince to go thermionic! J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 03:29:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA15569; Mon, 18 May 1998 03:28:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 03:28:02 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <022901bd8247$60d36ec0$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Aetheral Drag with Relativistic Particle Beams? Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 04:25:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"8bQNj1.0.Bp3.oq0Or" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18875 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex A possible way to see ZPE "Extraction" from the vacuum, is the "wake" created in a hard vacuum around relativistic particle beams. The Jefferson Lab Facility (formerly CEBAF)in Virginia, is pushing a hair-thin electron beam up to 4 Gev (a gamma of about 8,000)or so. Possibly there could be a temperature rise next to the beam brought about by ZPE extraction effects, in the following manner: The energy contained in the capacitance of space,E = 0.5*C*V^2, thus as the capacitance decreases in order for the charge C*V = q (a constant) V^2 MUST INCREASE accordingly. This poses the possibility that particles moving in vacuo, intrinsically act as a ZPE "heat pump". This wild-eyed speculation suggests that at some near-c velocity a particle can break the speed-of-light barrier and gain energy by creating a lower capacitance (and higher potential V)around itself in space. IOW, fast particles dilate or time-tunnel space creating their own "worm-holes". :-) Cosmic rays that have energies of over 1.0E20 ev (16 joules) indicate that this may be occurring. >From this, it isn't out of line to consider modest O/U heat effects from charge flow in electrolytes, or other means of agitating particles in ways that create "vortices" and cause vacuum "heat pumping". Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 04:45:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA06063; Mon, 18 May 1998 04:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 04:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980518074439.00c914c0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:44:39 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Case anomaly! In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980515180529.00c09154 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qmljO1.0.fU1.cx1Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18876 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:05 PM 5/15/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >In conducting Run 6 today, I discovered that what I had thought was an >electrical noise problem on one of my K thermocouples turned out to be >actual temperature oscillations occurring in the gas above the catalyst bed!!! ... >The bad news: The Pin and Pout traces from my calorimetry indicate that >these interesting temperature excursions have nothing to do with excess >heat...:( Don't treat this as bad news. You were doing research. You found something. Work with what you find, characterize it, and write it up. This is how science truly proceeds. It may be that the oscillation effect you discovered allows you or someone else to increse Pd loading, and that effect leads to new high-temperature superconductors, or to something else entirely. 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 Mon May 18 06:36:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA07345; Mon, 18 May 1998 06:32:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 06:32:45 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980518083328.00c11d18 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 08:33:28 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case anomaly! In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980518074439.00c914c0 spectre.mitre.org> References: <3.0.1.32.19980515180529.00c09154 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WLcRu1.0.co1.xX3Or" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18877 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:44 5/18/98 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > Don't treat this as bad news. You were doing research. You found >something. Work with what you find, characterize it, and write it up. Thanks for the encouragement. I have written it up (see Run 6 on our web page)...and I am proceeding to explore it. My first test will be to replace the catalyst with an inert material (glass beads) to see if the effect is purely "geometric". 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 Mon May 18 08:16:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA04324; Mon, 18 May 1998 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 08:07:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805181504.LAA05998 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Problem with Scott's Case set up Date: Mon, 18 May 98 11:07:52 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"eQ71I3.0.Q31.bw4Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18878 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vortexians: I just had a chat with Dr. Case and he has identified a possible serious problem with Scott's otherwise fine -- nay, outstanding -- effort to replicate. Case says he has faxed Scott the explanation, but I'll offer what I understand of it and Scott can comment on what he received. The volume of Case's chamber is 1,600 ml and the catalyst is only 30- 50 ml, so there is a huge volume ratio of gas to catalyst. This is good, Case claims, because that allows the residual H2 (from the Pd and carbon and the particle interstices) that persists even after heavy evacuation to be greatly diluted by the D2 later pumped in. In Scott's much smaller chamber, the gas volume ratioed to the catalyst volume is closer to 1:1. Case says that the mass spec analysis done at Oak Ridge showed at least 5% H2 and HD content in the D2 gas -- in addition to the 90-100 ppm He4. So, this is a big warning to us all that teh D2 level must be kept high or there will be too high a percentage H2 in the gas. In order for Scott to match Case's situation, he will either have to got to much higher pressures, pump-down and recycle much more thoroughly (or cylce D2 more times), or use a larger volume container. I am encouraging Dr. Case to send me the Oak Ridge test report, which we will publish in IE #20 in July, along with anything that Scott, I or anyone else has found. Best, Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302 Phone: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com http://www.infinite-energy.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 09:30:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA16821; Mon, 18 May 1998 09:21:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:21:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980518111602.00c0a568 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:16:02 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 7 underway Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"76lXp2.0.h64.w_5Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18879 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: For Run 7, I replaced the official Case catalyst (United Catalysts G75-D received from Dr. Case himself) with an equal volume (~40cc) of some SiO2 chips nearly identical in size and shape. Run 7 is now underway and I have already observed the same thermal oscillations at 50 psi of hydrogen. I have also observed that they stop when the pressure is raised to 60 psi...like the phenomenon observed in Run 6. Horace hit the nail on the head when he suggested that Case could be suffering from "stem effects" (since his temperature probe passes through a large gas space into a relatively shallow catalyst bed). Judging from the behavior of my system, I am certain that stem effects would be noticeable in Case's setup. IMPORTANT: If this convection instability is the cause of Dr. Case's effect, then why does he report that "some catalysts work...others don't"? 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 Mon May 18 09:30:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17460; Mon, 18 May 1998 09:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980518112212.00c131b0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:22:12 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, "VORTEX" From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Problem with Scott's Case set up In-Reply-To: <199805181504.LAA05998 mercury.mv.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"5-3L92.0.kG4.f26Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18880 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:07 5/18/98 -0400, E.F. Mallove wrote: >The volume of Case's chamber is 1,600 ml and the catalyst is only 30- 50 >ml, so there is a huge volume ratio of gas to catalyst. This is good, >Case claims, because that allows the residual H2 (from the Pd and carbon >and the particle interstices) that persists even after heavy evacuation >to be greatly diluted by the D2 later pumped in. In Scott's much smaller >chamber, the gas volume ratioed to the catalyst volume is closer to 1:1. Indeed, I received a FAX to this effect from Dr. Case this AM. About the only thing I can do easily is to cycle the chamber with D2 multiple times. Seems to me like this would be just as effective as having a much larger chamber...comments? I'll probably give this a try on Run 8. 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 Mon May 18 09:55:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA21405; Mon, 18 May 1998 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:41:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <024a01bd8279$b5d794a0$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: ZPE Pumping in Compressed-Heated Gases? Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:25:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"e8BTF3.0.KE5.TI6Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18881 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Going by the assumption that moving particles can "Heat Pump" from the vacuum, it is possible that the movement of the electron clouds of atoms/molecules in a compressed-heated gas can effect the ZPE extraction. A close approximation of the velocity of the electron cloud is c/137 and the velocity of the atom/molecule is mv = MV where mv is the product of the total mass of the electrons in the cloud and velocity(c/137). MV is the momentum of the atom/molecule. Thus 0.5*M*V^2 = kT and V = (kT/0.5*M)^1/2 which is gives a kinetic velocity of an atom/molecule within a factor of two of the classical velocity values at a given temperature. In a compressed gas the Mean Free Path, MFP is: 1/((pi)r^2*N) where r is the radius of the atom/molecule. N = 2.7E25*P*To/Po*T molecules/m^3. Thus, although the MFP is very small restricting the movement of the atoms/molecules, the electron clouds are still "the tail wagging the dog" and moving at a velocity of c/137 or more and possibly "pumping" energy (ZPE)from the vacuum merely by creating a void in the Aether. Might this be the source of the so-called "ZPE Fluctuation"/energy,near absolute zero,also? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 10:30:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29651; Mon, 18 May 1998 10:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805181721.NAA02784 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Problem with Scott's Case set up Date: Mon, 18 May 98 13:25:24 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"hJn6O.0.TE7.ix6Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18883 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >Indeed, I received a FAX to this effect from Dr. Case this AM. About the >only thing I can do easily is to cycle the chamber with D2 multiple times. >Seems to me like this would be just as effective as having a much larger >chamber...comments? > >I'll probably give this a try on Run 8. Great, go to it! Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 10:30:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29609; Mon, 18 May 1998 10:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805181721.NAA02788 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Case Run 7 underway Date: Mon, 18 May 98 13:25:26 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"b7Mdk2.0.ME7.ix6Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18882 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >IMPORTANT: If this convection instability is the cause of Dr. Case's >effect, then why does he report that "some catalysts work...others don't"? Simple answer: The hypothesis is wrong. The "convection instability" is not likely to be the cause of his observed effects. the putative reason why the effects are not seen with D2 in at least some catalysts, is that these catalysts do not catalyze cold fusion reactions. By the way, those who might wish to dimiss Case too readily should remember that Arata/Zhang have demonstrated pretty much the same effect that Case is claiming: excess heat from small Pd particles under D2 gas pressure with concomittant He-4 production. Case and Arata/Zhang are mutually supportive. I would like to see those who believe that there is a "trivial" explanation of the high thermocouple readings do some calculations to show that a 20 to 30 C elevated reading would be possible (based on what Scott has seen) -- because that's what Case gets with his proprietary catalysts, and I have no reason to odubt his word on that. Better yet, let's get one of Case's own cells running continuously for three weeks with the elevated temeperature, then have the He-4 checked out. Even better, let's give the man a chance to "do or die" with an enduring self-sustainer. If he can do that, he proves conclusively that he has a real non-chemical energy source. Best, Gene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 10:53:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA04844; Mon, 18 May 1998 10:48:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:48:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0902 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power measure for Vince Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:42:31 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"bFMLV2.0.WB1.lH7Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18884 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Op-amp technology is so good these days that you don't introduce much error using them. An ordinary 50mv ammeter shunt, into a gain of 100 fet input op-amp (100K feedback, 1K input resistors) circuit would work nicely, changing the 50mv into 5v which is standard input for the A/D's. Use twisted wires from the ammeter shunt to the op-amp input. Hank > ---------- > From: Scott Little[SMTP:little eden.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Saturday, May 16, 1998 8:51 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince > > At 03:09 PM 5/16/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: > > >I suspect there is more than one of us interested in being able to > cheaply > >measure power input across a wide range of parameters, and > financially > >desperate enough to try to make one. > > I've been doing a little research on this issue. Both Analog Devices > and > Burr Brown make a "precision 4-quadrant multiplier" that is advertised > to > achieve 0.25% accuracy with a 1MHz bandwidth. > > Both carry the number "534" in their part names. > > The Analog Device unit is described at: > > http://products.analog.com/products/info.asp?product=AD534 > > and Burr-Brown's is: > > http://www.burr-brown.com/Products/DataSheets/MPY534.html > > Digi-Key sells the Burr-Brown part at: > > http://www.digikey.com/D.DKS$348608H25397 > > for $47.50 each. > > This is not real cheap as IC's go but, man, what a package it is! > It's got > differential inputs that can handle +/- 10 volts. We'd need to work > up a > decent voltage divider for the voltage monitor and a current viewing > resistor (CVR) for the current monitor. The latter is what bothers > me. > Say you wanted to set it up for 120VAC power up to 1500 watts. That's > 13 > amps. With a 0.1 CVR, you'd only get 1.3 volts (only 13% of the input > range, which is not great) but the dissipation in the CVR would be 17 > watts! Should we use a smaller CVR and an op amp to boost the signal > going > into the 534?... I hate to start introducing more chances for > error... > > Suggestions? > > > Scott Little > EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX > 78759 > 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) > little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 11:07:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA07464; Mon, 18 May 1998 11:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356077D6.55B4 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 14:03:02 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince References: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0902 xch-cpc-02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GtLZi3.0.Xq1.qW7Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18885 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > Op-amp technology is so good these days that you don't introduce much > error using them. An ordinary 50mv ammeter shunt, into a gain of 100 fet > input op-amp (100K feedback, 1K input resistors) circuit would work > nicely, changing the 50mv into 5v which is standard input for the A/D's. > Use twisted wires from the ammeter shunt to the op-amp input. Good stuff, Hank! I'll heed this when I try to make up a "signal conditioner" black box for my cheap little A/D data logger. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 11:48:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15080; Mon, 18 May 1998 11:42:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:42:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <028a01bd828c$17f35fe0$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Ortho and Para Hydrogen & Deuterium Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:37:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"g_FKG1.0.Qh3.E48Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18886 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex An Interesting property of the diatomic H2 or D2 molecule is the Ortho (nuclear spins aligned) and Para (nuclear spins opposed). In H2 above 300 K the Ortho/Para ratio is 3:1. In D2 the Ortho is 2/3 and the Para is 1/3 because of the different nuclear spin of Deuterium the relationship is opposite to H2. The forms may be reversed by Adsorption on Activated Charcoal or Platinized Asbestos. The two forms differ radically in their Thermal Conductivity. You want to field that one, Horace? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 12:34:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA24317; Mon, 18 May 1998 12:30:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:30:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356070EA.3157 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:33:30 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr BELLSOUTH.NET X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex Subject: AG Propulsion Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TQmS92.0.qx5.Hn8Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18887 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: An interesting treatise on AG Propulsion at: http://www.qedcorp.com/Q/Qship.html mentions some of our list members. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 13:00:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA29850; Mon, 18 May 1998 12:54:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:54:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <02b901bd8291$3c056fe0$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: NASATechTracS TechFinder (http://ntas.techtracs.org/4d.acgi$twDispTechItem(15;G Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:14:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD825E.E5DDD8A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"BzqUk3.0.JI7.-79Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18890 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD825E.E5DDD8A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cooling by catalytic conversion of Ortho-Para Hydrogen. http://ntas.techtracs.org/4d.acgi$twDispTechItem(15;GSC-12770-1;0;1) ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD825E.E5DDD8A0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="NASATechTracS TechFinder.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="NASATechTracS TechFinder.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://ntas.techtracs.org/4d.acgi$twDispTechItem(15;GSC-12770-1;0;1) Modified=60F740039182BD016B ------=_NextPart_000_0053_01BD825E.E5DDD8A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 13:00:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA29761; Mon, 18 May 1998 12:54:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:54:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <02a901bd8290$a027b420$358cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Ortho-Para Hydrogen (http://astsun.astro.virginia.edu/~eww6n/physics/Ortho-Para Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:10:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004A_01BD825E.466E1C80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"A96aQ.0.lG7.g79Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18889 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_004A_01BD825E.466E1C80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://astsun.astro.virginia.edu/~eww6n/physics/Ortho-ParaHydrogen.html ------=_NextPart_000_004A_01BD825E.466E1C80 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Ortho-Para Hydrogen.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Ortho-Para Hydrogen.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://astsun.astro.virginia.edu/~eww6n/physics/Ortho-ParaHydrogen.html Modified=8025AC7C9082BD019D ------=_NextPart_000_004A_01BD825E.466E1C80-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 13:47:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11077; Mon, 18 May 1998 13:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <000d01bd828b$86bb78a0$9d14ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Test Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:33:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01BD8261.9D0F8300" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"fw9aa.0.xi2.Sq9Or" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18891 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BD8261.9D0F8300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Only a test. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BD8261.9D0F8300 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Only a = test.
------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BD8261.9D0F8300-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 14:46:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA22813; Mon, 18 May 1998 14:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 14:39:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:30:12 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Juno or other free service... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9plu32.0.Fa5.nfAOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18892 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., I am told there are free internet providers, one being "juno"... Is this true? Can anyone let me know how to contact them and how to avail myself of the services? Thanks, JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 16:22:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03980; Mon, 18 May 1998 16:17:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 16:17:30 -0700 From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Lost Keys Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 09:25:02 +1000 Message-ID: <000201bd82b4$c90df060$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Gw9nS3.0.Qz.16COr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18893 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There are a number of things that get repeated time and again to newbies looking into the field of cold fusion. One that I have encountered is the following analogy: Private communication: >Your suggestion that Case is merely pursuing what is, for him, a >logical course of investigation reminds me of the old joke about the >drunk who dropped his house key in the dark shadows near his door but >looked for it under the street lamp where there was more light. Story rewritten: A drunk man came home one evening and, fumbling around for the key, he dropped it. Being unable to see around his porch, he spent 15 minutes looking under a street light. A passerby saw him and asked him what he was doing. The drunk explained. "But" said the passerby, "why you are looking out here?" "Because I can see things better out here." I have two problems with this analogy. First, it assumes there is only one answer to the problem (and assumes the passerby really knows what the problem is). Let me put an addendum to this analogy. "But you lost the keys over there!" exclaimed the passerby. "I know that, but the problem is getting into the house, not necessarily finding the key. Right now I want to find a hair pin to jig the lock." Second, it downplays, even deters, the usefulness of cross-fertilisation of ideas of people that work in different fields. This is especially relevant for the above quote, for it attacks the very idea that a chemical engineer should look at cold fusion. At its base, this is simply selfishness on the part of the sceptic. Let's continue the addendum. "Here," the passerby suggested, "I have a pocket torch. Let's go and look for the key where you dropped it." Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 16:48:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA21396; Mon, 18 May 1998 16:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 16:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:59:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Problem with Scott's Case set up Resent-Message-ID: <"SIaci.0.4E5.aSCOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18894 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:22 AM 5/18/98, Scott Little wrote: >At 11:07 5/18/98 -0400, E.F. Mallove wrote: > >>The volume of Case's chamber is 1,600 ml and the catalyst is only 30- 50 >>ml, so there is a huge volume ratio of gas to catalyst. This is good, >>Case claims, because that allows the residual H2 (from the Pd and carbon >>and the particle interstices) that persists even after heavy evacuation >>to be greatly diluted by the D2 later pumped in. In Scott's much smaller >>chamber, the gas volume ratioed to the catalyst volume is closer to 1:1. > >Indeed, I received a FAX to this effect from Dr. Case this AM. About the >only thing I can do easily is to cycle the chamber with D2 multiple times. >Seems to me like this would be just as effective as having a much larger >chamber...comments? Holding at vacuum a long time between H2 and D2 fillings should have an even larger impact on final H2/D2 ratio. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 17:01:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA08686; Mon, 18 May 1998 16:55:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 16:55:50 -0700 Message-ID: <000a01bd8284$f7e86b20$9614ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Baffling Black Box Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:47:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD825B.0E1ABCB0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"NLifi1.0.F72.0gCOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18895 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD825B.0E1ABCB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Forget the term OU, it's out... To gain acceptance maybe one might use = Energy State Conversion (ESC). If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work = but does, maybe that ESC thing. http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD825B.0E1ABCB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Forget the term OU, it's out... To = gain=20 acceptance maybe one might use Energy State Conversion = (ESC).
 
If you have the time, check out the = Baffling=20 Black Box, it can't work but does, maybe that ESC thing.
 
http://home.wt.net/atgro= up/blackbox.htm
 
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD825B.0E1ABCB0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 17:05:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09889; Mon, 18 May 1998 16:57:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 16:57:35 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0903 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power measure for Vince Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 10:46:29 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"JhHSN1.0.lP2.bhCOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18897 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace The "four quadrant" multiplier is a single stage in a package, with both inputs allowed to be plus or minus. If you plot them on a X-Ygraph, you see where the "four quadrants" come from. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 1998 1:27 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince > > At 10:51 PM 5/16/98, Scott Little wrote: > [snip and thanks for the parts info] > >This is not real cheap as IC's go but, man, what a package it is! > It's got > >differential inputs that can handle +/- 10 volts. We'd need to work > up a > >decent voltage divider for the voltage monitor and a current viewing > >resistor (CVR) for the current monitor. The latter is what bothers > me. > >Say you wanted to set it up for 120VAC power up to 1500 watts. > That's 13 > >amps. With a 0.1 CVR, you'd only get 1.3 volts (only 13% of the > input > >range, which is not great) but the dissipation in the CVR would be 17 > >watts! Should we use a smaller CVR and an op amp to boost the signal > going > >into the 534?... I hate to start introducing more chances for > error... > > > Probably need an op amp - but once you have one there are lots of > advantages as far as scaling and calibration goes. Also opens the > possibility of adding current shunts for much bigger amp ranges. > > How about a hall effect device? Might be worth the extra expense just > to > be able to get a "clip on probe" that can handle a large DC component. > Very low impedence though, a big advantage even without clip-on. > Don't > know about limits to frequency response for hall effect devices. It > seems > like 0 - 1 MHz is an OK range. I think there might be a need for > repeated > calibration for hall effect devices as well. Is this just wild > dreaming? > > BTW, "four quadrant multiplier" means a quad IC, i.e. 4 separate > mutlipliers? If so, a quad package sounds great. A two channel > device > would be very nice for measuring power in vs power out for some > devices. > Could just ignore the other two multipliers, or apply them to a > specialized > use. > > Your DIGIKEY web page reference pointed to the DIGIKEY catalog, page > 157. > I noted there "Wide Bandwidth Precision Analog Multiplier", for $16.69 > qty > 1, part number MPY634KP-ND, 14 pin DIP, Burr-Brown Li-480-ND in 1996 > linear > databook. Don't know how specs compare to AD534 specs. > > Just food for thought. I'm pretty clueless about electronics. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 17:07:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09426; Mon, 18 May 1998 16:56:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 16:56:46 -0700 Message-ID: <002d01bd8285$ccccb170$9614ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Fw: Baffling Black Box Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:53:00 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002A_01BD825B.E33F6760" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"im9g82.0.oI2.wgCOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18896 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002A_01BD825B.E33F6760 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -----Original Message----- From: atgroup To: vortex-L eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 12:47 PM Subject: Baffling Black Box Forget the term OU, it's out... To gain acceptance maybe one might use = Energy State Conversion (ESC). =20 If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work = but does, maybe that ESC thing. =20 http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm =20 ------=_NextPart_000_002A_01BD825B.E33F6760 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
-----Original = Message-----
From:=20 atgroup <atgroup@wt.net>
To:=20 vortex-L@eskimo.com = <vortex-L@eskimo.com>
Dat= e:=20 Monday, May 18, 1998 12:47 PM
Subject: Baffling Black=20 Box

Forget the term OU, it's out... To = gain=20 acceptance maybe one might use Energy State Conversion = (ESC).
 
If you have the time, check out the = Baffling=20 Black Box, it can't work but does, maybe that ESC thing.
 
http://home.wt.net/atgro= up/blackbox.htm
 
------=_NextPart_000_002A_01BD825B.E33F6760-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 17:14:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14562; Mon, 18 May 1998 17:07:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:07:13 -0700 Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:18:53 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: "This is only a test" Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805181722_MC2-3D67-FCD7 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"dvhWL3.0.cY3.gqCOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18898 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex "atgroup" gave the e-mail a workout by posting a couple of messages saying "this is only a test." That reminds me of the cold war joke with the catch phrase familiar to everyone who remembers the Cuban Missile Crisis and other Follies of that era. A loud squeal on the radio would be followed by something like: "This has been a test of the emergency warning system. This is only a test. In the event of a genuine emergency, you will be instructed to bend over, tuck your head between your knees, and kiss your ass goodbye." A Soviet version of this joke: Helpful authority: "In the event of a U.S. declaration of war against the motherland, the authorities instruct all citizens to wrap themselves in sheets and walk -- do not run -- to the nearest graveyard." Citizen: "Why walk? Why not run?" Authority: "To avoid creating a panic." . . . It is a little known fact of history that the Cuban Missile Crisis was squelched and World War Three averted by a small group of anxious U.S. and Soviet diplomats who met informally several times at the Yenching Palace Restaurant on Connecticut Avenue and Ordway street, in Washington D.C. My family must have eaten there a hundred times while I was growing up. That historical note was later printed on the back of the menu. The place was still frequented by intelligence spooks and diplomats in the 1980s, when I last went there. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 17:21:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA18424; Mon, 18 May 1998 17:15:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:15:10 -0700 Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:14:38 -0700 Message-Id: <199805190014.RAA04413 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: Re: Baffling Black Box Resent-Message-ID: <"9qZ_B2.0.RV4.9yCOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18899 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work but does, maybe that ESC thing. > >http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm OK, I'm dense. E^2/R on left and right gives, 0.065 watts input, 0.050 watts output. What's the big deal? Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 17:33:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA01418; Mon, 18 May 1998 17:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3560D1AF.6F50 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 20:26:23 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <000a01bd8284$f7e86b20$9614ecd0 atgroup> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lvFr43.0.1M.D8DOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18900 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: atgroup wrote: > > Forget the term OU, it's out... To gain acceptance maybe one might use > Energy State Conversion (ESC). > > If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work > but does, maybe that ESC thing. > Atgroup, you have been living in that "black box" too long - the problem seems ill stated. Why don't you tell us what we should infer from your diagram and and then we will be on the same wavelength. I have enough trouble figuring out answers - I have no time to figure out what the question is. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 18:13:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA08343; Mon, 18 May 1998 18:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805190105.UAA10506 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Electrical verses magnetic fields Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 20:12:11 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BD8299.3E0D2D20" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NX8QA3.0.F22.tiDOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18901 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01BD8299.3E0D2D20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello all, here is my thoughts on this subject. Regards, Robert H. Calloway. ------=_NextPart_000_01BD8299.3E0D2D20 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Electrical verses magnetic fields.eml" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: Electrical verses magnetic fields (Internet E-Mail Message) Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Electrical verses magnetic fields.eml" Return-Path: Received: from lists.kz (root.starfire.douglas.ma.us [207.180.91.8]) by neon.prysm.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA03934 for ; Mon, 18 May 1998 18:20:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 20218 invoked by alias); 18 May 1998 23:34:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact KeelyNet-L-help lists.kz; run by ezmlm Reply-To: KeelyNet-L lists.kz Delivered-To: mailing list KeelyNet-L lists.kz Received: (qmail 20209 invoked from network); 18 May 1998 23:34:24 -0000 Received: from mail.prysm.net (HELO neon.prysm.net) (206.137.60.13) by mail.starfire.douglas.ma.us with SMTP; 18 May 1998 23:34:24 -0000 Received: from billc9 (ts5-p36.mar.prysm.net [207.16.246.192]) by neon.prysm.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA03907 for ; Mon, 18 May 1998 18:20:04 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805182320.SAA03907 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Electrical verses magnetic fields Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:27:11 -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=3DISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-UIDL: 19254b2427b79037632e9219b3e20269 Hello All, I've always believed magnetic and electrical fields were = one in the same. I'm not here to try to change the views of most people on that issue = but... Lets dicuss it! So.. lets go all the way back to making electricty with a magnetic field. A magnet is turning inside a coil of wire, so call electrons are = bumping along in the=20 wire carrying a electrical charge to a load. Number 1 question. How are electrons being replaced in the coil after the others have left to a load? If electrons are being replaced from the aether, you should have noticeable effects around = large generators. Question number 2. The electrons are so called "charged" with this explanation, what happened to their charge when the load was disconnected and the magnet stops? If the generator runs long enough you'll have a bunch of atoms running around looking for electrons! I personally believe you must have law and order in this world we live in being "BALANCE". Now everything in this world has some sort of "defense" system. Atoms are no different since everything is made up of them. I believe copper atoms are actually "offended" by a moving magnetic field. The magnet being a superimposed electrical field offends these atoms causing their electrons and protons = to go "Out of balance" around their orbit of the nucleus. The nucleus reacts by = putting out potential from each of its atoms from this displeasure if you may.. This = is repetative among the copper atoms, one senses it from the other offering its own supply of potential. But the futher from the generator it goes, the effect drops depending on wire size which contain more copper atoms if the wire guage is larger. Heating in the wire would be caused by the out of balanced state of the atom. One might ask about other conductors? Take silver for exsample, it would carry potential in = the same manner, but its atoms are not offended by a magnetic field as = copper is. But they are subceptable to potential which is repetative. I say electrons are = going nowhere. Do you want to experience the atoms "defense" system in person? Wear a nylon shirt with a polyester jacket all day. You'll be glad to shuck those = when you get home. The fact is, they are two different materials of atoms that just = cant tolerate one another. To me.. its just natures way of balance. Dont roll over yet Mike Faraday....these are just thoughts. Any = takers?? Regards, Robert H. Calloway ------=_NextPart_000_01BD8299.3E0D2D20-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 18:48:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA06096; Mon, 18 May 1998 18:41:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:41:18 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00c201bd82a3$7c36fae0$298cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: 4393039 Detailed View (http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=4%2C39 Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:24:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0063_01BD8271.18247640" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"EN0Ng.0.SU1.tCEOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18902 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01BD8271.18247640 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=4%2C393%2C039 ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01BD8271.18247640 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=" 4393039 Detailed View.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=" 4393039 Detailed View.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=4%2C393%2C039 Modified=00389E53A382BD010C ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01BD8271.18247640-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 19:11:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA18651; Mon, 18 May 1998 19:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 19:06:55 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: Subject: RE: Problem with Scott's Case set up Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:07:35 +1000 Message-ID: <000c01bd82cc$2500f180$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 In-Reply-To: <199805181504.LAA05998 mercury.mv.net> Resent-Message-ID: <"p4B5l3.0.LZ4.-aEOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18903 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: E.F. Mallove wrote: The volume of Case's chamber is 1,600 ml and the catalyst is only 30- 50 ml, so there is a huge volume ratio of gas to catalyst. This is good, Case claims, because that allows the residual H2 (from the Pd and carbon and the particle interstices) that persists even after heavy evacuation to be greatly diluted by the D2 later pumped in. In Scott's much smaller chamber, the gas volume ratioed to the catalyst volume is closer to 1:1. Hi Vortexians Can anyone tell us the flow rate of hydrogen out of the catalyst when under vacuum? Is it possible to calculate the amount of hydrogen expected to be left in the catalyst after a complete D2 replacement cycle? Would increasing the time under vacuum also increase the effectiveness of the cycle? Has BET analysis been done on the catalyst and if so, what were the results? (This analysis calculates the surface area of a porous material by adsorbing a noble gas into the lattice.) Do liquids absorbed into the lattice significantly effect the expulsion of hydrogen from the lattice (eg. through capillary blockages), or does the initial cycling effectively rid the catalyst of all of its absorbed liquids? Let's see what our fellow Vortexians can do with the results and (possible) implications of these questions. Thanks Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 20:02:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA10290; Mon, 18 May 1998 19:58:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 19:58:36 -0700 Message-ID: <3560D558.5165 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 20:42:00 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <199805190014.RAA04413 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_nAIH2.0.nV2.MLFOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18904 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > > >If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work but > does, maybe that ESC thing. > > > >http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm > > OK, I'm dense. E^2/R on left and right gives, 0.065 watts input, 0.050 > watts output. What's the big deal? > Good question Ross! 1. Which is it: 989 ohms or 986 ohms? 2. Is 989 ohms the internal impedance of the source? 3. What's the black box made of? 4. Are the LEDs taped to the box or are they connected? 5. Is the 0.707 Vrms a sine wave also? 6. Does circuit point (1) have a known impedance to ground? 7. etc., etc. Frank S. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 20:47:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA05925; Mon, 18 May 1998 20:42:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 20:42:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:13:20 -0500 (GMT) From: Carlos Henry Castano To: From Carlos Henry Castano Giraldo Subject: This information is important? Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Qhsv_.0.OS1.I-FOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18905 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: http://www.physik.fu-berlin.de/~thees/ This work talk about of very short times to relaxation of polycrystalline Nickel to magnetisation. Carlos Henry Castano G. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 21:14:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA12116; Mon, 18 May 1998 21:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 21:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:41:26 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Juno or other free service... (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"7HbWM2.0.9z2.fOGOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18906 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 17:30:12 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Juno or other free service... Dear Vo., I am told there are free internet providers, one being "juno"... Is this true? Can anyone let me know how to contact them and how to avail myself of the services? Thanks, JHS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 18 22:16:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA22777; Mon, 18 May 1998 22:13:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 22:13:49 -0700 Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 00:13:35 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805190513.AAA03251 dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: A light water cf at ICCF-7 to try To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"SW5NW3.0.fZ5.BKHOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18908 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 18, 1998 To Vortex Having finished duping the ICCF-7 tape sets (delay with some bugs), I will be sending them off to limited individuals that have cleared themselves with the ICCF-7 sponsor (Fred Jaeger) or personal distribution. ENECO will be getting a copy set as per agreement. Eighty five VHS cassettes in all. Seventeen cassettes per set. One set has already gone to an investor type. Original cassettes were nine three hour S-VHS tapes. If anybody desires a copy set, please contact Fred Jaeger (or Eugene Mallove(?)) for their disposition on distribution. I have no objection or any interest to their use of the contents other than proper attribution. I am satisfied that I was permitted to archive it. I did miss a part of Fleischman's restrospective talk on CF. A historical review item on electrolysis experiments. That part I can fill in (if its needed) from Mallove who taped that portion for his own funded IE(?) video project. There were some oral presentations whose actual title and contents were changed from those written on the Conference program scheduling and printed Abstracts. The one I felt that was most radically changed and had some import was the report authored by Ohmori, Mizuno, and Enyo. It was read and explained by a representative who, first off apologised for his english delivery. He was hard to understand but for the most part, he was reading from the viewgraph. All the authors are from the Hokkaido area in Japan near where the ICCF-6 was held. Between the cracked english, bad viewgraph displays, insufficient Q&As, and the changed content of the presentation, the full impact of the report seemed to have been missed by the audience. Only India's Srinivasun (now retired) questioned the high neutron/electromagnetic emission count of the experiments. A second questioned the quality of the count. Nothing from Douglas Morrison. The report presentation contained outlines of experiments (because of time constraints probably), results, and conclusions easily replicated by other experimenters. The experiments were conducted during the previous last four months. The paper invited other scientists to pursue the investigations. The presentation were raw data from the team of Ohmori, Mizuno, and Enya from Hokkaido University and the Hakodate National College of Technology (Enyo). The report were on ongoing experiments and analysis of two open-air electrolytic cells using 0.50 mole of Na2SO4 and 0.50 mole K2CO3 repectively. A rubidium solution of some kind was indicated but nothing was detailed about that except it showed a higher reaction rate than K2CO3. Like Na< K< Rb. This approach is something akin to what Reiko Notoya and others reported on begining at the 4th ICCF (light water fusion). Reiko Notoya gave a poster presentation separate and independant from this oral presentation. She is in the same Catalysis Research Center as Ohmori at Hokkaido University. The presentation reported on light water setups and also heavy water. They indicated higher rates for heavy water but nothing detailed. The cathode electrodes used in the electrolytic cells were various metals centered and located above a platinum ring anode at the bottom of the cell. The report was a mixture of results, very abbreviated, but it dwelled particularly on the use of a tungsten cathode. The overall results for all metals used indicated excess energy, high eletromagnetic and/or neutron counts, and transmutation products with isotopic ratios that did not correspond to natural occurring ratios. Something we have heard from many other experimental results. There were no descriptions or photographs of the laboratory setup used so we are left to assume competancy of their procedures or might make furthur inquiries to them. But there were photographs of a luminous beaker as the tungsten cathode diplayed plasma paths to the anode through the electrolyte. The experiments revolved about using tungsten (and other metals) in 0.50 mole of either Na2SO4 or 0.50 mole of K2CO3. These cells are an open air vented, stoppered electrolytic beaker type cells. The arrangement in the cells, in a diagram shown, shows a circular thin ring anode of platinum at the bottom, a flat cathode electrode (of tungsten or some other metal) in the center above the anode, and an alcohol type thermometer and a thermocouple suspended in the electrolyte solution. After ignition, the thermocouple became useless (because of electromagnetic interference) and the other alcohol thermometer was relied upon for readings. "The electrolysis was conducted at a current density of 1.4 A/cm3 by applying 120-140 v. potential." After start of electrolysis, there was a sudden (after the temp rose to about 80 C), an illuminating ignition plazma through the solution which rapidly (about 80 seconds) brought the solution to a boil. After calibrating for energy input to energy output (many details lacking) and later analysis of the electrolyte and electrodes, they have reached the conclusion (for the ICCF-7 I guess) that: 1. Nuclear transmutation occured with the various electrodes used. 2. Excess energy in the order of 200 - 500 KW would be EASY using a tungsten electrode with an input electric power supply of 100 KW. The part of high neutron count (upwards of 60,000 counts per second and climbing with the voltage input) output was qualified with the real possibility of very high electromagnetic emission mixture and neutrons from the reactions. These prelimiary experimental reults were listed early in the presentation: 1. In their electolysis cell (tungsten), "strong excess energy reaching 180 W evolved which caused the electrode to become incadescent." 2, They regard the electrode plasma to consist of protons. They attribute to this "the strong electromagnetic wave and/or neutron emission as detected by their neutron counter." 3. Considrable new elements were produced. "Pb, Ni, Fe, Cr, and C are produced" beyond "impurities contained in the electrolysis system." 4. The isotopic distribution of Pb and others deviated markedly from natural distribution. "So these facts supports the reality of nuclear reactions occurring in light water (and heavy water) reactions." Some suggested reaction equations that give rise to the new elements were displayed along with photos of electrode pittings. Experiments worth looking into? It is a cheaper alternative to the Pd-D systems. Looks robust and promising with 200- 500 KW out for 100 KW in, EASY. Especially since the price of palladium has rocketed. Rumor has it that the Russians patented a CF device (using Pd I guess)that can run a house or a car caused the stopping of deliveries until the device was looked into. Aside from political excuses, I suspected something of the sort for the crazt delays of Pd deliveries. Perhaps the visibility of investor types and VC's at the ICCF-7 can be attributed to the general advance of CF research and this Russian rumor attendant to the palladium prices. I wonder, wonder. -AK- New Oral Presentation Title: "Strong Excess Energy Evolution, New Element Production, and Electromagnetic and/or Neutron Emission in the Light Water Electrolysis with a Tungsten Electrode." Authors: Dr. Tadayoshi Ohmori Catalysis Research Center Hokkaido University North 11 West 10 Sapporo o6o o811 Japan tel: 011 706 2606 fax: 011 709 4948 e-mail: Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 22:14:00 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "This is only a test" References: <199805181722_MC2-3D67-FCD7 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Autx-.0.AZ5.4KHOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18907 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > The Cuban missile crisis was... by a small group > ... diplomats who met... at the Yenching Palace > Restaurant in Washington D.C. My > family must have eaten there a hundred times while I was growing up. Related anecdote: My wifes father helped design the guidance system for the Polaris missiles. During the Cuban Missile crisis, he and his boss were sent to the submarine base in Florida to check the on-board missiles. They found one missile on which the guiadance system wasn't working. sub commander:`` can you make hit Russia? '', his boss: ``yeah'' sub commander: ``thats good enough...'' Tense times, but especially at my wife's family, knowing their dad is down there arming the missiles.... -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 01:15:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA10030; Tue, 19 May 1998 01:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 01:11:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <356070EA.3157 bellsouth.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 22:09:12 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: AG Propulsion Resent-Message-ID: <"LsIIc2.0.eS2.ExJOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18909 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Terry - [from the web site http://www.qedcorp.com/Q/Qship.html ] > "the transient reduction in the weight of the > proof mass was always coincident with the > thermal transition of the YBCO disk from the > superconducting to the non-superconducting > state." and... > "It is crucial for the occurrence of the effect > that the supercurrent present in the disk at > the transition be very high and that the > transition width be small. This requires an > excellent HTC ceramic material." This is probably just piling speculation on top of conjecture, but Woodward's idea ( http://chaos.fullerton.edu/~jimw/general/massfluc/index.htm ) is that "transient mass fluctuations" occur in materials that are quickly shedding or gaining energy density. A superconductor warming quickly through transition while carrying a dense current might provide a situation where a TMF kick could occur. Seems to me the sign is wrong though: losing energy causes a transient loss of mass. But in phase with vibrations... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 02:43:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA30247; Tue, 19 May 1998 02:41:15 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 02:41:15 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 01:41:42 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Problem with Scott's Case set up Resent-Message-ID: <"iKtSi.0.VO7.wELOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18910 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:07 PM 5/19/98, Brendan Hall wrote: [snip] >Hi Vortexians > >Can anyone tell us the flow rate of hydrogen out of the catalyst when under >vacuum? Is it possible to calculate the amount of hydrogen expected to be >left in the catalyst after a complete D2 replacement cycle? Would >increasing the time under vacuum also increase the effectiveness of the >cycle? Has BET analysis been done on the catalyst and if so, what were the >results? (This analysis calculates the surface area of a porous material by >adsorbing a noble gas into the lattice.) Do liquids absorbed into the >lattice significantly effect the expulsion of hydrogen from the lattice (eg. >through capillary blockages), or does the initial cycling effectively rid >the catalyst of all of its absorbed liquids? > >Let's see what our fellow Vortexians can do with the results and (possible) >implications of these questions. I suggest that the outgassing rate could be nicely determined emperically with Scott's apparatus. It holds pressure well, and has a pressure transducer with a data aquisition system. Possibly the SiO2 chips could be used as a control or even better, no chips at all. The pressure vs time curve following evacuation should show a different slope with the catalyst vs no catalyst. From the difference in slopes of the pressure curves it is then possible to deterine the outgassing volume and mass for both the catalyst and/or apparatus as a function of time T. It is reasonable to expect the D2 gas exchanged with H2 and DH in the catalyst during the experiment time, while the gas is under pressure, should be much less than the total outgassing mass for the same period while under vacuum, due to the inward direction of the gas into tha catalyst once repressurized. If the total mass of H2 outgassed after evacuation of the cell is less than 5 percent of the mass of H2 in the cell when pressurized, over a period of time equal to the total experiment time, say 12 hours, it is then clear that there is no problem with H2 gas mixing with D2 or DH during the experiment. Using this criteria, it is thus possible to emperically deterine the amount of vacuum hold time required between fillings, or to certify a specific vacuum hold protocol as valid or not by some desired (H2+DH)/D2 criteria. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 03:20:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA00746; Tue, 19 May 1998 03:18:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 03:18:50 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 02:19:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power measure for Vince Resent-Message-ID: <"5mFUT.0.aB.AoLOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18911 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:46 AM 5/18/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Horace > The "four quadrant" multiplier is a single stage in a package, >with both inputs allowed to be plus or minus. If you plot them on a >X-Ygraph, you see where the "four quadrants" come from. > >Hank Yes, Thanks. Scott posted that information also. I think it is very strange, that there could be "negative power" by this arrangement. I have an application where the input I vs V curve looks like: I=0 | /| ---------|---------/ / / | / V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- / | / / /----------|-------- |/ | | It thus appears the power factor for this should be closer to zero than to one, i.e. about 0.30, is that correct? It also then makes no difference which direction around the I vs V loop the curve is traced, right? It is just an I*V calculation, summed through one cycle time, to get total energy per cycle, i.e. power. It can also be tuned so the bumps on either end nearly disappear. The output of the device closely approximates a power factor of one when taking P=(I rms avg)*(V rms avg). This gives an idea for a meter handy for ou investigators/inventors. It would not require absolute calibration either. The idea is to use the analog multiply and divide and rms calc chips to create a power factor meter. It is just a matter of doing the analog computation of (I*V averaged)/(I rms averaged)*(V rms averaged). The input scaling is then only necessary to place the I and V anaologs into approximately the +-10 V range in order to maximize function accuracy. The meter could then be used to "tune" EM devices to operate in the negative power range. Something does not sound right about all this! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 04:09:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA19409; Tue, 19 May 1998 04:02:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 04:02:17 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <35610FCB.1134FAD9 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 04:51:23 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Problem with Scott's Case set up References: <3.0.1.32.19980518112212.00c131b0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="x" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="x" Resent-Message-ID: <"U9KJ53.0.Al4.tQMOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18912 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:07 5/18/98 -0400, E.F. Mallove wrote: The volume of Case's chamber is 1,600 ml and the catalyst is only 30- 50 ml, so there is a huge volume ratio of gas to catalyst. ... In Scott's much smaller chamber, ... Scott Little wrote: ... About the only thing I can do easily is to cycle the chamber with D2 multiple times. Seems to me like this would be just as effective as having a much larger chamber...comments? Horace Heffner wrote: Using this criteria, it is thus possible to emperically deterine the amount of vacuum hold time required between fillings, or to certify a specific vacuum hold protocol as valid or not by some desired (H2+DH)/D2 criteria. Scott Little wrote: ... Horace hit the nail on the head when he suggested that Case could be suffering from "stem effects" (since his temperature probe passes through a large gas space into a relatively shallow catalyst bed). Judging from the behavior of my system, I am certain that stem effects would be noticeable in Case's setup. IMPORTANT: If this convection instability is the cause of Dr. Case's effect, then why does he report that "some catalysts work... others don't"? Gene Mallove wrote: Simple answer: The hypothesis is wrong. The "convection instability" is not likely to be the cause of his observed effects. the putative reason why the effects are not seen with D2 in at least some catalysts, is that these catalysts do not catalyze cold fusion reactions. Brendan Hall wrote: "Here," the passerby suggested, "I have a pocket torch. Let's go and look for the key where you dropped it." Hi Scott: This brings us back to the same discussion which occurred during the BLP runs. Is there ANY scalability between your apparatus and that of Dr. Case? Perhaps a starting point would be dimensionless numbers, such as the Reynolds number. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 05:49:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA04368; Tue, 19 May 1998 05:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 05:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:29:11 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35617C26.66238B9B verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:33:42 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: "This is only a test" References: <199805181722_MC2-3D67-FCD7 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"604Dl2.0.741.-uNOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18913 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Nuke test? :-) hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 06:07:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA09679; Tue, 19 May 1998 06:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 06:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356180C6.31DD interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:53:26 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Power measure for Vince References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KlBGg.0.5N2.wDOOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18914 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 10:46 AM 5/18/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Horace > > The "four quadrant" multiplier is a single stage in a package, > >with both inputs allowed to be plus or minus. If you plot them on a > >X-Ygraph, you see where the "four quadrants" come from. > > > >Hank > > Yes, > > Thanks. Scott posted that information also. > > I think it is very strange, that there could be "negative power" by this > arrangement. Horace, negative power in such a metering situation just means that the energy is moving in the opposite direction than for "positive power". One example is a variable-frequency motor-alternator driving a flywheel load. When the motor is accelerating the flywheel, you might define the power as positive. Changing the frequency could cause the flywheel to then drive the alternator - negative power. The subject meter would indicate the direction of energy flow as + or -. Any way you cut it, this would be a nice meter to set up! Get out the op-amps and go to town, Horace! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 06:20:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA12873; Tue, 19 May 1998 06:18:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 06:18:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002f01bd8327$60c490e0$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:09:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"9uR2W1.0.-83.UQOOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18915 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Energies involved in catalysis of bond exchange in the Case experiments are not trivial: H-H 445,990 joule/mole (4.630 ev/bond) D-D 443,534 joule/mole (4.605 ev/bond) H-D 439,220 joule/mole (4.562 ev/bond) With a heat source and catalyst: 2 HD <---> D2 + H2 etc. With the Pd-Carbon catalyst at work next to the heat input driving endothermic reactions (including pairing Ortho-Para Hydrogen-Deuterium combinations) and exothermic recombination at work in the gas volume, the 30 deg C "over-temperature" might be accounted for. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 06:29:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA15051; Tue, 19 May 1998 06:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 06:27:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004201bd8327$de4a0cc0$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: "This is only a test" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:13:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"2TK8r.0.1h3.7ZOOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18916 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Hamdi Ucar To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 6:47 AM Subject: Re: "This is only a test" >Nuke test? >:-) Back at you, Hamdi. :-) Fred S. > >hamdi ucar > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 07:36:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA29120; Tue, 19 May 1998 07:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:13:31 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3561949A.9B64E1 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:18:02 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: eprint:gr-qc/9805067 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5KcRi1.0.p67.3XPOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18917 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, abstract gr-qc/9805067 From: "Dharam V. Ahluwalia" Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:36:47 GMT (9kb) Can general-relativistic description of gravitation be considered complete? Author: D. V. Ahluwalia Comments: Essay Awarded "Honorable Mention" by Gravity Research Foundation (1998). The answer to the question posed in the title is an experimentally verifiable "no." Report-no: LA-UR-98-1159 Availabe from xxx.lanl.gov Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 08:16:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA05015; Tue, 19 May 1998 08:14:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:14:07 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0905 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Problem with Scott's Case set up Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:10:20 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"5R-pk3.0.vD1.v6QOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18918 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Can you run a resistive heater in your quartz pellets, in an H2 atmosphere, and generate an equivalent AC pattern to the gas temperature excursions with your apparatus. That would be fairly solid evidence that it is covection that is causing it Hank From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 08:42:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA11998; Tue, 19 May 1998 08:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3561A6CD.324358C0 ro.com> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:35:42 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" Organization: NASA Volunteer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Juno or other free service... X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xMvPF2.0.Nx2.MUQOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18919 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > Dear Vo., > > I am told there are free internet providers, one being > "juno"... > Is this true? > > Can anyone let me know how to contact them and how to avail > myself of the services? > > Thanks, > > JHS John, See http://www.juno.com -- Patrick V. Reavis Student at Large /\ / \ / G \ ~~~~~~~~ DELTA-G From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 08:43:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA12409; Tue, 19 May 1998 08:40:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:40:31 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:37:31 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"gBMmb1.0.k13.hVQOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18920 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, Arriving this week (I hope) : 2- 12 microfarad 5.2kV oil filled caps. 4- 10 kV 750 mA diodes. This should get rid of the ripple in the power supply. Question: The maximum AC open circut transformer output is 2kV. What can I expect to see open circut DC output? The two caps will be parallel. I don't want to exceed the capacitor rating of 5.2 kV. Thanks for the diode offer Horace, but I had already ordered the 750 mA units. I will take you up on the offer to send the writups on the Motorola electronic ballast design as I don't have a suitable printer. My address: Vince Cockeram 9616 Chianti Lane Las Vegas Nevada 89117 Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 09:02:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA15883; Tue, 19 May 1998 08:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:57:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Problem with Scott's Case set up Resent-Message-ID: <"nXERh.0.0u3.nnQOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18922 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:10 AM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Scott > Can you run a resistive heater in your quartz pellets, in an H2 >atmosphere, and generate an equivalent AC pattern to the gas temperature >excursions with your apparatus. That would be fairly solid evidence that >it is covection that is causing it > >Hank A positive result on that would be an indication the oscillations are *not* from a convection instability, true? It would mean the oscillations are capable of coming from a hot spot, not from the fairly uniform heat that Scott is now applying to the bottom of his cell. (He moved the heater coils from the sides down to the bottom outside of the cell.) It might mean there is some kind of non-uniform evaporation condensation cycle happening, or, as Fred Sparber hypothesized, there is some kind of slow cycle ortho-para hydrogen energy exchange happening to cause the oscillations. The evaporation-condensation cycle is hard to believe, in that, at 60 psia, if it is water that is evaporating and condensing, the top of Scott's cell would have to be below 145 C, too much of a thermal differential to be possible I would think. Scott, is it possible the top of your cell is below 145 C? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 09:02:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA15863; Tue, 19 May 1998 08:59:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:59:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 07:57:35 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrical verses magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"nWZR43.0.jt3.inQOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18921 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:12 PM 5/18/98, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello all, here is my thoughts on this subject. Regards, Robert H. Calloway. >Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Electrical verses magnetic >fields.eml" >Content-Description: Electrical verses magnetic fields (Internet E-Mail >Message) >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Electrical verses magnetic >fields.eml" > >Attachment converted: Hard Disk:Electrical verses magnetic fiel >(????/----) (0000C7CE) I thought this was supposed to be an ascii news list. Why is my Eudora attachment folder being cluttered up with all this junk I can't read? Is there any chance we could limit attachments to GIFs? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 09:15:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17725; Tue, 19 May 1998 09:11:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 09:11:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:09:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Resent-Message-ID: <"lJc5r.0.pK4.qyQOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18923 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:09 AM 5/19/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The Energies involved in catalysis of bond exchange in the Case experiments >are not trivial: > >H-H 445,990 joule/mole (4.630 ev/bond) >D-D 443,534 joule/mole (4.605 ev/bond) >H-D 439,220 joule/mole (4.562 ev/bond) > >With a heat source and catalyst: > > 2 HD <---> D2 + H2 etc. > >With the Pd-Carbon catalyst at work next to the heat input driving >endothermic reactions (including pairing Ortho-Para Hydrogen-Deuterium >combinations) and exothermic recombination at work in the gas volume, the 30 >deg C "over-temperature" might be accounted for. > >Regards, Frederick This is interesting, but doesn't account for the oscillations. What would cause the oscillations in temperature? Also, the above process should be equally applicable to a mostly D2 environment and a mostly H2 environment, if the percentages were alike. The H2-DH-DD exchanges could be ruled out by leaving the cell closed at vacuum for a long period and measuring the outgassing by the pressure increase over a duration equal to the D2 run time. It would then be possible to determine a vacuum outgassing period sufficient to eliminate enough H to prevent the exchange from being significant. The outgassing process might be further facilitated by running the outgassing at 230 C, and then actually running the cell at 200 C. It would take much more run time due to the need to thermally stabilize the system, though. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 09:20:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA18716; Tue, 19 May 1998 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 09:17:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005d01bd8341$0aa8f600$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Juno or other free service... Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:12:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"8Ogsa3.0.Ga4.q2ROr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18924 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Patrick V. Reavis To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 9:38 AM Subject: Re: Juno or other free service... >John Schnurer wrote: > >> Dear Vo., >> >> I am told there are free internet providers, one being >> "juno"... >> Is this true? >> >> Can anyone let me know how to contact them and how to avail >> myself of the services? >> >> Thanks, >> >> JHS > > >John, >See http://www.juno.com Hey Patrick. I think you have to have internet service to go to the www.juno.com web site. :-) Can you or someone go there download and e-mail John the hookup software? I use juno as a freebie backup e-mail, but I had internet service on Sprint. Regards, Frederick > > >-- >Patrick V. Reavis >Student at Large > /\ > / \ > / G \ > ~~~~~~~~ > DELTA-G > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 09:53:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA07582; Tue, 19 May 1998 09:50:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 09:50:04 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007e01bd8345$ec14a540$5b8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:47:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"ykZf-1.0.Is1.wWROr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18925 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 10:11 AM Subject: Re: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Horace wrote: >At 7:09 AM 5/19/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>The Energies involved in catalysis of bond exchange in the Case experiments >>are not trivial: >> >>H-H 445,990 joule/mole (4.630 ev/bond) >>D-D 443,534 joule/mole (4.605 ev/bond) >>H-D 439,220 joule/mole (4.562 ev/bond) >> >>With a heat source and catalyst: >> >> 2 HD <---> D2 + H2 etc. >> >>With the Pd-Carbon catalyst at work next to the heat input driving >>endothermic reactions (including pairing Ortho-Para Hydrogen-Deuterium >>combinations) and exothermic recombination at work in the gas volume, the 30 >>deg C "over-temperature" might be accounted for. >> >>Regards, Frederick > >This is interesting, but doesn't account for the oscillations. What would >cause the oscillations in temperature? With thermal gradients in a gas about the same "instability" as cigarette smoke, especially with H2, HD, and D2. I don't think Scott wants to do a paper on those. :-) > >Also, the above process should be equally applicable to a mostly D2 >environment and a mostly H2 environment, if the percentages were alike. Not really. You started out with H2 and loaded the 500+ meter^2 of carbon with it or a hydrocarbon that stays in the carbon lattice. Then when you introduce the D2: 1, H2 + D2 + E = 2 HD -.446 Mj -.444Mj 2(-.440 Mj) E = -.880+.446+.444 Mj E = .450 Mj (endothermic) However, with heat and the carbon catalyst this "deuteration" of hydrocarbons can occur which means that in the gas phase 2 HD ---> H2 + D2 (exothermal) with the release of .450 Mj/mole probably catalyzed on the chamber walls. > >The H2-DH-DD exchanges could be ruled out by leaving the cell closed at >vacuum for a long period and measuring the outgassing by the pressure >increase over a duration equal to the D2 run time. To do what you say would require running the carbon up to "Activation" temperatures of 1,000 C or better. > >The outgassing process might be further facilitated by running the >outgassing at 230 C, and then actually running the cell at 200 C. It would >take much more run time due to the need to thermally stabilize the system, >though. Not very practical, Horace. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 10:13:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA12748; Tue, 19 May 1998 10:03:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:03:53 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0907 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power measure for Vince Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:00:11 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"-ZUpF2.0.-63.rjROr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18926 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace The term "Power Factor" is primarily useful when you are talking about sine waves. You have to be very careful defining it when your talking about different waveforms. The instantaneous power P(t) = V(t) * I(t) can be either positive or negative at any moment in time. Energy used is given by the integral of P(t) over the duration (say 0 to T) of the test you are running. If the waveform of the current I(t) and the voltage V(t) is periodic, such as it would be in the saturated hysteresis loop you sketched, The energy use is also periodic, and you can define an average power by dividing the energy in one period by its duration. With periodic voltages and currents such as sinewaves, if there are reactive elements in the circuit, inductors and/or capacitors, then energy is stored in these devices during part of a periodic cycle, and recovered during the other part of the cycle. This involves negative instantaneous power during the recovery portion. Power factor can then be defined as the ratio of the average power divided by the product ( peak(I(t)) * peak(V(t)) * 1/2 ) . The factor of 1/2 comes in from the fact that for sinewaves the average power is 1/2 the peak power. A different Power factor can be defined if you use for the denominator the product of RMS I(t) times RMS V(t), which is probably easier to measure if you don't have a oscilloscope. For sinewaves the two measures are the same. Power factor is mostly useful for Electric Utilities, so they can charge more, since the surging reactive power increases line loss as they deliver power to you. With my electric car, I use a "Bad Boy" charger which is a transformer, and a full wave diode bridge. The peak currents that flow during the small part of the cycle that the AC is greater then the battery voltage are quite large, and I can blow my circuit breakers or fuses when my average current is well below the rating of the breaker or fuse. I also am screwing up the power factor for my home, but I am just small potatoes to Southern California Edison. Hank > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 3:19 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Power measure for Vince > > At 10:46 AM 5/18/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Horace > > The "four quadrant" multiplier is a single stage in a > package, > >with both inputs allowed to be plus or minus. If you plot them on a > >X-Ygraph, you see where the "four quadrants" come from. > > > >Hank > > Yes, > > Thanks. Scott posted that information also. > > I think it is very strange, that there could be "negative power" by > this > arrangement. I have an application where the input I vs V curve looks > like: > > > I=0 > | /| > ---------|---------/ / > / | / > V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- > / | / > / /----------|-------- > |/ | > | > > > It thus appears the power factor for this should be closer to zero > than to > one, i.e. about 0.30, is that correct? It also then makes no > difference > which direction around the I vs V loop the curve is traced, right? It > is > just an I*V calculation, summed through one cycle time, to get total > energy > per cycle, i.e. power. It can also be tuned so the bumps on either end > nearly disappear. The output of the device closely approximates a > power > factor of one when taking P=(I rms avg)*(V rms avg). > > This gives an idea for a meter handy for ou investigators/inventors. > It > would not require absolute calibration either. The idea is to use the > analog multiply and divide and rms calc chips to create a power factor > meter. It is just a matter of doing the analog computation of (I*V > averaged)/(I rms averaged)*(V rms averaged). The input scaling is > then > only necessary to place the I and V anaologs into approximately the > +-10 V > range in order to maximize function accuracy. The meter could then be > used > to "tune" EM devices to operate in the negative power range. > > Something does not sound right about all this! > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 10:14:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA15158; Tue, 19 May 1998 10:10:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:10:37 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 09:10:48 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"h8vUs2.0.Ni3.6qROr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18927 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: I=0 | /| ---------|---------/ / / | / V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- / | / / /----------|-------- |/ | | Q1: It thus appears the power factor PF for this should be closer to zero than to one, i.e. about 0.30, is that correct? Q2: It also then makes no difference which direction around the I vs V loop the curve is traced, right? Q3: It is just an I*V calculation, summed (integrated) through one cycle time, to get total energy per cycle, i.e. power, right? Q4: The device can also be tuned, by reducing input volatge, so the bumps on either end nearly disappear. If we designate Irms the average input rms current, and Vrms the average input rms voltage, then the device produces thermal output power which closely approximates: Pout = Irms * Vrms But output power Pout is supposed to be approximated by in put power Pin: Pin = PF * Irms * Vrms or about: Pin = 0.3 * Irms * Vrms So the device described above must be ou, with a coefficient of power COP of at least: COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.3 = 3.33 Correct? Q5: However, looking at the overlayed "current vs time" and "voltage vs time" traces on the oscilloscope, it appears there is a phase angle, based on zero cross delay, voltage lagging current, of about: theta = [(delay time)/(full wave time)]*360 = 26 degrees. I know this is not a valid method in that the current trace is not a sine wave. However, it seems like it should provide some kind of approximation, a cross check. The current waveform doesn't look all *that* non-sinusoidal. So, using theta = 26 degrees we have: PF = cos(theta) = cos(26 deg) = 0.898794 and looking at COP again we have: COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.898794 = 1.11 Q6: This is a huge difference! The excess power is 11 percent (COP 1.11) vs 233 percent (COP 3.33)! What is the correct approach? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 10:19:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA18051; Tue, 19 May 1998 10:17:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:17:20 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 09:17:45 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Resent-Message-ID: <"OiVQx3.0.tP4.VwROr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18928 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:47 AM 5/19/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >Horace wrote: [snip] >>The outgassing process might be further facilitated by running the >>outgassing at 230 C, and then actually running the cell at 200 C. It would >>take much more run time due to the need to thermally stabilize the system, >>though. > >Not very practical, Horace. Thermal stability (Pin = Pout) was reached in a couple hours at cell startup. A few extra hours is not a lot to spend to nail down the effect. It looks practical to me. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 10:25:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20842; Tue, 19 May 1998 10:22:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:22:50 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0909 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:19:04 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"Q1DBs.0.x45.c_ROr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18929 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace I think our posts crossed. Q1: I'm not sure, I would guess so, but you would need the exact phasing info to calculate it. From question 5. It looks like the current is constant when the voltage is changing, and vice-versa. The instananeous power would be triangular, sawtooth like. I would suggest just working with average energy, and not worry about Power Factor. See my BAD BOY charger. Q2: Correct. Q3 Correct. Q4 See my recent post. Q5 Ditto. Regards, Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 10:10 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Power factor calculation questions > > I have an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the > corners > very slightly rounded, about like: > > > I=0 > | /| > ---------|---------/ / > / | / > V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- > / | / > / /----------|-------- > |/ | > | > > > Q1: It thus appears the power factor PF for this should be closer to > zero > than to one, i.e. about 0.30, is that correct? > > Q2: It also then makes no difference which direction around the I vs V > loop > the curve is traced, right? > > Q3: It is just an I*V calculation, summed (integrated) through one > cycle > time, to get total energy per cycle, i.e. power, right? > > Q4: The device can also be tuned, by reducing input volatge, so the > bumps > on either end nearly disappear. If we designate Irms the average > input rms > current, and Vrms the average input rms voltage, then the device > produces > thermal output power which closely approximates: > > Pout = Irms * Vrms > > > But output power Pout is supposed to be approximated by in put power > Pin: > > Pin = PF * Irms * Vrms > > or about: > > Pin = 0.3 * Irms * Vrms > > So the device described above must be ou, with a coefficient of power > COP > of at least: > > COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.3 = 3.33 > > Correct? > > Q5: However, looking at the overlayed "current vs time" and "voltage > vs > time" traces on the oscilloscope, it appears there is a phase angle, > based > on zero cross delay, voltage lagging current, of about: > > theta = [(delay time)/(full wave time)]*360 = 26 degrees. > > I know this is not a valid method in that the current trace is not a > sine > wave. However, it seems like it should provide some kind of > approximation, > a cross check. The current waveform doesn't look all *that* > non-sinusoidal. So, using theta = 26 degrees we have: > > PF = cos(theta) = cos(26 deg) = 0.898794 > > and looking at COP again we have: > > COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.898794 = 1.11 > > Q6: This is a huge difference! The excess power is 11 percent (COP > 1.11) > vs 233 percent (COP 3.33)! What is the correct approach? > > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 10:52:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA30180; Tue, 19 May 1998 10:49:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:49:14 -0700 Message-ID: <3561C626.140B interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:49:26 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"d-eAp3.0.UN7.POSOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18931 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > > All, > Arriving this week (I hope) : > 2- 12 microfarad 5.2kV oil filled caps. > 4- 10 kV 750 mA diodes. > This should get rid of the ripple in the power supply. Question: > The maximum AC open circut transformer output is 2kV. What can > I expect to see open circut DC output? The two caps will be parallel. > I don't want to exceed the capacitor rating of 5.2 kV. WOW, what caps, Vince! They must weigh about 5 - 10 each? With a full-wave bridge you should charge the caps to the peak of the 120 "humps per second" waveform - about 1.4 x 2000 VAC (rms) = 2800 VDC. This is at no load. The average voltage out of the bridge is about 0.9 x 2000 = 1800 average VDC. Your caps should be fine if you don't get yourself across them when charged (the caps that is!). Let's see, 2 caps in parallel = 24 MFD so at 2800 volts, the energy in the caps is: E = 1/2 x C(mfd) x V(kv)^2 = 24/2 x 2.8^2 = 94 joules = 69 ft-lbs. - enough to lift me 4 or 5 inches off the ground. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 11:13:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA01926; Tue, 19 May 1998 11:03:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:03:55 -0700 Message-ID: <3561C79B.55DD skylink.net> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:55:39 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Wallace & Tampere (Long) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7n7bZ3.0.tT.8cSOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18933 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A The Wallace Inventions, Spin Aligned Nuclei, The Gravitomagnetic Field, and The Tampere Experiment: Is there a connection? By: Robert Stirniman, May 1998 During the 1960s through the mid 1970s, Henry William Wallace was a scientist at GE Aerospace in Valley Forge PA, and GE Re-Entry Systems in Philadelphia. In the early 1970s, Wallace was issued patents (1,2,3) for some unusual inventions relating to the gravitational field. Wallace developed an experimental apparatus for generating and detecting a secondary gravitational field, which he named the kinemassic field, and which is now better known as the gravitomagnetic field. Wallace's experiments were based on aligning the nuclear spin of elements and isotopes which have an odd number of nucleons. These materials are characterized by a total nuclear spin which is an odd integral multiple of one-half, resulting in one nucleon with un-paired spin. Wallace drew an analogy between the un-paired angular momentum in these materials, and the un-paired magnetic moments of electrons in ferromagnetic materials. Wallace created nuclear spin alignment by rapidly spinning a brass disk, of which essentially all isotopes have an odd number of nucleons. Nuclear spin becomes aligned in the spinning disk due to precession of nuclear angular momentum in inertial space -- a process similar to the magnetization developed by rapidly spinning a ferrous material (known as the Barnett effect). The gravitomagnetic field generated by the spinning disk is tightly coupled (0.01 inch air gap) to a gravitomagnetic field circuit composed of material having half integral nuclear spin, and analogous to magnetic core material in transformers and motors. The gravitomagnetic field is transmitted through the field circuit and focused by the field material to a small space where it can be detected. In his three patents, Wallace describes three different methods used for detection of the gravitomagnetic field -- change in the motion of a body on a pivot, detection of a transverse voltage in a semiconductor crystal, and a change in the specific heat of a crystal material having spin-aligned nuclei. In a direct analogy with a magnetic circuit, the relative amount of the detected gravitomagnetic field always varied directly with the size of the air-gap between the generator disk and the field circuit. Wallace's patents are written in great detail, and he appears to be meticulous in his experimental design and practice. In my opinion, it is nearly certain that his experiments performed as claimed. None the less, there has been no scientific acknowledgment whatsoever of Wallace's discoveries. An in-depth search of the literature has uncovered only two references to Wallaces work (4, 5), and each of these references merely creates further mystery. The necessary existence of a magnetic-like gravitational field has been well established by physicists specializing in general relativity, gravitational theories, and cosmology. But, the existence of this field is not well known in other of arenas of physical science. The gravitomagnetic field was first hypothesized by Heaviside in the 1880's. The field is predicted by general relativity, and was first formulated in a relativistic context in 1918 by Lense and Thirring (6). In 1961, Forward (7) was the first to express the gravitational field equations in a vector form directly analogous and nearly identical to Maxwells equations for electromagnetics. During the last 20 years many other scientists, (8 to 17), have published articles demonstrating the necessary existence of the gravitomagnetic field, using arguments based on general relativity, special relativity, and the cause and effect relationship which results from non-instantaneous propagation of energy (retardation). Nearly all of these authors present the gravitational field equations in a vector form similar to Maxwells equations. Some authors comment that these equations provide fundamental insights into gravitation, and it is unfortunate that they are not at all well known. Despite their relative simplicity and possible practical value, Maxwells equations for gravitation do not appear in any under- graduate physics textbook. Just as in Maxwells equations for electromagnetics, it is found that in the presence of a time varying gravitomagnetic flux there will always exist concurrently a time varying gravitoelectric field. The secondary generated gravitoelectric field is a dipole field, and unlike the background gravito- electric field due to mass charges, the generated gravitoelectric field always exists in closed loops. Henry Wallace recognized this and described it in his inventions. Wallace also describes another effect which may result from generation of a secondary gravitoelectric field. Wallace believed that a secondary gravito- electric field can result in exclusion of an existing primary background field. In other words, a gravitational shield can be created. The bulk of Wallace's patents describe his experimental apparatus, and his detection of the gravitomagnetic field. The effects detected are minuscule, and as such, may not be of immediate practical value. In reading his patents it is possible to become immersed in the detail of his experimental apparatus, and to neglect the possible significance of the alternative embodiment of his invention (figures 7, 7A, and 7B of his first patent). The alternative embodiment uses a time varying gravitomagnetic flux to create a secondary gravitoelectric field in an enclosed shell of material in order to shield the background gravitoelectric field of the earth. Unfortunately, Wallace does not state whether this embodiment was ever actually produced, and unlike the detailed discussion of his experimental apparatus, he provides no experimental findings or data to back his claim. Nor does he provide much in the way of theoretical arguments about how a secondary gravitoelectric field can act to exclude a primary field, except to state: "It is well known that nature opposes heterogeneous field flux densities." Is it well known that nature opposes heterogeneous flux densities? Well, not to me, and I can not find anything in the way of scientific literature to directly support this idea. But it does seem to make sense. It could be argued thusly. In a well-ordered manifold all derivatives of the fields, time-like and space-like, must be continuous. If you force a field to exist in a region of space, the existing background field is somehow required to form a pattern around or smoothly merge with the created field. Nature does not permit flux lines to act with cross-purposes and to exist with widely different directions in the same region of space. Flux lines can never cross. Wallace seems to have gotten his experiments right -- maybe he is also right in his claim of inventing a gravitational shield? In a ground breaking paper in 1966, Dewitt (18) was first to identify the significance of gravitational effects in a superconductor. Dewitt demonstrated that a magnetic-type gravitational field must result in the presence of fluxoid quantization. In 1983, Dewitt's work was substantially expanded by Ross (19). Beginning in 1991, Ning Li, at the University of Alabama Huntsville, and Douglas Torr, formerly at Huntsville and now at the University of South Carolina, have published a number of articles about gravitational effects in superconductors (20, 21, 22). One interesting finding they have derived is the source of gravitomagnetic flux in a type II superconductor material. Guess what? It is due to spin alignment of the lattice ions. Quoting from Li and Torr's second paper: "The interaction energy of the internal magnetic field with the magnetic moment of the lattice ions drives the lattice ions and superconducting condensate wave function to move together vortically within the range of the coherent length and results in an induced precession of the angular momentum of the lattice ions." And quoting from their third paper: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs but the lattice ions, which must execute coherent localized motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity." And, "It is shown that the coherent alignment of lattice ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the presence of a time-dependent applied magnetic vector potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric field." Li and Torr also demonstrate that the gravitomagnetic field in a super- conductor has a relatively large magnitude compared with the magnetic field -- a factor of 10E11 times larger. The gravitational wave velocity in a superconductor is estimated as a factor of two magnitudes smaller than the velocity in free space. And the resulting estimate of relative gravito- magnetic permeability is four magnitudes (10 thousand times) greater than the permeability of free space. In their third paper, Torr and Li, demonstrate that it is possible to generate a time varying gravitomagnetic field in a superconductor, which must exist concurrently with a time varying gravitoelectric field. In 1995, Becker et al (23), show mathematically that a significant size gravitomagnetic field must always exist along with a magnetic field whenever there is flux pinning or other forms of flux trapping in a type II superconductor. They propose a macroscopic experiment to detect the gravitomagnetic field. Becker et al, choose not to speculate about the source of the gravitomagnetic field, except to provide a brief comment that it may result from spin of the lattice ions. One might ask, what is a pinning center if not a microscopic hole which carries trapped flux, and what must be source of the gravitomagnetic dipole moment if not the angular momentum of the lattice ions at the pinning center? In 1992, an experiment at Tampere University was reported by Podkletnov (24, 25). A torroidal shaped type II superconductor disk was suspended via the Meissner effect by a constant vertical magnetic field, and was rapidly rotated by a time varying horizontal magnetic field. Masses located in a cylindrical spacial geometry above the rotating disk were found to lose up to 2% of their weight. A gravitational shielding effect is claimed. Conclusion. Is a time varying gravitomagnetic field generated in the Tampere disk due to the horizontal time varying magnetic field used to rotate the disk, and does this result in a time varying gravitoelectric field in the disk, and possibly also in the space surrounding the disk, and could this result in exclusion of the earth's primary background gravitoelectric field as claimed by Henry Wallace? Acknowledgments. Many of the ideas in this article have been developed in personal discussions with Kedrick Brown (http://home.att.net/~kfbrown/index.html). I would also like to thank Ron Kita for his kind support and useful background information about Henry Wallace. ==================================================== References: 1. US Patent No 3626605, Method and Apparatus for Generating a Secondary Gravitational Force Field, Henry Wm Wallace, Ardmore PA, Dec 14, 1971. Wallace's first patent. The gravitomagnetic field is named the kinemassic field. The patent describes the embodiment of his experiment. An additional embodiment of the invention (Figures 7, 7A, and 7B) describes how a time varying gravitomagnetic field can be used to shield the primary background gravitoelectric field. Available on the net. http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wallc/ 2. US Patent No 3626606, Method and Apparatus for Generating a Dynamic Force Field, Henry Wm Wallace, Ardmore PA, Dec 14, 1971. Wallace's second patent provides a variation of his experiment. A type III-V semiconductor material (Indium Arsenide), of which both materials have unpaired nuclear spin, is used as an electronic detector for the gravitomagnetic field. The experiment demonstrates that the material in his gravitomagnetic field circuit has hysterisis and remanence effects analogous to magnetic materials. Available on the net. http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wallc/ 3. US Patent No 3823570, Heat Pump, Henry Wm Wallace, 60 Oxford Drive, Freeport NY, July 16, 1974 Wallaces third patent provides an additional variation of his experiment. Wallace demonstrates that by aligning the nuclear spin of materials having an odd number of nucleons, order is created in the material, resulting in a change in specific heat. 4. New Scientist, 14 February 1980, Patents Review This article is one of the only references to Wallace's work anywhere in the literature. The article provides a brief summary of his invention and ends with this intriguing paragraph. "Although the Wallace patents were initially ignored as cranky, observers believe that his invention is now under serious but secret investigation by the military authorities in the US. The military may now regret that the patents have already been granted and so are available for anyone to read." 5. Electric Propulsion Study, Dennis L. Cravens, Science Applications International Corp, August 1990, Prepared for Astronautics Laboratory, Edwards AFB This report provides a detailed review of a variety of 5-D theories of gravitational and electromagnetic interactions. It also provides a summary of a variety of possibly anomalous experiments, including experiments relating to spin aligned nuclei. The reports contains two paragraphs about Wallace's inventions -- partially quoted here: "The patents are written in a very believable style which include part numbers, sources for some components, and diagrams of data. Attempts were made to contact Wallace using patent addresses and other sources but he was not located nor is there a trace of what became of his work. The concept can be somewhat justified on general relativistic grounds since rotating frames of time varying fields are expected to emit gravitational waves." 6. On the Gravitational Effects of Rotating Masses: The Lense-Thirring Papers Translated, B. Mashhoon, F.W. Hehl, and D.S. Theiss. General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol 16:711-50 (1984) A translation of the original article in German by J. Lense and H. Thirring published in 1918. This article is the first fairly comprehensive analysis of the necessary existence of the gravito- magnetic field. An earlier prediction of the existence of this field was made by Heaviside in the 1880s. 7. Proceedings of the IRE Vol 49 p 892, Robert L. Forward (1961) Forward was the first to express the gravitomagnetic field in the modern form of Maxwells equations for gravitation. He named it the prorotational field. 8. Gravitation, C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne, and J.A. Wheeler, Freeman Publishing, San Francisco (1973). MTW is the bible of gravitational theorists. Among many other theories presented, gravitational field equations are derived from general relativity in a form similar to Maxwells equations. 9. Laboratory Experiments to Test Relativistic Gravity, Vladimir B. Braginsky, Carlton M. Caves, and Kip S. Thorne, Physical Review D, Vol 15 No 8 p2047, April 15 1977 Gravitational field equations are derived from General Relativity in a form similar to Maxwells equations. The gravitomagnetic field is called magnetic-type gravity. A variety of experiments are proposed and analyzed for detecting the gravitomagnetic field. 10. Foucault Pendulum at the South Pole: Proposal for an Experiment to Detect the Earth's General Relativistic Gravitomagnetic Field, Vladimir Braginsky, Aleksander Polnarev, and Kip Thorne, Physical Review Letters, Vol 53 No 9 p863, August 1984 Analyses an experiment for detecting the earth's gravitomagnetic field. Possibly the first authors to use the terms gravitomagnetic and gravitoelectric. 11. On Relativistic Gravitation, D. Bedford and P. Krumm, American Journal of Physics, Vol 53 No 9, September 1985 The necessary existence of the gravitomagnetic field is derived from arguments based on apecial relativity. The field is referred to as the gravitational analog of the magnetic field. 12. The Gravitational Poynting Vector and Energy Transfer, Peter Krumm and Donald Bedford, American Journal of Physics, Vol 55 No 4 p362, April 1987 Establishes the necessary existence of the gravitomagnetic field based on arguments from special relativity and energy conservation in mass flow. Derives the gravitational Poynting vector. Names the two types of gravitational fields as gravinetic and gravistatic. 13. Gravitomagnetism in Special Relativity, American Journal of Physics Vol 56 No 6 p523, June 1988 Predicts the existence of the gravitomagnetic field using special relativity and time dilation. Names the fields gravielectric and gravimagnetic. 14. Detection of the Gravitomagnetic Field Using an Orbiting Superconducting Gravity Gradiometer: Theoretical Principles, Bahram Mashhoon, Ho Jung Paik, and Clifford Will, Physical Review D, Vol 39 No 10 p2825, May 1989. Provides a summary analysis of Maxwells equations for gravitation, and an in-depth analysis of the Gravity Probe-B orbital gyroscope experiment for detecting the earth's gravitomagnetic field. 15. Analogy Between General Relativity and Electromagnetism for Slowly Moving Particles in Weak Gravitational Fields, Edward G. Harris, American Journal of Physics, Vol 59 No 5, May 1991 Derives Maxwells equations for gravitation from GR in the case of non-relativistic velocities and relatively weak field strengths. A somewhat more direct method of derivation is used compared with the PPN formulation used by Braginsky, et al. 16. Gravitation and Inertia, Ignazio Ciufolini and John Wheeler, Princeton Series in Physics, Princeton University Press (1995), Chapter 6 -- The Gravitomagnetic Field and its Measurement. Derives the electromagnetic analog of the gravitational field equations, and provides in-depth analysis of experiments for detecting the gravitomagnetic field. 17. Causality, Electromagnetic Induction, and Gravitation. Oleg Jefimenko, Electret Scientific Publishing, Star City WV (1992). Jefimenko derives the electromagnetic field equations based on retarded sources, (charges, moving charges, and accelerating charges). He applies similar arguments to the gravitational field equations. If gravitational energy propagates at any finite speed, the gravito- magnetic field must exist. Maxwells equations for gravitation are presented. He also presents an unusual configuration of mass which is predicted to provide an antigravity effect. 18. Physics Review Letters, Vol 16 p1902, B.S. Dewitt (1966) I don't have this paper, and can not provide a summary. Dewitt was the first to analyze fluxoid quantization in a superconductor in the presence of a time varying magnetic-type gravitational field. 19. The London Equations for Superconductors in a Gravitational Field, D.K. Ross, Journal of Physics A, Vol 16 p1331. (1983) Maxwells equations for gravitation are presented in vector form. Ross uses the name coined by Forward for the gravitomagnetic field -- the prorotational field. Fluxoid quantization is analyzed in the presence of a varying gravitomagnetic field. Ross establishes that the momentum of a charged particle in an electromagnetic and gravitational field is given (in MKS units) by: p = mv +qA + mV, where V is the gravito- magnetic vector potential, and A is the magnetic vector potential. The resulting modified London equations are presented in covariant form. 20. Effects of a Gravitomagnetic Field on Pure Superconductors, Ning Li and Douglas Torr, Physical Review D, Vol 43 No2 p457, January 1991 Li and Torr present Maxwells equations for gravitation using MKS units. The equations are given in a form where the gravitomagnetic permeability of a superconductor material is presumed to be different than the permeability of free space. Vector equations for the gravitational potentials are also presented. The canonical momentum is derived (same finding as Ross paper). It is established that an electrical current also results in a mass current, and an inter- relationship is derived between the magnetic field and gravitomagnetic field in a superconductor. It is established that the magnetic flux in a superconductor is a function of the gravitomagnetic permeability, and vice versa, resulting in a more rigorous form of the Meissner equation and the London theory. It is shown that the gravitomagnetic field must have a relatively large size in a superconductor, and is on the order of 10E11 times larger than the magnetic field. 21. Gravitational Effects on the Magnetic Attenuation of Superconductors, Ning Li and Douglas Torr, Physical Review B, Vol 64 No 9 p5489. September 1992. Li and Torr elaborate on their theory of the interrelationship of the gravitomagnetic field and the magnetic field in superconductors. It is established that the gravitomagnetic field must be sourced by spin alignment of the lattice ions. The velocity of a gravitational wave in a superconductor is estimated to be two orders of magnitude slower than the vacuum velocity, resulting in an estimate of relative gravitational permeability of a superconductor material which is as much as four magnitudes greater than free space. 22. Gravitoelectric-Electric Coupling Via Superconductivity, Douglas Torr and Ning Li, Foundations of Physics Letters, Vol 6 No 4 p371. (1993) Torr and Li continue their analysis of gravitational effects in superconductors. Abstract: "Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the carriers of quantized angular momentum are not the Cooper pairs but the latice ions, which must execute coherent localized motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity. We demonstrate here that in the presence of an external magnetic field, the free superelectron and bound ion currents largely cancel providing a self-consistent microscopic and macroscopic interpretation of near- zero magnetic permeability inside superconductors. The neutral mass currents, however, do not cancel, because of the monopolar gravitational charge. It is shown the coherent alignment of lattice ion spins will generate a detectable gravitomagnetic field, and in the presence of a time-dependent applied magnetic vector potential field, a detectable gravitoelectric field." 23. Proposal for the Experimental Detection of Gravitomagnetism in the Terrestrial Laboratory, Robert Becker, Paul Smith, and Heffrey Bertrand. September 1995. Published on the net. http://www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/RBecker/Gmexp2.htm Becker, et al, demonstrate mathematically that a significant size gravitomagnetic field must exist concurrently with a magnetic field in a superconductor whenever there is flux pinning or other forms of flux trapping. An experiment is proposed whereby a small hole is made in a superconductor, flux is trapped in the hole, and the gravito- magnetic field is detected by measuring counter-torque from a macroscopic cylindrical mass inserted through the hole. 24. A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk YBa2Cu3O7-x Superconductor, E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen, Physica C Vol 203 p441 (1992) Podkletnov describes an experiment where a 2% reduction in weight is created in a mass suspended over a levitated and rotating super- conductor disk. A detailed compilation of information about this experiment is available on the net at Pete Skegg's website. http://www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/gravity.html 25. Weak Gravitational Shielding Properties of Composite Bulk Yba2Cu3O7-x Superconductor Below 70K Under EM Field, Eugene Podkletnov, LANL Physics Preprint Server, Cond-Mat/9701074, January 1997. Podkletnov provides greater detail about his experimental apparatus and the construction of the superconductor disk. Available on the net. http://www.gravity.org/msu.html ========================================== Appendix - MKS Units for the Gravitomagnetic Field. Gravitoelectric Charge = Kg (in purely electrical units, Kg = (Weber/Meter)(Coul/Meter)(Sec) Gravitoelectric Field = Meter/Sec-Squared Gravitoelectric Flux Density = Kg/Meter-Squared Mass Current = Kg/Sec = (Weber/Meter)(Coul/Meter) Gravitomagnetic Dipole Moment = (Kg)(Meter-Squared)/Sec = Angular Momentum = (Coulomb)(Weber) Gravitoelectric Dipole Moment = (Kg)(Meter) (You would need the equivalent of negative mass to make one of these) Gravitomagnetic Charge = (Velocity)(Meter) = Square-Meter/Sec Gravitomagnetic Field = (Mass Current)/Meter = Kg/Sec-Meter = (Coul/Meter)(Weber/Meter)/Meter Gravitomagnetic Flux Density = (Gravitomagnetic Charge)/Meter^2 = Velocity/Meter = 1/Sec = Angular Velocity Gravitoelectric Scalar Potential = Joule/Kg = (Acceleration)(Meter) = (Gravitoelectric Field)(Meter) = Velocity-Squared = Meter-Squared/Second-Squared Gravitomagnetic Vector Potential = (Gravitomagnetic Charge)/Meter = Velocity = Meter/Sec Gravitoelectric Permitivity = Gravitoelectric Flux per Gravitoelectric Field = (Kg)(Second-Squared)/(Cubic Meter) = 1/4(Pi)(G) = 1.1927E09 Kg-Sec^2/Meter^3 Gravitomagnetic Permeability = Gravitomagnetic Flux per Gravitomagnetic Field = Meter/Kg Assuming Gravitational Waves Propagate at the Velocity of Light -- = 1/(c-squared)(epsilon0) = 9.316E-27 Meter/Kg From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 11:32:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA08285; Tue, 19 May 1998 11:22:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:22:57 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:23:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"Jh52k3.0.I12.0uSOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18934 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hank, Thanks for responding. At 10:19 AM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Horace > I think our posts crossed. Yes. >Q1: I'm not sure, I would guess so, but you would need the exact phasing >info to calculate it. The ratio of the areas is nearly one. The PF = 0.3 is conservative I believe. The waveform is very close to that portrayed. >From question 5. It looks like the current is >constant when the voltage is changing, and vice-versa. That is correct. >The instananeous >power would be triangular, sawtooth like. I would suggest just working >with average energy, and not worry about Power Factor. I used a TEK digital oscilloscope which provides a true rms calc for voltage and true rms for voltage across a 10 ohm current sensing resistor, thus a true rms for current. It also provides a great I vs V trace. The traces are very accurate. My main concern is using the correct interpretation, resolving apparent discrepancies, and more so, getting help in finding artifacts to my input power measurement scheme. I have used boiloff calorimetry to establish to about 3 percent that Pout = Irms * Vrms I am not concerned about this part at this time. It is the input power calc. that is very suspect. >See my BAD BOY >charger. Don't understand what the above means. The electric company's kwh meters approximate true I*V don't they? > >Q2: Correct. > >Q3 Correct. > >Q4 See my recent post. The COP is 3.33. Is that a yes or a no? (I don't see anything in your post that disagrees with this.) > >Q5 Ditto. Your earlier post seems to indicate, because I am dealing with repetitive waveform, that calculating the power factor from the I vs V plot is a perfectly valid approach, so the COP is actually greater than 3.33 assuming the PF is less than 0.3. Maybe my concern here is really nailing down the numbers better, because I am so incredulous, and one way to do that might be to apply additional power measurements, i.e use a kwh meter in the primary, redundant calorimetery for the output, etc. It still bothers me that looking at the phase angle gives such dramatically different results, even though the current trace is not so bad. Current looks like: ---- / \ / \ ------ \ / \ /..................\.......................... \ / \ / ------- / \ / \ / ---- with corners very slighly rounded, and leads the voltage sign wave by about 26 degrees. Regards, Horace Heffner > >Regards, >Hank > >> ---------- >> From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 10:10 AM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Power factor calculation questions >> >> I have an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the >> corners >> very slightly rounded, about like: >> >> >> I=0 >> | /| >> ---------|---------/ / >> / | / >> V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- >> / | / >> / /----------|-------- >> |/ | >> | >> >> >> Q1: It thus appears the power factor PF for this should be closer to >> zero >> than to one, i.e. about 0.30, is that correct? >> >> Q2: It also then makes no difference which direction around the I vs V >> loop >> the curve is traced, right? >> >> Q3: It is just an I*V calculation, summed (integrated) through one >> cycle >> time, to get total energy per cycle, i.e. power, right? >> >> Q4: The device can also be tuned, by reducing input volatge, so the >> bumps >> on either end nearly disappear. If we designate Irms the average >> input rms >> current, and Vrms the average input rms voltage, then the device >> produces >> thermal output power which closely approximates: >> >> Pout = Irms * Vrms >> >> >> But output power Pout is supposed to be approximated by in put power >> Pin: >> >> Pin = PF * Irms * Vrms >> >> or about: >> >> Pin = 0.3 * Irms * Vrms >> >> So the device described above must be ou, with a coefficient of power >> COP >> of at least: >> >> COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.3 = 3.33 >> >> Correct? >> >> Q5: However, looking at the overlayed "current vs time" and "voltage >> vs >> time" traces on the oscilloscope, it appears there is a phase angle, >> based >> on zero cross delay, voltage lagging current, of about: >> >> theta = [(delay time)/(full wave time)]*360 = 26 degrees. >> >> I know this is not a valid method in that the current trace is not a >> sine >> wave. However, it seems like it should provide some kind of >> approximation, >> a cross check. The current waveform doesn't look all *that* >> non-sinusoidal. So, using theta = 26 degrees we have: >> >> PF = cos(theta) = cos(26 deg) = 0.898794 >> >> and looking at COP again we have: >> >> COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.898794 = 1.11 >> >> Q6: This is a huge difference! The excess power is 11 percent (COP >> 1.11) >> vs 233 percent (COP 3.33)! What is the correct approach? >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Horace Heffner >> >> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 11:32:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09053; Tue, 19 May 1998 11:26:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:26:09 -0700 Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:26:22 -0700 Message-Id: <199805191826.LAA00596 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: Re: Wallace & Tampere (Long) Resent-Message-ID: <"7hDhp.0.MD2.0xSOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18936 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >The Wallace Inventions, Spin Aligned Nuclei, The Gravitomagnetic Field, >and The Tampere Experiment: Is there a connection? >By: Robert Stirniman, May 1998 > >During the 1960s through the mid 1970s, Henry William Wallace was a scientist >at GE Aerospace in Valley Forge PA, and GE Re-Entry Systems in Philadelphia. >In the early 1970s, Wallace was issued patents (1,2,3) for some unusual >inventions relating to the gravitational field. Greetings Robert; Great post, thanks. You were introduced to the ideas I have been working on at our conference last year. I am continuing to make headway and don't intend to push them on you here, but there is a good degree of analogy between the ideas you presented and the ones I am working on and the observations I have made of stars and their behaviors. For gravitation of solitons (spherical standing waves is an easier concept to grasp) what you do is to allow them to filter out some of the wave energy that is incident in their region of the universe. Then, by being phase and frequency coupled to other solitons nearby (aka particles), each of these particles filters out some of the wave energy incident from the distant universe. This leaves a cleaner wave structure in and around those particles which we call, "spacetime". Their filtering action pushes them away from the origin of the out of frequency matched wave energy, ie, away from outer space. And so objects are pushed toward other objects due to mutual shielding (filtering) from the noisy waves coming from deep space. This is the gravitation of GR in it's present context. When you speak of gravitomagnetic and gravito electric fields, you are speaking more like what I am working on than GR in it's present context. This is because I find that not only can objects "gravitate" (which simply means, *get accelerated in proportion to their mass, and not in proportion to their charge*) due to an interaction with waves in the aether ocean, but additionally they must gravitate due to any bulk flow motions in the ocean of which they are resonances. Fusion in stars leads to the emission of the medium of the universe because "mass", turns out to be a measure of how much aether is associated with a given soliton resonance. As for your comments on Wallace's work, a gravito electric field IS, a region with bulk flow of aether. This is what is taking place outside of stars, and it is why we observe ions in the corona to be heated to the same *velocity dispersion* despite having very different charge to mass ratios (ie, OII and HII, which are both singly ionized O and H respectively *astrophysicists use the I state to denote neutral atoms so be careful when reading astrophysical texts regarding ionization states) such as 16:1 vs 1:1 for O and H respectively. I think that it is very possible that the Tampere disk caused a localized bulk motion in the aether itself. And so describing gravitation using Maxwell's equations would be the only way you could anticipate these phenomena, except for via understanding the underlying nature of the universe as being an ocean rather than of particles with empty spacetime as some metric. In any case, I think that you are on the right track. You are approaching it from the mathematical side of things using the theories you cite. While I am approaching it from the side of the geometries of the solitons and the ways in which waves can communicate action. but I think that both of these will be seen to be the same thing, one day. As for the Tampere disk, as I have said in this group before, if you make a disk with atomic layers that spiral one on top of another to build up the bulk volume of the disk, then I think you will greatly enhance the effect as compared to the Tampere work. It is hard to show the reasons in words, but when you consider the action required to cause fluids rotating in a journal to break into turbulent flow unexpectedly, and apply those anticipations to particles that want to break into a turbulent motion, but which are confined in a solid lattice and unable to do so, it may well be that in response to that impetus the atoms corkscrew up through spacetime like a turbine. the net will actually be that you have caused a localized flow motion to the aether, and that we can think of the device as an aether analogue of a modern jet turbine engine. But no matter how you think of it, I think we will observe these devices developed in the next few years. Once someone shows this phenomena to the public, mainstream will take it seriously and off we go into outer space. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 11:34:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA14095; Tue, 19 May 1998 11:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:27:29 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:24:45 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, jbarron@gpu.com, zettsjs ml.wpafb.af.mil, jayneg@grove.iup.edu, halfox@slkc.uswest.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Update Low level nuclear reaction conference Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"Lch2F.0.8S3.EySOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18935 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Low level nucear reaction conference. "cold fusion conference" Date Wednsday June 9 and Workshop Wednsday June 10th. Place Opprey Land Hotel Nashville. I'm going. ........................................................ Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 11:36:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA10950; Tue, 19 May 1998 11:30:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:30:58 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F090C xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:27:44 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"3NJid3.0.vg2.V_SOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18937 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince The capacitors will charge up to about 2800 volts each positive going quarter cycle, and then discharge through the tube during the next quarter cycle. The discharge will be approximately linear, and the voltage drop will be deltaV = 24x10^-6 * I /240 , for 60Hz current. I is the tube current. Hank > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 10:49 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > VCockeram wrote: > > > > All, > > Arriving this week (I hope) : > > 2- 12 microfarad 5.2kV oil filled caps. > > 4- 10 kV 750 mA diodes. > > This should get rid of the ripple in the power supply. Question: > > The maximum AC open circut transformer output is 2kV. What can > > I expect to see open circut DC output? The two caps will be > parallel. > > I don't want to exceed the capacitor rating of 5.2 kV. > > WOW, what caps, Vince! They must weigh about 5 - 10 each? > > With a full-wave bridge you should charge the caps to the peak of the > 120 "humps per second" waveform - about 1.4 x 2000 VAC (rms) = 2800 > VDC. > This is at no load. The average voltage out of the bridge is about > 0.9 x 2000 = 1800 average VDC. Your caps should be fine if you don't > get yourself across them when charged (the caps that is!). > > Let's see, 2 caps in parallel = 24 MFD so at 2800 volts, the energy in > the caps is: > > E = 1/2 x C(mfd) x V(kv)^2 = 24/2 x 2.8^2 = 94 joules > = 69 ft-lbs. > - enough to lift me 4 or 5 inches off the ground. > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 11:52:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15939; Tue, 19 May 1998 11:47:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:47:42 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F090E xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 11:44:15 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"3MrRJ1.0.ru3.DFTOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18938 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace The watthour meters are somewhat limited in bandwidth, and may not be completely accurate, depending on waveform slopes. You are better off working directly from the scope. Doesn't the scope give you a multiply function, to multiply two waveforms together as they are happening? This would give you the power waveform, and its area over a cycle would give you the energy, which is what you are after, I think. Else, do it by hand. To a first approximation, since the current waveform isn't that far from a sinewave, calculate: power = Imax* Vmax*Cos(26dgrees) / 2.0 Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 11:23 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions > > Hank, > > Thanks for responding. > > At 10:19 AM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Horace > > I think our posts crossed. > > Yes. > > > >Q1: I'm not sure, I would guess so, but you would need the exact > phasing > >info to calculate it. > > > The ratio of the areas is nearly one. The PF = 0.3 is conservative I > believe. The waveform is very close to that portrayed. > > > >From question 5. It looks like the current is > >constant when the voltage is changing, and vice-versa. > > > That is correct. > > > >The instananeous > >power would be triangular, sawtooth like. I would suggest just > working > >with average energy, and not worry about Power Factor. > > > I used a TEK digital oscilloscope which provides a true rms calc for > voltage and true rms for voltage across a 10 ohm current sensing > resistor, > thus a true rms for current. It also provides a great I vs V trace. > The > traces are very accurate. My main concern is using the correct > interpretation, resolving apparent discrepancies, and more so, getting > help > in finding artifacts to my input power measurement scheme. > > I have used boiloff calorimetry to establish to about 3 percent that > > Pout = Irms * Vrms > > I am not concerned about this part at this time. It is the input > power > calc. that is very suspect. > > > > >See my BAD BOY > >charger. > > > Don't understand what the above means. The electric company's kwh > meters > approximate true I*V don't they? > > > > > >Q2: Correct. > > > >Q3 Correct. > > > >Q4 See my recent post. > > > The COP is 3.33. Is that a yes or a no? (I don't see anything in your > post > that disagrees with this.) > > > > > >Q5 Ditto. > > Your earlier post seems to indicate, because I am dealing with > repetitive > waveform, that calculating the power factor from the I vs V plot is a > perfectly valid approach, so the COP is actually greater than 3.33 > assuming > the PF is less than 0.3. > > Maybe my concern here is really nailing down the numbers better, > because I > am so incredulous, and one way to do that might be to apply additional > power measurements, i.e use a kwh meter in the primary, redundant > calorimetery for the output, etc. > > It still bothers me that looking at the phase angle gives such > dramatically > different results, even though the current trace is not so bad. > Current > looks like: > > > ---- > / \ > / \ > ------ \ > / \ > /..................\.......................... > \ / > \ / > ------- / > \ / > \ / > ---- > > with corners very slighly rounded, and leads the voltage sign wave by > about > 26 degrees. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > > > >Regards, > >Hank > > > >> ---------- > >> From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 10:10 AM > >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com > >> Subject: Power factor calculation questions > >> > >> I have an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the > >> corners > >> very slightly rounded, about like: > >> > >> > >> I=0 > >> | /| > >> ---------|---------/ / > >> / | / > >> V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- > >> / | / > >> / /----------|-------- > >> |/ | > >> | > >> > >> > >> Q1: It thus appears the power factor PF for this should be closer > to > >> zero > >> than to one, i.e. about 0.30, is that correct? > >> > >> Q2: It also then makes no difference which direction around the I > vs V > >> loop > >> the curve is traced, right? > >> > >> Q3: It is just an I*V calculation, summed (integrated) through one > >> cycle > >> time, to get total energy per cycle, i.e. power, right? > >> > >> Q4: The device can also be tuned, by reducing input volatge, so the > >> bumps > >> on either end nearly disappear. If we designate Irms the average > >> input rms > >> current, and Vrms the average input rms voltage, then the device > >> produces > >> thermal output power which closely approximates: > >> > >> Pout = Irms * Vrms > >> > >> > >> But output power Pout is supposed to be approximated by in put > power > >> Pin: > >> > >> Pin = PF * Irms * Vrms > >> > >> or about: > >> > >> Pin = 0.3 * Irms * Vrms > >> > >> So the device described above must be ou, with a coefficient of > power > >> COP > >> of at least: > >> > >> COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.3 = 3.33 > >> > >> Correct? > >> > >> Q5: However, looking at the overlayed "current vs time" and > "voltage > >> vs > >> time" traces on the oscilloscope, it appears there is a phase > angle, > >> based > >> on zero cross delay, voltage lagging current, of about: > >> > >> theta = [(delay time)/(full wave time)]*360 = 26 degrees. > >> > >> I know this is not a valid method in that the current trace is not > a > >> sine > >> wave. However, it seems like it should provide some kind of > >> approximation, > >> a cross check. The current waveform doesn't look all *that* > >> non-sinusoidal. So, using theta = 26 degrees we have: > >> > >> PF = cos(theta) = cos(26 deg) = 0.898794 > >> > >> and looking at COP again we have: > >> > >> COP = Pout/Pin = 1/0.898794 = 1.11 > >> > >> Q6: This is a huge difference! The excess power is 11 percent (COP > >> 1.11) > >> vs 233 percent (COP 3.33)! What is the correct approach? > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Horace Heffner > >> > >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 12:05:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19957; Tue, 19 May 1998 12:03:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:03:25 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:03:09 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"gdvIF2.0.ht4.xTTOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18939 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-19 13:51:05 EDT, you write: <> ....2-12 mfd 5.2 kV caps.... > WOW, what caps, Vince! They must weigh about 5 - 10 each? <> Yep Frank, 5 pounds each. 35 bucks from H&R. They also list: 32 mfd-4.5 kV for 40 bucks and 88 mfd-1.2 kV for 15 bucks. I chose the 2 12's because of flexability in use and operating voltage. Also adding good bleeders AND a HV indicator to this lethal setup in addition to the manual crowbar. I'm not so sure I want to throw the crowbar when these things are charged. Flashburn bothers me. Vince > Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 12:14:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22474; Tue, 19 May 1998 12:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <002601bd8359$1dd79e80$ae9a8bce atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:05:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"YOLTI3.0.3V5.qbTOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18940 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Sorry for the premature release. Someone dropped the ball and the content did not get loaded when expected. We are attempting to complete the load at this time and have suffered a server crash. Again our apologies and if we have not destroyed your interest you might take another look. -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:02 PM Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box >Ross Tessien wrote: >> >> >If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work but >> does, maybe that ESC thing. >> > >> >http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm >> >> OK, I'm dense. E^2/R on left and right gives, 0.065 watts input, 0.050 >> watts output. What's the big deal? >> >Good question Ross! > > 1. Which is it: 989 ohms or 986 ohms? > 2. Is 989 ohms the internal impedance of the source? > 3. What's the black box made of? > 4. Are the LEDs taped to the box or are they connected? > 5. Is the 0.707 Vrms a sine wave also? > 6. Does circuit point (1) have a known impedance to ground? > 7. etc., etc. > >Frank S. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 12:43:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA25603; Tue, 19 May 1998 12:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0910 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Baffling Black Box Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:26:42 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"Vbwoe2.0.hF6.QvTOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18941 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You appear to have a transformer here, with air coupling, and mutual inductances between your coils, and some capacitors, or else parasitic capacity with your coils. The Yellow LED's are usually a combination of a red and a green, oppositely connected, so each lights on a half cycle, and the eye combines them into a yellow light if the frequency is high enough. The LED' s, the capacitances, and inductances can form a relaxation oscillator to generate the bursts of waveform under the right conditions. So what is his all about anyhow? Is it supposed to be OU? why bother this news-list? Hank > ---------- > From: atgroup[SMTP:atgroup wt.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 12:05 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box > > Sorry for the premature release. Someone dropped the ball and the > content > did not get loaded when expected. > > We are attempting to complete the load at this time and have suffered > a > server crash. > > Again our apologies and if we have not destroyed your interest you > might > take another look. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis J. Stenger > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:02 PM > Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box > > > >Ross Tessien wrote: > >> > >> >If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't > work > but > >> does, maybe that ESC thing. > >> > > >> >http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm > >> > >> OK, I'm dense. E^2/R on left and right gives, 0.065 watts input, > 0.050 > >> watts output. What's the big deal? > >> > >Good question Ross! > > > > 1. Which is it: 989 ohms or 986 ohms? > > 2. Is 989 ohms the internal impedance of the source? > > 3. What's the black box made of? > > 4. Are the LEDs taped to the box or are they connected? > > 5. Is the 0.707 Vrms a sine wave also? > > 6. Does circuit point (1) have a known impedance to ground? > > 7. etc., etc. > > > >Frank S. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 12:58:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01021; Tue, 19 May 1998 12:54:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:54:34 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980519155711.009bba20 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:57:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LZpiy2.0.vE.dDUOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18942 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:03 PM 5/19/98 EDT, VCockeram wrote: >They also list: 32 mfd-4.5 kV for 40 bucks and 88 mfd-1.2 kV for 15 bucks. Hmmm. $123.46 and $236.74 per kilojoule rated. (The 12s that Vince bought are $215.72 per kilojoule.) I wonder how many they have in stock? Six kilojoules and change for $1000.00 gives new meaning to the idea of basement experiments... Have to stop on the way home and buy some Powerball tickets. 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 May 19 13:29:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA10816; Tue, 19 May 1998 13:25:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:25:34 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:25:54 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"tv4wM.0.oe2.xgUOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18943 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:44 AM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Horace > The watthour meters are somewhat limited in bandwidth, and may >not be completely accurate, depending on waveform slopes. You are better >off working directly from the scope. Doesn't the scope give you a >multiply function, to multiply two waveforms together as they are >happening? No, I bought the entry level TDS220 scope. You have to buy the computer interface and software to get power calcs. Didn't realize it until after I bought it. It's a great scope for the price though, no regrets. >This would give you the power waveform, and its area over a >cycle would give you the energy, which is what you are after, I think. >Else, do it by hand. If I do it by hand I'll guarantee it will still be lower than 0.5. That is the problem! You can see that just by eyeballing the areas. I don't want to go to the trouble of building a V*I power meter if the results are going to be bad. I'd really like to figure out what is wrong before embarking on another series of experiments. >To a first approximation, since the current waveform isn't that far from >a sinewave, calculate: >power = Imax* Vmax*Cos(26dgrees) / 2.0 > >Hank If Ipp is peak to peak current, and Vpp is peak to peak voltage, I take it by Imax and Vmax you mean: Imax = Ipp/2 Vmax = Vpp/2 We are actually talking about many experiments, and a wide range of voltages and currents. I did not record peak to peak (p-p) values for most of them. Here is a sample from my lab book: Ipp/Irms Vpp/Vrms 3.18 2.80 So we have relative values: Irms = 1 Vrms = 1 Imax = 1.59 Vmax = 1.40 Pout = 1 Pin = (1.59)(1.40)(0.89879)/2 = 1.000358 which is in a very surprizing total agreement with P = Irms*Vrms! Let's try another one: Pin = (1.63)(1.39)(0.89879)/2 = 1.018 COP = 0.98 Here is one with a 60 deg. phase angle: Pin = (1.52)(1.38)(0.5)/2 = 0.524 COP = 1.91 so it appears that as I drive the phase angle up the COP increases - or I simply drive the calculation error higher. I am not sure this is getting anywhere. A man with one watch knows what time it is. A man with two is never quite sure! Now I have three and none agree! I take it the above formula is an approximation which assume the waveform is sinusoidal, as is P = Irms*Vrms, which we know is wrong. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 13:41:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13835; Tue, 19 May 1998 13:37:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:37:51 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0911 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:34:14 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"ZgfZM3.0.xN3.UsUOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18944 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace, I'm sorry, but: Thats why I said a first approximation. There's no way around it, you have to multiply the waveforms, forming the instantaneous power, and then integrate it, when you don't have sinewaves. Doing it graphically is probably OK. If the current waveform is a combination of square pulses and linear segments, you can multiply them by a sinewave and integrate with a medium amount of calculus, or write a small Basic or Fortran or C program to do it for you. What language do you have available? Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 1:25 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions > > At 11:44 AM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Horace > > The watthour meters are somewhat limited in bandwidth, and > may > >not be completely accurate, depending on waveform slopes. You are > better > >off working directly from the scope. Doesn't the scope give you a > >multiply function, to multiply two waveforms together as they are > >happening? > > No, I bought the entry level TDS220 scope. You have to buy the > computer > interface and software to get power calcs. Didn't realize it until > after I > bought it. It's a great scope for the price though, no regrets. > > > >This would give you the power waveform, and its area over a > >cycle would give you the energy, which is what you are after, I > think. > >Else, do it by hand. > > > If I do it by hand I'll guarantee it will still be lower than 0.5. > That is > the problem! You can see that just by eyeballing the areas. I don't > want > to go to the trouble of building a V*I power meter if the results are > going > to be bad. I'd really like to figure out what is wrong before > embarking on > another series of experiments. > > > >To a first approximation, since the current waveform isn't that far > from > >a sinewave, calculate: > >power = Imax* Vmax*Cos(26dgrees) / 2.0 > > > >Hank > > If Ipp is peak to peak current, and Vpp is peak to peak voltage, I > take it > by Imax and Vmax you mean: > > Imax = Ipp/2 > > Vmax = Vpp/2 > > > We are actually talking about many experiments, and a wide range of > voltages and currents. I did not record peak to peak (p-p) values for > most > of them. Here is a sample from my lab book: > > Ipp/Irms Vpp/Vrms > > 3.18 2.80 > > So we have relative values: > > Irms = 1 > Vrms = 1 > Imax = 1.59 > Vmax = 1.40 > > Pout = 1 > Pin = (1.59)(1.40)(0.89879)/2 = 1.000358 > > which is in a very surprizing total agreement with P = Irms*Vrms! > Let's > try another one: > > Pin = (1.63)(1.39)(0.89879)/2 = 1.018 > COP = 0.98 > > Here is one with a 60 deg. phase angle: > > Pin = (1.52)(1.38)(0.5)/2 = 0.524 > COP = 1.91 > > so it appears that as I drive the phase angle up the COP increases - > or I > simply drive the calculation error higher. > > I am not sure this is getting anywhere. A man with one watch knows > what > time it is. A man with two is never quite sure! Now I have three and > none > agree! > > I take it the above formula is an approximation which assume the > waveform > is sinusoidal, as is P = Irms*Vrms, which we know is wrong. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 13:49:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA06761; Tue, 19 May 1998 13:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0912 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:39:35 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"iEtGi1.0.Zf1.pzUOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18945 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace If you can get ahold of one of the Analog devices four quadrant multiplier chips, you can take the current and voltage product, and then measure the average output waveform with a DC meter. This might be easier for you. You could calibrate it with sinewaves. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 1:25 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions > > At 11:44 AM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Horace > > The watthour meters are somewhat limited in bandwidth, and > may > >not be completely accurate, depending on waveform slopes. You are > better > >off working directly from the scope. Doesn't the scope give you a > >multiply function, to multiply two waveforms together as they are > >happening? > > No, I bought the entry level TDS220 scope. You have to buy the > computer > interface and software to get power calcs. Didn't realize it until > after I > bought it. It's a great scope for the price though, no regrets. > > > >This would give you the power waveform, and its area over a > >cycle would give you the energy, which is what you are after, I > think. > >Else, do it by hand. > > > If I do it by hand I'll guarantee it will still be lower than 0.5. > That is > the problem! You can see that just by eyeballing the areas. I don't > want > to go to the trouble of building a V*I power meter if the results are > going > to be bad. I'd really like to figure out what is wrong before > embarking on > another series of experiments. > > > >To a first approximation, since the current waveform isn't that far > from > >a sinewave, calculate: > >power = Imax* Vmax*Cos(26dgrees) / 2.0 > > > >Hank > > If Ipp is peak to peak current, and Vpp is peak to peak voltage, I > take it > by Imax and Vmax you mean: > > Imax = Ipp/2 > > Vmax = Vpp/2 > > > We are actually talking about many experiments, and a wide range of > voltages and currents. I did not record peak to peak (p-p) values for > most > of them. Here is a sample from my lab book: > > Ipp/Irms Vpp/Vrms > > 3.18 2.80 > > So we have relative values: > > Irms = 1 > Vrms = 1 > Imax = 1.59 > Vmax = 1.40 > > Pout = 1 > Pin = (1.59)(1.40)(0.89879)/2 = 1.000358 > > which is in a very surprizing total agreement with P = Irms*Vrms! > Let's > try another one: > > Pin = (1.63)(1.39)(0.89879)/2 = 1.018 > COP = 0.98 > > Here is one with a 60 deg. phase angle: > > Pin = (1.52)(1.38)(0.5)/2 = 0.524 > COP = 1.91 > > so it appears that as I drive the phase angle up the COP increases - > or I > simply drive the calculation error higher. > > I am not sure this is getting anywhere. A man with one watch knows > what > time it is. A man with two is never quite sure! Now I have three and > none > agree! > > I take it the above formula is an approximation which assume the > waveform > is sinusoidal, as is P = Irms*Vrms, which we know is wrong. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 14:03:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA03195; Tue, 19 May 1998 13:59:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:59:13 -0700 Message-ID: <19980519205802.429.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:58:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"1Iq-5.0.on.WAVOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18946 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ok -- looked at the second post as well. So...please fill us in on the wiring/winding/positioning of the coil....looks like it's the critical part of the unit. Teasing will only piss-off the members of this list. I'll take a guess. Middle two coils [L1 and L2] are wound in opposite directions to have opposite polarity configuration. [bifilar sort of config] Both are connected to [a] and [b]. I'll assume that the LEDs are connected to both leads of L3 and L3 is unpowered. [secondary side of transformer] L4 is powered...unsure of polarity, but it also connects to [a] and [b]. Is this the "driver" coil? _LEDs_ |_ __| +L1- +L2- L3 [CCW] [CW] [CW] - L4 [CW] + I give up -- Am I close? BTW -- better read Jerry Decker's Poof of Priniciple before attempting to sell kits to this group! see: http://www.keelynet.com/pop.htm Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com ---atgroup wrote: > > Sorry for the premature release. Someone dropped the ball and the content > did not get loaded when expected. > > We are attempting to complete the load at this time and have suffered a > server crash. > > Again our apologies and if we have not destroyed your interest you might > take another look. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis J. Stenger > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:02 PM > Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box > > > >Ross Tessien wrote: > >> > >> >If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work > but > >> does, maybe that ESC thing. > >> > > >> >http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm > >> > >> OK, I'm dense. E^2/R on left and right gives, 0.065 watts input, 0.050 > >> watts output. What's the big deal? > >> > >Good question Ross! > > > > 1. Which is it: 989 ohms or 986 ohms? > > 2. Is 989 ohms the internal impedance of the source? > > 3. What's the black box made of? > > 4. Are the LEDs taped to the box or are they connected? > > 5. Is the 0.707 Vrms a sine wave also? > > 6. Does circuit point (1) have a known impedance to ground? > > 7. etc., etc. > > > >Frank S. > > > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 14:32:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA13340; Tue, 19 May 1998 14:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980519162732.00c1994c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 16:27:32 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Problem with Scott's Case set up In-Reply-To: <35610FCB.1134FAD9 mail.pc.centuryinter.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19980518112212.00c131b0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"oLRtK3.0.MG3.MdVOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18947 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:51 5/19/98 +0000, Taylor J. Smith wrote: >This brings us back to the same discussion which occurred >during the BLP runs. Is there ANY scalability between your >apparatus and that of Dr. Case? Perhaps a starting point >would be dimensionless numbers, such as the Reynolds number. It is a fact that my chamber has 13 times less volume than Dr. Case's. (120cc compared to 1.6 liters). Dr. Case has suggested correctly that this means my catalyst does not get exposed to as much D2 gas as his does, hence it would remain more contaminated with H2 in my experiment after only one or two fillings with D2. Soon I will conduct a run in which I take measures to compensate for this problem: more flushes with fresh D2, and longer evacuation periods at temperature between flushes. If Dr. Case's phenomenon simply requires the right catalyst to be exposed to sufficient D2 gas at the right temperature, I will probably observe it in this next run. Regarding a Reynold's number, nominally there is no flow involved in this experiment. If convection currents are actually important then its probably bad news for Dr. Case (i.e. it would mean that his "excess temperature" effect is not excess heat). 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 May 19 14:35:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA12206; Tue, 19 May 1998 14:31:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:31:42 -0700 Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:31:31 -0700 Message-Id: <199805192131.OAA26732 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: Re: Wallace & Tampere (Long) Resent-Message-ID: <"6Sqmi1.0.U-2.veVOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18948 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: OK, I have now had time to read the whole article and there are a few more facts about our universe that you may be interested in because they pertain to the gravito-electric field, and a link between them and magnetic fields. First: >Is it well known that nature opposes heterogeneous flux densities? Well, not >to me, and I can not find anything in the way of scientific literature to >directly support this idea. But it does seem to make sense. It could be argued >thusly -- In a well-ordered manifold all derivatives of the fields, time-like >and space-like, must be continuous. Not if you alter the amount of medium present from some source of the medium within which waves are, the fields. ie, IMO, these "fields" we like to use in discussion are simply wave structures, or topologies, in an ocean of aether we call empty space. Thus, we can say that the derivitives of these wave structures are continuous, meaning that we expect we can trace the intensity of the waves around a loop and come back to the starting point to find that the intensity of waves are the same as when we began our loop. but, if while we are on our way around the loop, there is an emission of the medium of which the waves are composed, and in which the waves are resonances, then there is a dynamic situation going on that is not anticipated by the above comments, nor by any other comments in the balance of this paper. Mass to energy conversion, such as in stars, or exothermy in general, provide such a bulk flow of aether away from the region of energy emission. And so you should not expect to find a continuous loop around such a region without getting into the nitty gritty of the interior wave topology of the nuclei themselves. Even then, I don't think you will succeed at getting around the loop and back to the start conditions, unless the reactivity is constant over the time it takes to move around the loop. Planetary nebulae are found outside of old stars that have become white dwarfs. These are hot stars. It should be no surprise that these stars exist, except that we don't expect that fusion, ie mass to energy conversion, emits the stuff of empty space and thus exerts a gravito electric flux in your terms. That flux, acts on the resistance (time delay) of the nuclei in the way of the flux and it thus pushes matter away from the star. The reason white dwarfs are so hot, (40,000 K up to 200,000 K?? I'd need to look it up, but hot OK) is simple. They existed for a long time without burning any fuel, and thus without a flux of aether headed outward, and thus no gravito electric current to act against the matter of the star. After the outer layers cool for millions of years (subsequent to H running out inside due to the core now being mostly He), they settle down on top of the underlying layers, thus heating them up. Eventually, the core ignites it's helium to fuse it to heavier elements such as C and O etc. When this occurs, it is known as helium flash. The outer layers of the star are then blown away. But it is HOW they are blown away that is odd. First of all, we notice that the surface of the white dwarf stars that are really hot, have really intense gravitational fields. Some of the most intense fields we know of in physics. Second, we notice that the matter outside of the star along the axis of rotation is being blown out in what looks like an inertial manner. In other words, we observe that the matter in what are called FLIERs (fast low ionization regions) are moving really fast, and yet they are at low ionization states. This is really odd because if you are going to use magnetic fields to accelerate the ions to these high velocities, then they have to be really hot. And if they are really hot, they should be at high ionizations and not low ones as is observed. It is as though the ions are being accelerated by some unknown mechanism, **gravito electric**, or aether bulk flow as you choose is my assertion. The second thing that is wierd about them is that the matter in these objects is highly processed. ie, it is "as though they are spit balls coming from inside of the star where the matter is highly processed" to paraphrase the researchers. Basically, you have bulk flow of aether heading out. For the super conductors, I don't think there is any requirement that a magnetic field necessarily is accompanied by flow of aether. but, I do think it is a requirement that flow of aether be accompanied by a magnetic field. Thus the fields around the white dwarf stars. I do, however, think that a gravito electric field must be accompanied by a flow of aether. But the flow could easily be in the configuration of a smoke ring like vortex. ie, for the Tampere experiment, he could easily have established a vortex were the aether is flowing upward through his disk, and then it expands outward and flows back down again under the disk, and then converges inward and rises back up through the disk again. This vortex geometry would look in cross section like the magnetic field of a bar magnet, raising the question as to whether a bar magnet is such an aether vortex. I haven't answered that question yet, but don't think that a magnetic field must be accompanied by bulk flow because it can instead be due to soliton precession and wave topology rather than flow. If you force a field to exist in a region >of space, the existing background field is somehow required to form a pattern >around or smoothly merge with the created field. Nature does not permit flux >lines to act with cross-purposes and to exist with widely different directions >in the same region of space. Flux lines can never cross. I think this is probably right. But you can force the lines to spread apart if you are emitting aether from a source. So the derivitives might not close in a loop if you have time variable exothermy involved. Most of our exothermy is so trivial this would not be a factor though. >Quoting from Li and Torr's second paper: "The interaction energy of the internal >magnetic field with the magnetic moment of the lattice ions drives the lattice >ions and superconducting condensate wave function to move together vortically >within the range of the coherent length and results in an induced precession of >the angular momentum of the lattice ions." And quoting from their third paper: >"Recently we demonstrated theoretically that the carriers of quantized angular >momentum are not the Cooper pairs but the lattice ions, which must execute >coherent localized motion consistent with the phenomenon of superconductivity." Yes. I completely concur and this is what I stated over a year ago was responsible for super conductivity. The lattice atoms must be waving coherently as they phase and frequency lock to the electrons waving trajectory as those pass through the lattice. Basically, the electron motion forces the lattice to phase and frequency lock to their motions by exchanging momentum derived from the "resistance" to flow prior to super conductivity being established. They are just like a series of coupled JJ's, or a series of coupled pendulums. first, you need to allow them to couple, and they they will remain coupled. >Conclusion. >Is a time varying gravitomagnetic field generated in the Tampere disk due to the >horizontal time varying magnetic field used to rotate the disk, and does this >result in a time varying gravitoelectric field in the disk, and possibly also >in the space surrounding the disk, and could this result in exclusion of the >earth's primary background gravitoelectric field as claimed by Henry Wallace? One way to circumvent the need to fabricate the disk with atomically separated spiral layers is to set up atomic waves inside the disk which shear the aether coherently. One way to do that is to set up standing waves in the disk atomic lattice that shear spacetime vertically. The time varying fields could very well accomplish that, IMO. That was one of the ideas I had for building that device when I could afford to do so. But I think you want to get things to shear against the fields, and the atomic lattice binding by forcing the disk to be in a certain strained condition such that the atomic layers shear as they rotate. You need them to be like turbine blades, but at the sub atomic level. ie, the positions of each nucleus must be located in spacetime nodes such that their positions are always slightly in error from where they should be. Thus, the wave pattern heading backward from leading nuclei in the lattice, must always be vertically displaced relative to the nuclei behind and ahead of their location, as the disk turns. Climb inside of the nuclei and look out to the other nuclei and imagine that each is setting up a wave topology for the others to ride. You need for them to all be riding up on the waves in the same direction. Then, they will all be forced to surf the wave in the same direction horizontally and vertically. The horizontal components will all cancel out as far as net thrust is concered. The vertical components should generate a net axial thrust. As far as the horizontal components are concerned, what you will have trouble with is that those components tend to cause the lattice to fly apart and the disk to shatter. So, in order that you can spin rapidly enough to get this effect to manifest with substantial net thrust, you must need to build the thing as a conical structure so that you use some of this thrust to keep the ceramic from flying apart, and some of the thrust to generate the "anti grav" thrust. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 14:42:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA15573; Tue, 19 May 1998 14:39:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:39:53 -0700 From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:39:36 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Wallace and Tempere Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"tEuIQ2.0.uo3.dmVOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18949 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The Wallace Inventions, Spin Aligned Nuclei, The Gravitomagnetic Field, and The Tampere Experiment: Is there a connection? By: Robert Stirniman, May 1998 .............................................................. Yes there is. It has to do with the force gravity symmetry. The Source of Inertial and Grav. Mass Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 15:00:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA22526; Tue, 19 May 1998 14:55:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:55:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 13:55:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"BvHzL3.0.uV5.q-VOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18950 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:39 PM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Horace > If you can get ahold of one of the Analog devices four quadrant >multiplier chips, you can take the current and voltage product, and then >measure the average output waveform with a DC meter. This might be >easier for you. You could calibrate it with sinewaves. >Hank Yes - that is the primary objective! But before going to all that trouble Ianted to resolve this conflict that has bothered me. I think I figured it out. I vs V tells you nothing about power. You have to know how long the trace lingers at each I*V value, and that information is not in the I*V trace. Bingo, conflict resolved. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 15:10:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA19698; Tue, 19 May 1998 15:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:07:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0913 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 15:01:51 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"favgY2.0.dp4.eAWOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18951 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Actually, it is in the I vs V trace, in the form of the brightness. If the I and V values stay the same for a while, the spot on the screen is brighter. But not very useful for power measurements. Good Luck Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 2:55 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions > > At 1:39 PM 5/19/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > >Horace > > If you can get ahold of one of the Analog devices four > quadrant > >multiplier chips, you can take the current and voltage product, and > then > >measure the average output waveform with a DC meter. This might be > >easier for you. You could calibrate it with sinewaves. > >Hank > > Yes - that is the primary objective! But before going to all that > trouble > Ianted to resolve this conflict that has bothered me. > > I think I figured it out. I vs V tells you nothing about power. You > have > to know how long the trace lingers at each I*V value, and that > information > is not in the I*V trace. Bingo, conflict resolved. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 16:20:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28380; Tue, 19 May 1998 16:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 16:16:12 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 19:20:02 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd837c$a67b6550$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZgY0S.0.Hx6.wAXOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18952 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince Cockeram wrote: >Another run tonight, a short 36 minutes. I positioned the temperature >sensor closer to the + end of the tube, about 1 inch below the upper electrode >which accounts for the higher temperature. This is about the >center of the tube wall bright orange hot area. >Observation: In this area the glow is visible as a very pale violet glow. > Below this area (where the tube wall is not even red hot) the > glow is not visible at all....?? > In the tube where the glow is visible, the glow is much > smaller than the tube id (.230 inch) about .125 inch or so. - Hi Vince, This is very unusual, I have never seen a tube operating in the glow discharge mode where the majority of thermal output was occurring in a relatively short positive column near the anode. The positive column is normally a region of efficient ionization and low ionization loss. I would be surprised to find more than 20% of the applied voltage across this region at your pressure. The positive column has an outer space charge layer formed of positive ions, in your case possibly mainly K+ if the temperature is high enough. I'll have to look up the vapor pressure of K vs temperature to check this out. Atomic H should also be plentiful from the electron current in the column. The observed thermal profile is a strong indicator of possible OU behavior! - Be very careful with those HV caps, a discharge through you would be painful and possibly fatal. One should be enough to provide sufficient filtering for your proposed full wave bridge. - This is getting interesting enough to be worth replicating. - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 17:16:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA25687; Tue, 19 May 1998 17:12:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:12:42 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:12:58 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: William Beaty Subject: Do this now Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"OHZu52.0.9H6.v_XOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18953 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS 1998 W. Beaty Shake your hand really hard, for a fairly long time, until your fingertips feel like they're turning into rubber. Stop for a moment, then do it again. It takes less time the second time for "rubberization" to commence, eh? Keep a pocketful of dimes and quarters with you at all times, and constantly leave them in knee-level weird places where only a child would ever look. Inside the hollow shafts of toilet-paper holders. Balanced along the ridges of decorative molding. Imagine the eventual entertainment that will result. Inside pencil sharpeners at the local elementary school. Look in the mirror, pull your lips open, then snap your teeth open and closed as shown in the photos below. This makes you become "AWARE OF YOUR SKULL" Why, your face is just a layer of meat! What if you woke up one morning and it was gone! (Once the full-blown skull awareness wears off, find another mirror and restore it to full strength.) [photos eventually!] Say "ooeeooeeooe", but relax your face and shake your head hard and fast back and forth so that your cheeks flap. Sounds like Elmer Fudd when he's trying to shake off the dizzyness that comes from being hit on the head. Try this next time you get hit on the head by a falling anvil, see if it helps. Smell the table. Smell the floor. Smell the computer screen. Why should dogs have all the fun? Rub your palms together hard, so you make those little black rolls of dead skin. Those are called "Blatties." They're named after an early computer hacker at MIT. Teach yourself to talk understandably while your mouth is wide open. If you ever accidentally cut your lips off, or lose your lower jaw, this will come in quite handy. "Tleese take ne tll a hos-thitle innnediatly!" While waiting in the dark outside a movie theatre or pub, violently shake your head back and forth while observing nearby neon signs. (this only works with clear-tube orange signs.) See those frilly filgerees in the bands of light? Those are called "positive column striations." Neon sign makers call them "jellybeans". They are a type of plasma instability, and even physicists don't really understand why they form. All neon signs have them, but normally they wiggle back and forth so fast that humans can't see them. Yawn. (no, REALLY yawn), then immediately force your toungue backwards against the roof of your mouth. The saliva glands under your tongue will squirt like a squirtgun! You can only squirt once or twice before another yawn is required. Practice this in front of a mirror until you can slightly part your lips and silently hit a target with deadly accuracy. Hey! Is it raining in here? Face a light source. Fill your cheeks with air partially, breathe normally through your nose, and tense your cheeks and lips to compress the air inside. (It helps if you push fingers on your lips to keep air from spurting out.) Now relax your cheeks, part your lips, and spit the air out slowly. (Don't breathe out, instead spit the air out with cheeks and tongue.) Smoke! Fog comes out of your mouth. This works great in the dark with a flashlight. While reading, eat something. Notice that the flavor vanishes as soon as you get involved with the story you're reading? Now concentrate on your mouth, and the flavor explodes into reality. By concentrating on the book or on your mouth, you can make the flavor flash on and off. WEIRD! After getting out of the car, quickly touch one of your passengers. Snap! Why waste a good "zap" on the car door? (If you don't enjoy sparks, then use the car keys to touch your passenger. YOU won't feel the shock.) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 19 18:26:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17267; Tue, 19 May 1998 18:24:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 18:24:23 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:24:48 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Electrical verses magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"SWLlF3.0.jD4.63ZOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18955 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:38 PM 5/19/98, Robert Calloway wrote: >Sorry Horace.. I screwed up.. I'll send it later without all the garbage. >Robert. No problem. I would just like to see what you posted. Just like a little kid who wants his candy ... 8^) I wonder about what Fred keeps putting in his attachments too. I assume it is web page html, though I can't get Netscape to read it. Curious he makes them attachments instead of cutting and pasting the text. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 19:13:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA21641; Tue, 19 May 1998 19:05:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 19:05:27 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 04:57:30 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35623933.CA8D9E5A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 05:00:19 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <19980519205802.429.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xe2qm1.0.2I5.bfZOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18956 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Atgroup, LED's frequency BW is normally not higher than 100 MHz. If there are some bursts to power the LEDs, they should be observable on scope clearly, if simple loop of wire is connected to the probe and getting to proximity to the coils. I think such a weak cou pling will not disturb the system, and you will obtain a solid data on the nature of this anomalous bursts. Even if higher frequencies than a LED allows (by its switching characteristics) are present on around coils, this would suggest a real unconvention al things are happening. I think displaying such a burst shots will strongly support your claims. My general strategy on OU research the Output/Input balance is not the guide of the research. I don't believe the OU will show itself without extraordinary artifacts. So if you catched the bursts, investigate them more instead of try to obtain strightforw ard O > I. May the circuit will never allows OU but the effect is present. If the condition of the effect is understood, it will be more efficiently used or amplified in the next design. On the other side, the data you supplied currently is not enough to prove the anomaly, as others said. I saw very strange effects but finally could be explained by conventional electronics done Capacitive/magnetic couplings, and LED's. Even it was possibl e to obtain impedance conversion (xformer effect) truly inline without a secondary circuit. LED's could be driven in reverse direction flowing current to the source, (negative current) but without violation the rules. Coils are magical. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 20:11:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00742; Tue, 19 May 1998 19:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 19:54:03 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: RE: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:52:03 +1000 Message-ID: <000001bd839b$c619efc0$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <007e01bd8345$ec14a540$5b8cbfa8 default> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"KLtb73.0.VB.7NaOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18957 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >You started out with H2 and loaded the 500+ meter^2 of carbon >with it or a hydrocarbon that stays in the carbon lattice. >Then when you introduce the D2: >1, H2 + D2 + E = 2 HD > -.446 Mj -.444Mj 2(-.440 Mj) > E = -.880+.446+.444 Mj > E = .450 Mj (endothermic) >However, with heat and the carbon catalyst this "deuteration" of >hydrocarbons can occur which means that in the gas phase >2 HD ---> H2 + D2 >(exothermal) with the release of .450 Mj/mole >probably catalyzed on the chamber walls. > Wouldn't the "deuteration" process be endothermic to the same amount of energy that would later be released in the above exothermic reaction, causing a temperature drop in the catalyst material? Over time this "deuteration" process should peter out. How is this consistent with the observed increase in temperature by Case and Mallove? (Possible answer: as the D2 penetrates deeper into the activated carbon, there is greater surface area in which "deuteration" can occur. Once again we can see the need for a more thorough understanding of the catalyst. Eg. How deep does the palladium penetrate the activated carbon, therefore influencing the available surface area for catalytic reactions?) How long can such a reaction sustain itself, creating the measured temperature difference, using all the H in the system? Assume that the volume of the catalyst was 100% H for an extreme over estimation. Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 20:16:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA05385; Tue, 19 May 1998 20:12:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 20:12:05 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: RE: Problem with Scott's Case set up Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:52:46 +1000 Message-ID: <000101bd839b$e910be00$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"7hJmg3.0.-J1.vdaOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18958 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I tried to send this one yesterday, but it didn't seem to get through. E.F. Mallove wrote: The volume of Case's chamber is 1,600 ml and the catalyst is only 30- 50 ml, so there is a huge volume ratio of gas to catalyst. This is good, Case claims, because that allows the residual H2 (from the Pd and carbon and the particle interstices) that persists even after heavy evacuation to be greatly diluted by the D2 later pumped in. In Scott's much smaller chamber, the gas volume ratioed to the catalyst volume is closer to 1:1. Hi Vortexians Can anyone tell us the flow rate of hydrogen out of the catalyst when under vacuum? Is it possible to calculate the amount of hydrogen expected to be left in the catalyst after a complete D2 replacement cycle? Would increasing the time under vacuum also increase the effectiveness of the cycle? Has BET analysis been done on the catalyst and if so, what were the results? (This analysis calculates the surface area of a porous material by adsorbing a noble gas into the lattice.) Do liquids absorbed into the lattice significantly effect the expulsion of hydrogen from the lattice (eg. through capillary blockages), or does the initial cycling effectively rid the catalyst of all of its absorbed liquids? Let's see what our fellow Vortexians can do with the results and (possible) implications of these questions. Thanks Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 20:17:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA06105; Tue, 19 May 1998 20:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 20:13:58 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Case: Little run 6 Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:02:38 +1000 Message-ID: <000201bd839b$ea2e14e0$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"Zxn4n1.0.GV1.ofaOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18959 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks Scott for the thorough investigation. The oscillations of the gas thermocouple signal were fascinating, and certainly not a waste of time investigating. Below is an interesting hypothesis based on a quick reading on my post-grad supervisor's investigation into the effect of sound on flames. Place a candle in an acoustically lively room, play a violin and, if you hit the right note, the candle will blow out. Place a Bunsen burner in the same place, and you can turn the yellow flame into a blue flame by the same method. The reasons are complex, resulting from the interaction of the room acoustics and resonant frequencies, vortex shedding in the presence of sound and vortex shedding due to a high thermal gradient. The result is that the sound increases the mixing during the burning of the gas (Schlieren photographs have confirmed this), the strength of the sound determined by the local acoustic resonances. If you (sonically) excite a closed cavity at a resonant frequency, you will get a slow toroidal vortex formed inside the cavity. The presence of the catalyst will tend to dampen the sound, so increasing the amount of catalyst will decrease the chance of a significant resonance forming. It is interesting that the rotational frequency will be much lower than the excitation frequency. Where a hot spot occurs (ie a region of high thermal gradient, eg. at the freeboard/catalyst interface) vortex shedding can occur (as has already been suggested), which we will call thermal vortices. The lifetime of the thermal vortices may, but not necessarily will, be altered by the resonant frequency. The smaller thermal vortices can be caught into the flow of the larger resonant vortex and carried to the gas thermocouple still intact. Where the thermocouple intersects the edge of a thermal vortex, the temperature reading will likely oscillate as the heat has not been dissipated into the bulk of the gas yet. In order to create this resonant condition, you need a noise source at the resonant frequency. This can be from computer fans, other equipment or floor vibrations. Why put an additional factor (acoustic resonance) into the model? The initial piece of evidence that made me start thinking about this was that the changes in the pressure influenced the oscillations in a rather strange way. This, I thought, was typical of how pressure (and gas density) changes alter resonant frequencies of cavities. It would be especially interesting if one of the resonant frequencies corresponded to the electrical mains frequency, giving the possibility of the chamber's heat expansion contributing to the sound source. If this hypothesis were true, then you would find oscillations with the D2 gas, but they will be at different pressures to the H2 gas (a result of their different density), if the vortices remain intact (don't dissipate their heat too quickly to be carried to the thermocouple). Further, a second thermocouple, placed closer to the wall, could also show the oscillations but is likely to have a higher temperature (and possibly a higher amplitude of oscillation). The place of greatest temperature difference would be (for the fundamental resonant frequency and if there were no strong transverse resonances as well) 1/4 to 1/3 the way in from the wall and 1/2 way from the top of the chamber, a position approximately corresponding to the eye of the vortex. Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 20:59:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA14390; Tue, 19 May 1998 20:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 20:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 19:49:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"ela9p1.0.mW3.zEbOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18960 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks to Hank Scudder and Frank Stenger for helping me muddle through my "I vs V curve" power misconception. Another question: what's a good cheap mailorder power supply with +15 and -15 V? DIGI-KEY has one (PW9946-ND, page 481) for $38.61. Could use batteries? Any corrections or advice regarding the following would be appreciated: I think I'll order a few MPY634KP-ND analog multipliers from DIGI-KEY. They're cheap and work up into the 10 MHz range. If I get one to work I may just mail it to Vince to see what he measures, if he is interested. It appears the MPY634's just work by themselves without anything else but a few resistors and a power supply, when used in Vince Cockeram's power range. In the 100 mA range Vince has been using, to get 10 V from 0.2 A we have R1 = V/I = 10 V/(0.2 A) = 50 ohms P1 = I^2 * R = (0.04)(100) = 4 watt so a 10 watt 50 ohm resistor should work well to produce the 10 V current sensing drop at 200 mA or less. It is just a matter of putting the X1 and X2 leads to each end of the current sensing resistor. X2 is ground, the X1 positive. R1 could be increased or decreased as necessary to keep the sensing voltage in range, depending on the current. Voltage is trickier. Suppose 3 kV is full range, so voltage needs to be divided by 30. This is the scary part because if the resistor ladder fails, the full power of the capacitor will blow the pieces all over the place. Maybe this is another good reason to put an inductor in series with the power supply - to reduce the fury of a component failure. The differential resistance Y1 to Y2 is 10 Mohms. So if R3 is 140 Mohm we have: ---R3-----5M-----10M-------G | ---MP634-----G Y1 Y2 The total resistance is 150 Mohm. Total peak current is I = V/R = 3kV/(1.5x10^8 ohm) = 20 uA. Total power dissipation in bridge is .06 W. No worries about resistor power specs. Using 14 10M resistors for R3 would give lots of taps for other lessor voltages. That's 200 V drop per resistor (maybe a bit high?). Given peak input of 3000 V at 200 mA, that is 600 watts full scale, at 10 V output, or 60 watts per volt. All that is necessary to read the output is an averaging circuit and voltmeter: Vout MP634---------------Vmeter------G | | R4 C4 | | G G It is good to chose the time constant Tc = R*C to be long enough that the voltmeter can sample OK, say 1 sec., say R4 = 10 M, C4 = 0.1 uF 50 V. Z1 and Z2 could be grounded, as no voltage output voltage displacement is needed. How's all that sound? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 21:04:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA16189; Tue, 19 May 1998 20:59:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 20:59:53 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <4d0d7da2.35624d7d aol.com> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:26:50 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"6tVQm1.0.Ry3.fKbOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18961 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-19 19:16:33 EDT, you write: <> > This is very unusual, I have never seen a tube operating in the > glow discharge mode where the majority of thermal output was > occurring in a relatively short positive column near the anode. Electrode gap is 2 inches. I see about 1 inch of pale violet glow (tube wall orange hot in this region), the violet glow tapers to a cone shaped end. Between the downward pointing cone tip and the lower (-) electrode I see nothing! The tube walls are not visible hot in this region. I took a picture (actually several) of this. In processing now. If they are worth seeing I will let you all know. > The positive column is normally a region of efficient ionization > and low ionization loss. I would be surprised to find more than > 20% of the applied voltage across this region at your pressure. > The positive column has an outer space charge layer formed of positive > ions, in your case possibly mainly K+ if the temperature is > high enough. And according to Mills, this is whats needed, K+ in the presence of atomic H When I had the sensor halfway between the electrodes (recording a lower temperature) it was running ~550 C. K was melted in the bottom of the tube surrounding the lower electrode. I estimate around 300-400 C here (lower electrode). Metallic K on the walls of the tube around the lower electrode. How do I know it was matallic K? Easy! When I added water to the tube to clean it all the silvery coating was gone in a sizzle. A small amount of W remained. Not much, it was semi transparent. Can't get that out till I oxidize it with heat + O2 and then HCI wash. > I'll have to look up the vapor pressure of K vs temperature > to check this out. Atomic H should also be plentiful from the > electron current in the column. The observed thermal profile > is a strong indicator of possible OU behavior! Now thats the 64 dollar question, a question, for me, that will have to go unanswered. I don't have and have no hope of getting the necessary instrumentation at this time. However I will do my best to accurately measure input power and output temperature. > Be very careful with those HV caps, a discharge through you would > be painful and possibly fatal. One should be enough to provide > sufficient filtering for your proposed full wave bridge. Agreed! Once burned twice shy. And that kick between my thumb and wrist was enough to throw my arm up, dislodging a shelf loaded with stuff (oil cans, capacitors, coils and other assorted junk) down on my head. And that, from only point six microfarads. I'm not going to do any running until I get some major safeguards in place. > This is getting interesting enough to be worth replicating. < - > George Holz george varisys.com > Varitronics Systems Thats my wish. And with proper calorimetry if possible. The tubes are a buck apiece from H&R. And please, if anyone else tries this, lets see it here. It's not so hard. If an old maimframe tech like me can get this going in his garage....well...If Dr. Mills and company ever hope to get this process into everyday use mode (turbines in your car) it _has_ to work under adverse conditions...just like my garage! Ulta clean labratory conditions are nice but no one will power anything with that. Bottom line: From what I have observed _so far_, when BLP goes public, I'm in. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 21:10:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA18839; Tue, 19 May 1998 21:07:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 21:07:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004e01bd83a4$12c02760$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 22:00:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"XeGJv1.0.Ac4.fRbOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18962 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Brendan Hall To: 'Vortex Discussion Group' Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 9:07 PM Subject: RE: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Brendan wrote: > Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > >>You started out with H2 and loaded the 500+ meter^2 of carbon >>with it or a hydrocarbon that stays in the carbon lattice. > >>Then when you introduce the D2: > >>1, H2 + D2 + E = 2 HD >> -.446 Mj -.444Mj 2(-.440 Mj) > >> E = -.880+.446+.444 Mj >> E = .450 Mj (endothermic) > >>However, with heat and the carbon catalyst this "deuteration" of >>hydrocarbons can occur which means that in the gas phase >>2 HD ---> H2 + D2 >>(exothermal) with the release of .450 Mj/mole >>probably catalyzed on the chamber walls. >> > >Wouldn't the "deuteration" process be endothermic to the same amount of >energy that would later be released in the above exothermic reaction, >causing a temperature drop in the catalyst material? Yes, D2 + H2 ---> 2 HD would need to get the endothermic energy from the catalyst, which judging from amount (60 cm^3)? spread over the bottom of a 1600 cm^3 steel bottle about a cm thick could easily recover this heat from the metal of the bottle without a measurable temperature change. However, the gram or so of H2-HD-D2 in the chamber at 14.32 joule/deg C or about 500 joules released by 2 HD ---> H2 +D2 + 0.225 Megajoules/mole HD (3 GRAMS). From this only fractions of a mole need react (exotherm) to give the 30 degree temperature rise in the gas. If I didn't goof somewhere. :-) >Over time this >"deuteration" process should peter out. Not necessarily. This could set up a cycle that lasts as long as the "heat basket" is powered. >How is this consistent with the >observed increase in temperature by Case and Mallove? (Possible answer: as >the D2 penetrates deeper into the activated carbon, there is greater surface >area in which "deuteration" can occur. Most Activated Carbons have a surface are of 500 to 1,000 meter^2/gram. It doesn't have to "breathe" very much to set up the D2 + H2 <--> HD bond-heat cycle. >Once again we can see the need for a >more thorough understanding of the catalyst. Eg. How deep does the palladium >penetrate the activated carbon, therefore influencing the available surface >area for catalytic reactions?) Those things are all WELL ESTABLISHED by the catalyst vendor for it's use as a HYDROGENATION CATALYST, where it is used to process TONS/DAY. > >How long can such a reaction sustain itself... As long as you power the heater. :-) Regards, Frederick > > >Brendan Hall > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 22:31:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA14923; Tue, 19 May 1998 22:29:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 22:29:41 -0700 Message-ID: <3562513A.1E interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:42:50 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Do this now References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cPTjP3.0.Re3.1fcOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18963 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > > FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS 1998 W. Beaty (snip) I did everything you said, Bill - visiting hours are every other Sunday from 2:00 to 4:00 PM. My wife said she would come and read to me next weekend. I think I have something to do, Bill....I could remember if that damn talking would stop.....err, chew my nail..it's really ragged...erghhhhh.... the person formerly known as Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 23:33:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA11257; Tue, 19 May 1998 23:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:25:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: RE: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:34:54 +1000 Message-ID: <000001bd83b9$742aeac0$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <004e01bd83a4$12c02760$2d8cbfa8 default> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"S2b1m1.0.fl2.TTdOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18964 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Brendan wrote: >>Over time this "deuteration" process should peter out. >Not necessarily. This could set up a cycle that lasts as long as the >"heat basket" is powered. >Most Activated Carbons have a surface are of 500 to 1,000 meter^ >2/gram. It doesn't have to "breathe" very much to set up >the D2 + H2 <--> HD bond-heat cycle. If this is the reaction, it is curious that it does not seem to occur in Scott Little's chamber (or for other catalysts). I would have thought that such a reaction is robust given the same catalyst is used at the same temperatures. Further, I would have thought that increasing the ratios of the D2 and H2 gas to 50:50 would be optimum for such a reaction. Thus Scott Little's chamber would be more likely to show such a reaction as it has a ratio closer to the above than Case's. Am I wrong in this assumption, and if so, why? >>Once again we can see the need for a >>more thorough understanding of the catalyst. Eg. How deep does the palladium >>penetrate the activated carbon, therefore influencing the available surface >>area for catalytic reactions?) >Those things are all WELL ESTABLISHED by the catalyst vendor for it's >use as a HYDROGENATION CATALYST, where it is used to process >TONS/DAY. Indeed. What I am asking is for someone to be so kind as to put the relevant information on the net or in this list. Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 19 23:47:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA31075; Tue, 19 May 1998 23:42:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:42:14 -0700 Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:36:37 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35627B0B.E2DB0920 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:41:15 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Ilkck3.0.Tb7.6jdOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18965 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Physics, abstract physics/9805028 From: Vesselin Petkov Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:52:29 GMT (10kb) On the Possibility of a Propulsion Drive Creation Through a Local Manipulation of Spacetime Geometry Authors: Vesselin Petkov Comments: 7 pages Report-no: AIAA 98-3142 Subj-class: Classical Physics; General Physics Since the shape of a free body's worldline is determined by the geometry of spacetime a local change of spacetime geometry will affect a body's worldline, i.e. a body's state of motion. The exploration of this possibility constitutes a radically new approach to the idea of how a body can be propelled: instead of applying a force to the body itself, the geometry of spacetime is subjected to a local manipulation which in turn results in the body's motion. Dear Vo, Just appeared on today release of xxx.lanl.gov archive. Dramatic increase of papers on "AG" subject on academic platform become apperent. We will drive tiresss cars soon.:-) Note the equations on the above paper look like Frank Znidarsic's style. It seems no "high mathematics" is needed to follow it. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 02:52:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA25491; Wed, 20 May 1998 02:49:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 02:49:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <35627B0B.E2DB0920 verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 23:46:36 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 Resent-Message-ID: <"97GQ93.0.CE6.cSgOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18966 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hamdi - > It seems no "high mathematics" is needed to > follow it. Yes, but the real question is: what is required to *do* it? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 03:56:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA24464; Wed, 20 May 1998 03:53:21 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 03:53:21 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <009701bd83dd$41e85c40$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 04:50:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"FLhfW.0.A-5.WOhOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18967 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Brendan Hall To: 'Vortex Discussion Group' Date: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 12:26 AM Subject: RE: Bond Exchange Energy in Case Experiments? Brendan wrote: > Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > >>Brendan wrote: > >>>Over time this "deuteration" process should peter out. > >>Not necessarily. This could set up a cycle that lasts as long as the >"heat >basket" is powered. > >>Most Activated Carbons have a surface area of 500 to 1,000 meter^ >>2/gram. It doesn't have to "breathe" very much to set up >>the D2 + H2 <--> HD bond-heat cycle. > >If this is the reaction, it is curious that it does not seem to occur in >Scott Little's chamber (or for other catalysts). Compare the Chamber volumes and gas volume: Case; 1600 cm^3, 1540 cm^3 gas volume. Scott; 120 cm^3, 20 cm^3 gas volume. Which is most likely to support a 30 degree gas temperature gradient? >I would have thought that >such a reaction is robust given the same catalyst is used at the same >temperatures. Further, I would have thought that increasing the ratios of >the D2 and H2 gas to 50:50 would be optimum for such a reaction. The amount of 2 HD ---> D2 + H2 reactions needed to support the temperature "artifact" wouldn't be much. > >Thus Scott >Little's chamber would be more likely to show such a reaction as it has a >ratio closer to the above than Case's. Am I wrong in this assumption, and >if so, why? The thermal conductivity of Hydrogen is quite high, but, a thermocouple in the larger volume more likely to show the temperature gradient. > >>>Once again we can see the need for a >>>more thorough understanding of the catalyst. Eg. How deep does the >palladium >>>penetrate the activated carbon, therefore influencing the available >surface >>>area for catalytic reactions?) I don't think the difference between carbon-supported Palladium catalysts makes that much difference. The role of the heated Pd is to fission the H-H, D-D, and H-D bond (about 4.55 ev each) at low temperatures in order to make H and D "free radicals" available for low temperature processes. Note that when the temperature is increased to a mere 250 C the "cycle" stops, apparently the 30 degree gradient is wiped out by convection mixing of the gases. Regards, Frederick > > >Brendan Hall > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 05:09:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA31289; Wed, 20 May 1998 05:03:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 05:03:47 -0700 Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:56:35 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3562C371.86186E1B verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:50:09 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hal Puthoff CC: vortex Subject: Vesselin Petkov paper (physics/9805028 on xxx.lanl.gov) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"t88gA1.0.ke7.YQiOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18968 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Hall, This morning I encountered paper " On the Possibility of a Propulsion Drive Creation Through a Local Manipulation of Spacetime Geometry" written by Vesselin Petkov. I am reading the paper and a critical question arise for the validity of his theory: What is the factor which differentiate the inertia/mass of the proton from electron? I did not yet found a clear answer from the paper. If you read (or already read) it, please send your comments. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 05:23:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA07166; Wed, 20 May 1998 05:16:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 05:16:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 08:08:28 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: TO AT GROUP...Re: Baffling Black Box In-Reply-To: <002601bd8359$1dd79e80$ae9a8bce atgroup> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"44szR2.0.ul1.sciOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18969 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear At Group, For those of us without www can you post a simple ascii description, please? On Tue, 19 May 1998, atgroup wrote: > Sorry for the premature release. Someone dropped the ball and the content > did not get loaded when expected. > > We are attempting to complete the load at this time and have suffered a > server crash. > > Again our apologies and if we have not destroyed your interest you might > take another look. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis J. Stenger > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Monday, May 18, 1998 10:02 PM > Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box > > > >Ross Tessien wrote: > >> > >> >If you have the time, check out the Baffling Black Box, it can't work > but > >> does, maybe that ESC thing. > >> > > >> >http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm > >> > >> OK, I'm dense. E^2/R on left and right gives, 0.065 watts input, 0.050 > >> watts output. What's the big deal? > >> > >Good question Ross! > > > > 1. Which is it: 989 ohms or 986 ohms? > > 2. Is 989 ohms the internal impedance of the source? > > 3. What's the black box made of? > > 4. Are the LEDs taped to the box or are they connected? > > 5. Is the 0.707 Vrms a sine wave also? > > 6. Does circuit point (1) have a known impedance to ground? > > 7. etc., etc. > > > >Frank S. > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 07:45:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA00163; Wed, 20 May 1998 07:41:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 07:41:38 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:01:52 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: power factor question Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"U_nHt1.0.N2.MkkOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18970 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Actually all of the talk about a gravity and gravitomagnetic fields is quite on track. A certain symmetry exists between the gravity and gravitomagnetic, the electric and the electro magnetic, and the nuclear and the nuclear magnetic force (spin orbit force) the range through which these symmetries interact is effected by electron condensations. znidr2.txt at www.eskimo.com Journal of New Energy, Volume 1, Number 2 This is the underlying basis for the Tampere and the Cold Fusion effect. Once we understand the symmetries we can see how power factor fits in. I did this first in 1988 in my book "Elementary Antigravity" Draw a power factor trangle. Let the X axis (normally watts) equal relativistic momentum Moving energy Let the Y axis (normally vars) equal the rest energy. Standing energy Let the hypotensue (normally volt amps) equal relativisitic mass. Compositie energy. Examine the power factor angle. It will be found to be equal to the arc cos of velocity/light speed. This is a simple linear relationship. Simple means more fundamental. I believe that special relitivity is constructed around the underlying symmetries fundamantal to all fields. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 08:34:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08265; Wed, 20 May 1998 08:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 08:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:13:18 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3562F384.A8C7E5DA verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:15:16 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <19980519205802.429.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com> <35623933.CA8D9E5A@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KFMtk3.0.u02.0KlOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18971 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Atgroup, On the scope shot scope01.jpg there are 5 circled area suggested as transients. But 3 of them are exactly coincide with scope display square lines. the lowest circled point is discussible, and the leftmost circled point coincide also with horizontal ruler just behind the millimetric vertical tick. If you don't confirmed these trace on an other shut, these are not really transients but discontinuities on display due ruler traces. Absence of transients does not imply of course the effect does not exist. If you ever observed or felt such bursts, the method that I suggested previously by loose magnetic coupling will disclose them well. hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 09:37:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA01999; Wed, 20 May 1998 09:31:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:31:55 -0700 Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 19:25:52 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35630529.C047379A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 19:30:33 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <19980519205802.429.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com> <35623933.CA8D9E5A@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OsL-8.0.XU.sLmOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18972 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Atgroup, On the scope shot scope01.jpg there are 5 circled area suggested as transients. But 3 of them are exactly coincide with scope display square lines. the lowest circled point is discussible, and the leftmost circled point coincide also with horizontal ruler just behind the millimetric vertical tick. If you don't confirmed these trace on an other shut, these are not really transients but discontinuities on display due ruler traces. Absence of transients of course does not imply the effect does not exist. If you ever observed or felt such bursts, the method that I suggested previously by loose magnetic coupling probably will disclose them well. hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 10:28:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA06751; Wed, 20 May 1998 10:24:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:24:36 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0917 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:32:16 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"yZodb.0.Kf1.J7nOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18974 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace, Vince Quick comment. A Zener diode can be placed across the lower leg of the voltage divider to protect the instrumentation from transient voltages. Use a Zener of a voltage rating a little bit higher then your maximum measuring voltage, so it doesn't actually start regulating. For example, if you want to measure 50 volts, you could use a 60 or 75 volt Zener. Don't forget with a Zener, you connect the diode backwards, since its the breakdown voltage that gives the Zener effect. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 8:49 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions > > Thanks to Hank Scudder and Frank Stenger for helping me muddle > through my > "I vs V curve" power misconception. > > Another question: what's a good cheap mailorder power supply with +15 > and > -15 V? DIGI-KEY has one (PW9946-ND, page 481) for $38.61. Could use > batteries? > > Any corrections or advice regarding the following would be > appreciated: > > I think I'll order a few MPY634KP-ND analog multipliers from DIGI-KEY. > They're cheap and work up into the 10 MHz range. If I get one to work > I > may just mail it to Vince to see what he measures, if he is > interested. > > It appears the MPY634's just work by themselves without anything else > but a > few resistors and a power supply, when used in Vince Cockeram's power > range. > > In the 100 mA range Vince has been using, to get 10 V from 0.2 A we > have > > R1 = V/I = 10 V/(0.2 A) = 50 ohms > > P1 = I^2 * R = (0.04)(100) = 4 watt > > so a 10 watt 50 ohm resistor should work well to produce the 10 V > current > sensing drop at 200 mA or less. It is just a matter of putting the X1 > and > X2 leads to each end of the current sensing resistor. X2 is ground, > the X1 > positive. R1 could be increased or decreased as necessary to keep the > sensing voltage in range, depending on the current. > > Voltage is trickier. Suppose 3 kV is full range, so voltage needs to > be > divided by 30. This is the scary part because if the resistor ladder > fails, the full power of the capacitor will blow the pieces all over > the > place. Maybe this is another good reason to put an inductor in series > with > the power supply - to reduce the fury of a component failure. > > The differential resistance Y1 to Y2 is 10 Mohms. So if R3 is 140 > Mohm we have: > > > ---R3-----5M-----10M-------G > | > ---MP634-----G > Y1 Y2 > > > The total resistance is 150 Mohm. Total peak current is I = V/R = > 3kV/(1.5x10^8 ohm) = 20 uA. Total power dissipation in bridge is .06 > W. > No worries about resistor power specs. Using 14 10M resistors for R3 > would > give lots of taps for other lessor voltages. That's 200 V drop per > resistor (maybe a bit high?). > > Given peak input of 3000 V at 200 mA, that is 600 watts full scale, at > 10 V > output, or 60 watts per volt. All that is necessary to read the > output is > an averaging circuit and voltmeter: > > Vout > MP634---------------Vmeter------G > | | > R4 C4 > | | > G G > > It is good to chose the time constant Tc = R*C to be long enough that > the > voltmeter can sample OK, say 1 sec., say R4 = 10 M, C4 = 0.1 uF 50 V. > > Z1 and Z2 could be grounded, as no voltage output voltage displacement > is > needed. > > How's all that sound? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 10:35:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA00142; Wed, 20 May 1998 10:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3562F67C.E8782B5A ro.com> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:27:56 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" Organization: NASA Volunteer X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l Subject: Attn John Schnurer.... X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <005d01bd8341$0aa8f600$5b8cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wpW5L1.0.f1.76nOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18973 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick V. Reavis > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 9:38 AM > Subject: Re: Juno or other free service... > > >John Schnurer wrote: > > > >> Dear Vo., > >> > >> I am told there are free internet providers, one being > >> "juno"... > >> Is this true? > >> > >> Can anyone let me know how to contact them and how to avail > > >> myself of the services? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> JHS > > > > > >John, > >See http://www.juno.com > > Hey Patrick. I think you have to have internet > service to go to the www.juno.com web site. :-) > > Can you or someone go there download and e-mail John the hookup > software? I > use juno as a freebie backup e-mail, but I had internet service on > Sprint. > > Regards, Frederick > > Will do. John S, the file is 1.5 Megs. Would you like me to e-mail it as an attachment? -- Patrick V. Reavis Student at Large /\ / \ / G \ ~~~~~~~~ DELTA-G From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 10:36:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA09993; Wed, 20 May 1998 10:31:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:31:30 -0700 Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:25:12 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: crowbar Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-D28t1.0.SR2.jDnOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18975 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vince, A crowbar with series 10 to 100 ohm resistor is not bad. Be carful. You should also have spotter and 'hot sticks' ... or insulated poles to poke stuff... and people! J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 11:00:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05801; Wed, 20 May 1998 10:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 06:47:52 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Problem with Scott's Case set up Resent-Message-ID: <"K_1dT1.0.WQ1.yRnOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18976 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:52 PM 5/20/98, Brendan Hall wrote: >Can anyone tell us the flow rate of hydrogen out of the catalyst when under >vacuum? Is it possible to calculate the amount of hydrogen expected to be >left in the catalyst after a complete D2 replacement cycle? Would >increasing the time under vacuum also increase the effectiveness of the >cycle? Has BET analysis been done on the catalyst and if so, what were the What is BET analysis? >results? (This analysis calculates the surface area of a porous material by >adsorbing a noble gas into the lattice.) Do liquids absorbed into the >lattice significantly effect the expulsion of hydrogen from the lattice (eg. >through capillary blockages), or does the initial cycling effectively rid >the catalyst of all of its absorbed liquids? Theoretical estimates of the H2 or D2 outgassing rates are comparatively useless without emperical confirmation, true? This is a value that Scott could determine emperically, by loading the catalyst, pulling a vacuum, closing off the cell, and then measuring pressure vs time for about 12 hours. Such a test is essential to estimating the H2 vs D2 vs HD content by time, dependent on the degassing procedure used in the experiment, is it not? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 11:06:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA23876; Wed, 20 May 1998 11:03:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:03:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:03:08 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: William Beaty Subject: Re: Do this now In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xH0B92.0.yq5.VhnOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18977 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 19 May 1998, William Beaty wrote: > FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS 1998 W. Beaty Far too few people are aware of their skulls, and it's high time somebody did something about it! Most of these I heard about (or stumbled across) as a kid. They are the coin of the eerie realm of the child-subculture, things that the Grownups had long ago forgotten. But different regions must have different kid-ethnic traditions. Does anyone here have similar ...uh... "things" they still remember from those times? I can add them to the list! ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Wed May 20 11:28:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15025; Wed, 20 May 1998 11:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 11:24:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:23:04 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: hu [Fwd: LIGHTING CHARCOAL GRILLS] (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xACyJ.0.Og3.1_nOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18978 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:20:32 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: hu [Fwd: LIGHTING CHARCOAL GRILLS] (fwd) > LIGHTING CHARCOAL GRILLS > or > WHY ENGINEERS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE... > ===================================== > > Our subject today is lighting charcoal grills. One of our favorite charcoal > grill lighters is a guy named George Goble (really!!), a computer person in > the Purdue University engineering department. > Each year, Goble and a bunch of other engineers hold a picnic in West > Lafayette, Indiana, at which they cook hamburgers on a big grill. Being > engineers, they began looking for practical ways to speed up the > charcoal-lighting process. "We started by blowing the charcoal with a hair > dryer," Goble told me in a telephone interview. "Then we figured out that > it would light faster if we used a vacuum cleaner." If you know anything > about (1) engineers and (2) guys in general, you know what happened: > The purpose of the charcoal-lighting shifted from cooking hamburgers to > seeing how fast they could light the charcoal. > >From the vacuum cleaner, they escalated to using a propane torch, > then an > acetylene torch. Then Goble started using compressed pure oxygen, which > caused the charcoal to burn much faster, because as you recall from > chemistry class, fire is essentially the rapid combination of oxygen with a > reducing agent (the charcoal). We discovered that a long time ago, > somewhere in the valley between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (or > something along those lines). > By this point, Goble was getting pretty good times. But in the world of > competitive charcoal-lighting, "pretty good" does not cut the mustard. > Thus, Goble hit upon the idea of using - get ready - liquid oxygen. This is > the form of oxygen used in rocket engines; it's 295 degrees below zero and > 600 times as dense as regular oxygen. In terms of releasing energy, pouring > liquid oxygen on charcoal is the equivalent of throwing a live squirrel into > a room containing 50 million Labrador retrievers. > On Gobel's Web page (the address is http://ghg.ecn.purdue.edu/) > , you can see actual photographs and a video > of Goble using a bucket attached to a 10-foot-long wooden handle to dump 3 > gallons of liquid oxygen (not sold in stores) onto a grill containing 60 > pounds of charcoal and a lit cigarette for ignition. What follows is the > most impressive charcoal-lighting I have ever seen, featuring a large > fireball that according to Goble, reached 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The > charcoal was ready for cooking in - this has to be a world record - 3 > seconds. > There's also a photo of what happened when Goble used the same technique on > a flimsy $2.88 discount-store grill. All that's left is a circle of charcoal > with a few shreds of metal in it. "Basically, the grill vaporized," said > Goble. "We were thinking of returning it to the store for a refund." > Looking at Goble's video and photos, I became, as an American, all choked up > with gratitude at the fact that I do not live anywhere near the engineers' > picnic site. But also, I was proud of my country for producing guys who can > be ready to barbecue in less time than it takes for guys in ess-advanced > nations, to spit. > Will the 3-second barrier ever be broken? Will engineers come up with a > new, more powerful charcoal-lighting technology? It's something for all of > us to ponder this summer as we sit outside, chewing our hamburgers, every > now and then glancing in the direction of West Lafayette, Indiana, looking > for a mushroom cloud. > Engineers are like that." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 12:15:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA13600; Wed, 20 May 1998 12:08:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:08:13 -0700 Message-ID: <000601bd8422$1833e2d0$6111ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:04:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"aAtsi1.0.NK3.ReoOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18979 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Anton Rager To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 4:08 PM Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box >Ok -- looked at the second post as well. > Not wanting to continue the obvious satirical atmosphere this group has offered and because you have responded with a valid question I can say in short, your close, but no cigar. The actual connection diagram will be posted to our site this evening (Central Time) and we have already posted some additional scope pictures and an actual picture of the coils. > > _LEDs_ > |_ __| > +L1- +L2- L3 > [CCW] [CW] [CW] > > - > L4 [CW] > + > > >I give up -- Am I close? BTW -- better read Jerry Decker's Poof of >Priniciple before attempting to sell kits to this group! see: WHO? is attempting to sell what ? ATGroup is a fully funded privately held organization which has never solicited funding, sold stock, or offered for sale any of our work. Please do not confuse use with our parent. Yes I guess some might be gun shy. Once taken does make one suspicious. >http://www.keelynet.com/pop.htm > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 12:29:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA16740; Wed, 20 May 1998 12:21:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:21:42 -0700 Message-ID: <003901bd8423$f7165680$6111ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:17:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"H4nr.0.T54.5roOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18980 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Hamdi Ucar To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 9:06 PM Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box >Atgroup, > >LED's frequency BW is normally not higher than 100 MHz. If there are some bursts to power the LEDs, they should be observable on scope clearly, if simple loop of wire Your idea is sound and we have posted to our site three different sampled waveforms obtained by various couplings to the black box coils. >shots will strongly support your claims. > What claims ? Until today we had not posted any sort of claim and still do not. What we have observed is a difference in input and output which we have not fully explained. >My general strategy on OU research the Output/Input We have not stated OU. We do not consider OU to be a valid description of what we might be seeing or misinterpreting. > >On the other side, the data you supplied currently is not enough to prove the anomaly, as others said. I saw very strange effects but finally could be explained by conventional electronics done Capacitive/magnetic couplings, and LED's. Even it was possible to obtain impedance conversion (xformer effect) truly inline without a secondary circuit. Yes, your correct, but before making a final decision look at the waveforms we posted in response to your suggestion. Feel free to email us direct if you would like use to provide you with additional information. It appears that the vortex agenda is nor understood by the atgroup, we therefore feel any valid interest should be directed to us direct and not via vortex. >LED's could be driven in reverse direction flowing current to the source, (negative current) but without violation the rules. Coils are magical. > >Regards, > >hamdi ucar > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 12:39:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19479; Wed, 20 May 1998 12:30:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:30:50 -0700 Message-ID: <35632EC8.158F keelynet.com> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:28:08 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <003901bd8423$f7165680$6111ecd0 atgroup> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"786Sn3.0.8m4.fzoOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18981 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts! I sent this to the ATGroup............. -------------------------- Hi Guys! Interesting, sounds very similar to detailed experiments posted in the book on 'F/E and High voltage experiments' and work done by my friend Jon Snell. You know the true test is will it run itself. If it won't, it's all illusion. Fold the power back and run it, feeding a small load even a grain of wheat bulb for a month, no outside power and in a Faraday cage to shield from RF intercepts....now you're talking... Just one such tabletop, self-sustaining device that anyone can build to prove the principle and the world will change in ways we cannot foresee as science first disputes it, then accepts it, then AMPLIFIES on it for ever higher powered versions... Good luck, many have made the same claims and nothing has come of it, make it self-sustain and you are really in the ballpark. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 12:58:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22744; Wed, 20 May 1998 12:46:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:46:56 -0700 Message-ID: <19980520194843.14522.rocketmail send1c.yahoomail.com> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:48:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"0m4pb2.0.CZ5.kCpOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18982 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks for the reply. ---atgroup wrote: > > WHO? is attempting to sell what ? ATGroup is a fully funded privately held > organization which has never solicited funding, sold stock, or offered for > sale any of our work. Please do not confuse use with our parent. > > Yes I guess some might be gun shy. Once taken does make one suspicious. > My apologies for mis-reading your WWW....thought you were selling something. Normally when folks are vague about designs they either A - have something to sell, or B - are just teasing and wasting everyone's time. Most folks here remember Greg Watson with this sort of thing. I have a few more ideas on what the black-box config might be, but will review your updates first. FWIW you might want to try posting to freenrg-l as well. That list tends to go nuts on FE and OU circuits/devices. We're a little goofier over there.....vortex has all the brainiacs ;) ---atgroup also wrote: > The actual connection diagram will be > posted to our site this evening (Central Time) and we have already posted > some additional scope pictures and an actual picture of the coils. I'm looking forward to the additional info -- If you are really getting %90+ OU [almost 2x unity?] with a simple design like this, you have my attention. Regards, Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 13:00:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA25437; Wed, 20 May 1998 12:55:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 12:55:25 -0700 Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:49:45 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356334F1.382AE989 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:54:25 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <000601bd8422$1833e2d0$6111ecd0 atgroup> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JJVfX2.0.KD6.hKpOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18983 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: atgroup wrote: > [snip] > The actual connection diagram will be > posted to our site this evening (Central Time) and we have already posted > some additional scope pictures and an actual picture of the coils. [snip] Yes, these shots are far more interesting than i/o current samplings. It is extraordinary that a simple passive circuit could generate such complex waveforms from sine-wave. The asymmetry between L1 and L2 samplings are even more exciting if the these coils are symmetrically attached to the circuit. The difference between coils fields are highly interesting. If the sampling coils have more than few turns, frequencies (harmonics) higher than 10 MHz may not be sensed. for probing such HF signals one turn is enough. If you can use smaller dia. probe coil very local HF oscillations along coils could be sensed. Generally, I prefer minimal couplings when probing the magnetic fields. On higher freq. capacitive effects dramatically affect operations. I suggest adding serially 1N4148 to each of the LEDS to improve the harmonoic content and reduce the LED capacitances which are 30-60pF. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 13:18:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04591; Wed, 20 May 1998 13:13:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:13:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00d301bd842b$12f13620$2d8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Free Electron and Free Radical Catalysis in Water? Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:07:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"eToZf2.0.c71.CbpOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18984 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Classically 2 H2O <---> H3O+ + OH-. Suppose that a random free electron is taken up by H2O allowing an H free radical to drift off the water molecule: H2O + e- ---> H + OH-, and this is the"autoionization" (1.0E-14/mole)of high purity water. In a conductive water cell the anode reaction is still 2 OH- - 2e = 2 OH, then 2 OH ---> H2O + 1/2 O2, with the cathode "recirculating" the electrons. With a Pd or Ni cathode the H "free radicals" can combine in the lattice 2 H ---> H2 + 436,000 joule/mole (4.53 ev/bond). In water being cavitated the 2 H atoms can combine in a gas bubble: 2 H ---> H2 + 436,000 joule/mole (4.54 ev/bond) released as UV/Heat. In either case there would be an apparent O/U effect over and above the electrolysis reactions? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 13:25:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA31833; Wed, 20 May 1998 13:20:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:20:40 -0700 Posted-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 23:14:52 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35633AD4.36F5A06C verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 23:19:32 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <003901bd8423$f7165680$6111ecd0 atgroup> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pM8kI1.0.In7.NipOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18985 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: atgroup wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hamdi Ucar > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Date: Tuesday, May 19, 1998 9:06 PM > Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box > > >Atgroup, > > > >LED's frequency BW is normally not higher than 100 MHz. If there are some > bursts to power the LEDs, they should be observable on scope clearly, if > simple loop of wire > > Your idea is sound and we have posted to our site three different sampled > waveforms obtained by various couplings to the black box coils. > > >shots will strongly support your claims. > > > What claims ? Until today we had not posted any sort of claim and still do > not. What we have observed is a difference in input and output which we have > not fully explained. Bursts. You suggested they were but, not clearly visible on output point(b) > > >My general strategy on OU research the Output/Input > > We have not stated OU. We do not consider OU to be a valid description of > what we might be seeing or misinterpreting. "The Baffling Black Box is one of those devices that conventional science says "can not" and "does not exist". Why ? Simply put it consumes more power than is input. Output greater than input means anomaly. OU term is a convention. it not imply "power amplification", which indeed an ambiguitous description. OU has practical sense as if one obtain excess power than he/she(?) put into the system can be called OU simply, because the source of the extra energy was not described or claimed. simply O>I. On the other hand "free energy" term is propose a source of energy and its nature is very speculative. OU is not speculative. it simply point the experimental anomaly. > > > >On the other side, the data you supplied currently is not enough to prove > the anomaly, as others said. I saw very strange effects but finally could be > explained by conventional electronics done Capacitive/magnetic couplings, > and LED's. Even it was possible to obtain impedance conversion (xformer > effect) truly inline without a secondary circuit. > > Yes, your correct, but before making a final decision look at the waveforms > we posted in response to your suggestion. Feel free to email us direct if > you would like use to provide you with additional information. Thank you for considering my suggestions. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 13:38:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA01813; Wed, 20 May 1998 13:32:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 13:32:38 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8404.3F829520 pm3-143.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: Greg Watson WAS RE: Baffling Black Box Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 15:30:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8404.3F8A3640" Resent-Message-ID: <"fCGof1.0.ES.btpOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18986 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8404.3F8A3640 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Anton Rager[SMTP:a_rager yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 2:48 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box >Most folks here remember Greg Watson with this sort >of thing. Speaking of Greg Watson, does anyone here have any idea whats going on with him? Has he come through with kits, refunded money, etc.? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8404.3F8A3640 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IikUAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACcAAABHcmVnIFdh dHNvbiBXQVMgUkU6IEJhZmZsaW5nIEJsYWNrIEJveACcDAEFgAMADgAAAM4HBQAUAA8AHgAoAAMA RgEBIIADAA4AAADOBwUAFAAPAB0AEgADAC8BAQmAAQAhAAAANDkwNENGMDZFM0VGRDExMUE3NUVF OEUwMEFDMTAwMDAAIwcBA5AGAMQDAAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAuAAAA AAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQAgeWQnLoS9AR4AcAABAAAAJwAAAEdyZWcgV2F0c29uIFdBUyBSRTogQmFm ZmxpbmcgQmxhY2sgQm94AAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABvYQuJ2QePsWi7+MR0ade6OAKwQAAAAAeAB4M AQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAAFwAAAHN0a0BzdW5oZXJhbGQuaW5maS5uZXQAAAMABhCu vs7RAwAHECoBAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAtLS0tLS0tLS0tRlJPTTpBTlRPTlJBR0VSU01UUDpBUkFH RVJAWUFIT09DT01TRU5UOldFRE5FU0RBWSxNQVkyMCwxOTk4Mjo0OFBNVE86Vk9SVEVYLUxARVNL SU1PQ09NU1VCAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAKQIAACUCAAA/BAAATFpGdX0chU//AAoBDwIVAqQD5AXrAoMA UBMDVAIAY2gKwHNldO4yBgAGwwKDMgPGBxMCg7ozEw19CoAIzwnZOxX/eDI1NQKACoENsQtgbvBn MTAzFCALChQiDAEaYwBAIAqFCotsaTEEODAC0WktMTQ0zw3wDNAcwwtZMTYKoANg9nQFkAVALR7n Cocdmwww9R5mRgNhOh/uHmYMghNwJwIwAiAH8GFnBJBbU4BNVFA6YV9yJBKAQHlhaG9vLgWg/G1d H48gnQZgAjAhzyLbClcJgG4HkGRheSwbBdAqYCAB0CqAMTk5kjgq0Do0K1BQTSXfWSCdVG8oHyLb dhWhZdB4LWxAB5BrB3Alc+Mr7ybudWJqHqEuDyLb5FJlM4BCYQ3QHCAZAJM1kAtgY2s1kG94Gu/Z G/MzNh1nGjk+OF0eZphNb3MFQAIQbGsEIPJoBJBlIBYAB4AG0ASQDCBHFgA2EFdhdHNjI9ED8HRo ID1wBAAgHz0QACAxHTjfOe8gb2b7PZIZAC43Px1nEvIB0BtM4z6/BgBwZWEwkDYBQVGzPJkqgGRv B5EAcHkCIDc74DuzEcB2O+BHwSBpHQ2wYT1AEcA9ACBnbwdGMz01PbBtPyBIYT07kiAlkTvgPXAD YHVnPz2APVMwkD0AKoAWAGZ18m4NsGQgBGAqICpxEgCIYy4/NsxLeWw74PRSLgXQYwdAHCA7IASQ C0P1FSEAUOAAAAADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAHMMAIz/YthL0BQAAIMMAIz/YthL0BHgA9AAEA AAABAAAAAAAAAAMADTT9NwAA8P4= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8404.3F8A3640-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 16:12:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05002; Wed, 20 May 1998 16:08:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:08:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000101bd8443$8eda7a40$168cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Secret Ingredients? Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:03:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"wa5Xu1.0.kD1.k9sOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18987 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex If the speculation that a random electron can attach to a water molecule and release the H or D free radical: e- + H2O ---> H + OH- holds, then O/U for everything from Browns Gas to Griggs and Potatov Cavitation Pumps Might be explained. The best sources of "random free electrons" are the radio decay of C14, K40, and Th232 or their water-soluble salts. Cs137 is a bit touchy. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 16:17:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA13833; Wed, 20 May 1998 16:15:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:15:10 -0700 Message-ID: <356364B6.4E8E5AA5 fc.net> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:18:14 -0500 From: John Fields Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jdecker keelynet.com CC: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <003901bd8423$f7165680$6111ecd0 atgroup> <35632EC8.158F@keelynet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8UZpV3.0.zN3.zFsOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18988 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jerry W. Decker wrote: > Gnorts! > > I sent this to the ATGroup............. > -------------------------- > Hi Guys! > > Interesting, sounds very similar to detailed experiments posted in > the > book on 'F/E and High voltage experiments' and work done by my > friend > Jon Snell. > > You know the true test is will it run itself. If it won't, it's > all > illusion. > > Fold the power back and run it, feeding a small load even a grain > of > wheat bulb for a month, no outside power and in a Faraday cage to > shield > from RF intercepts....now you're talking... > > Just one such tabletop, self-sustaining device that anyone can > build to > prove the principle and the world will change in ways we cannot > foresee > as science first disputes it, then accepts it, then AMPLIFIES on > it for > ever higher powered versions... > > Good luck, many have made the same claims and nothing has come of > it, > make it self-sustain and you are really in the ballpark. --Gentlemen:From the information presented at the atgroup's site I inferred that this is not an OU device in the sense that it produces more power than it consumes, but that it appears to consume more power than is input to it. In other words, it's an OU sink instead of a source. Perhaps the start of a black hole? -- John Fields From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 16:41:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09792; Wed, 20 May 1998 16:36:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:36:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980520183507.00c17ec4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:35:07 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 7 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"3V2-A2.0.wO2.HasOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18989 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Take a quick look at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run7.html It shows that the catalyst is not required for the thermal oscillations I observed in Run 5 & 6. I have spoken to Dr. Case again and he continues to emphasize the need for near-complete replacement of the H2 on the catalyst with D2 in order to see his effect. Run 8 will attempt to accomplish this. Run 8 is presently underway with the 20 grams of G75-D catalyst that Case sent me in the chamber. Since Case thinks its important to get rid of all the H2, I did not start this run with H2 at all. Instead, I started right off with D2. In my system, the water-flow calorimetry provides an absolute measure of the heat released by the experiment. I do not need to compare the temperature of the catalyst-H2 mixture to the temperature of the catalyst-D2 mixture as Case does. Run 8 has been underway for about 7 hours now and the 4th charge of D2 is in the chamber. I leave the chamber under high vacuum for 10 minutes (extra long) between charges to help remove adsorbed H2 from the catalyst surface. Thus far there is not even the slightest hint of excess heat. My calorimetry is working well enough that 1 watt of real excess heat would make an unmistakably positive signal. Even 1/2 watt would get my attention. I will leave Run 8 "cooking" overnight and resume the evac-refill cycles tomorrow. Case's system is 13 times larger than mine in volume. In his procedure, the residual H2 left on the catalyst is trapped in the system when he fills the chamber with D2. It's just the larger volume of D2 that serves to mostly replace the H2 on the catalyst with D2. In my present situation, I'm completely evacuating the chamber between each filling of D2 so I REMOVE the H2 that comes off and replace it with PURE D2 for the next cycle. Does anybody want to venture a guess as to how many of my cycles would be equivalent to Case's procedure? Seems like ~8 flushes should get my catalyst to have less H2 than his, no? Horace: For Run 8, I installed a temperature sensor on the bulkhead that forms the ceiling of my chamber. It reads about 95C when the catalyst is 180C. In other words, I have succeeded in creating a significant temperature gradient in my chamber, as Case surely has in his. All Vorts: I appreciate the discussion that has occurred. I'm reading and considering everything. Stay tuned for Run 8! 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 May 20 17:35:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA17815; Wed, 20 May 1998 17:32:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:32:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:30:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"cB7nM1.0.AM4.zNtOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18992 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:32 AM 5/20/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Horace, Vince > Quick comment. A Zener diode can be placed across the lower leg >of the voltage divider to protect the instrumentation from transient >voltages. Use a Zener of a voltage rating a little bit higher then your >maximum measuring voltage, so it doesn't actually start regulating. For >example, if you want to measure 50 volts, you could use a 60 or 75 volt >Zener. Don't forget with a Zener, you connect the diode backwards, since >its the breakdown voltage that gives the Zener effect. > >Hank Great idea. I get a lot of static shocks. Could protect the X1 and Y1 and Vout. Run in common mode (not differential mode) and thus be assured the current sensing resistor is grounded on one end. I found a bidirectional 600 watt surge protector, DIGI-KEY part P6KE12CAGICT-ND (11.4-12.6 breakdown voltage) $0.84 qty one, $7.56 qty 10, catalog page 218. Could put one across X1-X2 to prevent difference exceeding specs also. I do have a problem with this arrangement and understanding of use of the chip in general. One power I would like to measure is 220 V. In that case neither line is at ground potential. It would be good to measure on X1-X2 the differential across the resistor, which is floating. However, it doesn't appear the chip can handle a 220 V above ground value for X1 or X2. Could use battery power supply and let the whole thing float. Would need to let the meter float as well, and stay hands off. I wonder if there is a good solution to external voltage float for the current probe. One method might be to go with a hall effect device. But it would be much better to get true isolation, like via fiber, but that is asking for a lot. Maybe there is an opto-isolator solution? Problem there is working at 10 MHz. and producing 10 V p-p output? Don't want to lose the DC component, so clip on transformers are out. The following depicts and a battery powered device B which could be modified for use as either current or voltage difference probes (and lots of other things too), and its receiver A: Vs | ------- ---------- Vout----| | | |-------X1 | A |=====fiber ========| B | G----| | | |-------X2 ------- ---------- X1 - X2 <= 10 V (or pick a voltage) Vout = k*(X1 - X2) for some k, within 1% It seems like such a thing would have lots of uses. Any exist? It's just an analog fiber transmission device. Not cheap? Tektronix makes some very expensive differential probes I know. I found a 1 meter experimenter's kit FB105-ND for $6.95 on p. 122 of DIGI-KEY catalog, but maybe it's not linear? It seems like there must be a cheap way to transmit a 1% accurate 10 MHz analog signal, or at least 1 MHz. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 17:34:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAB01196; Wed, 20 May 1998 17:29:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:29:12 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:29:42 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge - stuff mailed Resent-Message-ID: <"0FcSs.0.cI.NLtOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18991 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:37 AM 5/19/98, VCockeram wrote: [snip] >Thanks for the diode offer Horace, but I had already ordered the 750 mA >units. >I will take you up on the offer to send the writups on the Motorola >electronic ballast design as I don't have a suitable printer. [snip address] Vince, I put together a package with the Motorola balast design info included with the AN1546 description. Also included the AN1543 document, and the datasheet on the BURR-BROWN MPY634 Wide Bandwidth Precision Analog Multplier. While I was at it I threw in five 20 kV, 0.1 A diodes. I suspect you may eventually find a use for them! 8^) All was airmailed this afternoon. Should be there around Tuesday. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 17:43:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA05513; Wed, 20 May 1998 17:39:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:39:02 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 16:39:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 7 Resent-Message-ID: <"u745s.0.vL1.ZUtOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18993 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:35 PM 5/20/98, Scott Little wrote: >Horace: For Run 8, I installed a temperature sensor on the bulkhead that >forms the ceiling of my chamber. It reads about 95C when the catalyst is >180C. In other words, I have succeeded in creating a significant >temperature gradient in my chamber, as Case surely has in his. OK, so the evaporation/condense cycle is still a possibility, even for water as the liquid. Don't know why that would be cyclical though - drop formation? Each drop that falls on the catalyst, or runs down the thermistor well, registers on the thermistor as a thermal dip? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 17:49:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA06656; Wed, 20 May 1998 17:42:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:42:19 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980520204143.007bf720 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 20:41:43 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Run 7 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980520183507.00c17ec4 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"81JsU2.0.nd1.cXtOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18994 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:35 PM 5/20/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >Take a quick look at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run7.html > >It shows that the catalyst is not required for the thermal oscillations I >observed in Run 5 & 6. > Seems to indicate that this artifact is internal noise to the Earthtech system. As such it might interfere with observing, or seriously ruling out, any putative effect. Also this again appears to confirm the need for long term baselines, cooling curves, and thermal waveform reconstruction. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 18:09:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA25209; Wed, 20 May 1998 18:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:05:24 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 7 Resent-Message-ID: <"PSSqx3.0.o96.8vtOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18995 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:35 PM 5/20/98, Scott Little wrote: >Case's system is 13 times larger than mine in volume. In his procedure, >the residual H2 left on the catalyst is trapped in the system when he fills >the chamber with D2. It's just the larger volume of D2 that serves to >mostly replace the H2 on the catalyst with D2. In my present situation, >I'm completely evacuating the chamber between each filling of D2 so I >REMOVE the H2 that comes off and replace it with PURE D2 for the next cycle. > >Does anybody want to venture a guess as to how many of my cycles would be >equivalent to Case's procedure? Seems like ~8 flushes should get my >catalyst to have less H2 than his, no? If you evacuate for 10 minutes between gasses, it seems to me your procedure does a much better job than Case's of replacing H2 with D2 in only a single cycle. If the H2 doesn't outgass in 10 minutes under vacuum, it surely won't outgass under pressure in any quantity during the hour or two of a test cycle. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 18:15:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA07064; Wed, 20 May 1998 18:13:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:13:50 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:14:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 7 Resent-Message-ID: <"9QMiC3.0.Ek1.C_tOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18996 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, If water is getting into your cell, it must be coming from the D2 bottle. You and Case bought the D2 from the same supplier. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 18:52:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA02038; Wed, 20 May 1998 18:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:47:21 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 04:39:22 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356386DD.1BB2032A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 04:43:57 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box References: <19980521001842.20553.rocketmail send1b.yahoomail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M4TpN.0.lV.dUuOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18997 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Anton Rager wrote: > > Hello atgroup/All, > > Looks like atgroup has posted a connection diagram of the 'black-box' > coil configuration. Here's my take on it expressed in ASCII-Art. > > ______________[L1]___ > |+ > Signal > Generator > |- > |__resistor____[L2]___[leds]____[L4]____[L3]___ > > This looks like some of Telsa's single wire transmission stuff to > me..... 110khz and low voltage. > > Any idea what's happening here folks? Could this circuit actually > work at all? Why are LEDs even lighting up? What exactly is L4 and L3 > contributing that makes two or more [not 1 according to the page...1 > would be a diode...two would allow some AC action] LEDs glow? some > sort of out-of-phase [with L1-L2 relationship] sink that is alternated > by L2? I think I'm getting to the edge of my Electronics knowledge > here....time to be quiet ;) > > All for now, > > Anton Rager > Denver, CO > a_rager yahoo.com Missing is, the strong capacitive coupling between L1-L3 and L2-L3. Again, L1-L2 and L3 are strongly (magnetically) coupled. L4 is also coupled to high order harmonics which resonate the coils. L3 coupling is dependent to resonance mode of the coils. Assuming multiple resonances are present on L1/L2, L3 is additively coup led to some resonances and substructively to other some resonance modes. I am not joking. such a complex interactions are indeed present. The othogonal placement of the L4 make sense when coils resonate on N-S_N or on high order harmonics providing exra p oles along coils. L4 appears coupled to such internal poles. I think the key feature of the circuit is high impedance feature and the 2+2V gap formed by LEDS. These gaps allow the circuit to generate and amplify some "extraneous" oscillation which may fed by unknown sources. Of course this circuit may not exhibit such a anomaly and still display very strange waveforms. I think these rich resonances and random operation of the circuit provided with *loose* coupling the the "exciting" signal generator is required for the "extraneus" suggested operation. The cause of this targeted effect is not known by me but my current favorite nominee is the ZPE. ZPE can pop up it self from the structure of magnet wires which are a essentially thin dielectric cylendres cover the copper conductor. A coil could be thoght as a array of closely placed such structures and could devellop ZPE oscillations and create inte rference with the complex structure of the coil or coils, and finally lead some observational anomalies. hamdi ucar "ZPE is the product of gravity-electromagnetism translation" :-) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 20:26:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA16451; Wed, 20 May 1998 20:23:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 20:23:57 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <766f4974.35639daf aol.com> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 23:21:18 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge - stuff mailed Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"z-07I3.0.v04.BvvOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18998 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-20 20:33:48 EDT, you write: <> >While I was at it I threw in five 20 kV, 0.1 A diodes. I suspect you may > eventually find a use for them! 8^) Thanks very much Horace. I may try to use them with the flyback transformer power supply. Much appreciated sir. Speaking to Roger at Midwest Surplus, the diodes I ordered he described sound exactly like the single diode in the supply I built from microwave oven components, 1/2 square 3 inches long. The capacitors and the diodes will arrive early next week. I have taken the old power supply apart. Have to rearange things to make room for the caps. > All was airmailed this afternoon. Should be there around Tuesday. > Regards, > Horace Heffner Thank you, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 21:49:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA27861; Wed, 20 May 1998 21:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 21:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980520234557.00825490 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 23:45:57 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 7 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980520204143.007bf720 world.std.com> References: <3.0.1.32.19980520183507.00c17ec4 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"t92BO3.0.Ap6.E7xOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18999 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:41 PM 5/20/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: >Seems to indicate that this artifact is internal noise to the >Earthtech system. The oscillations only occur in a narrow pressure range, and only on one of my three temperature sensors. Also, I have confirmed them with a battery-powered thermocouple instrument (normally the TC's are read by Omega CN76000's). It is therefore unlikely that they are a result of noise. Run 7 supports the hypothesis that the thermal oscillations are a kind of relaxation oscillation of convection currents. Such an oscillation would be dependant only upon the temperature gradients, pressure, and viscosity of the gas, and the geometry of the gas space, which is why it appeared both with an inert filler material and with the catalyst. >As such it might interfere with observing, or >seriously ruling out, any putative effect. Actually, if you examine the Pout/Pin traces you will see that the oscillations don't interfere at all with the power balance measurement, which is what counts in the end. Pout and Pin traces are quite steady and very very close to each other throughout the latter part of all of my Case runs. >Also this again appears to confirm the need for long term baselines, >cooling curves, and thermal waveform reconstruction. With a stable calorimeter system such as ours it is not necessary to re-establish the baseline for every experiment. Our laboratory time is better spent exploring the various operating parameters such as pressure, temperature, gas loading protocol, etc. If we start to see something unusual (e.g. over-unity or under-unity results), the first thing we check is the baseline, then next the sensitivity. Cooling curves and thermal waveform reconstruction are not required for accurate steady-state power balance measurements. Even if the experiment generated a relatively short pulse of excess heat, we would at least detect it with our present calorimeter system. In all of our calorimetric tests, all raw data is recorded on disk. If evidence of a transient heat event is observed we can always go back and reprocess the raw data with more sophisticated methods to extract additional information. However, as long as the Pout trace continues to run right on top of the Pin trace, there is no need for any further analysis. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 22:04:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA29852; Wed, 20 May 1998 22:01:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:01:27 -0700 (PDT) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 20:57:16 -0700 Subject: Re: Wallace & Tampere (Long) Message-ID: <19980520.214257.12078.6.tv juno.com> References: <3561BF4A.11ED skylink.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-3,5-6,8-14 From: tv juno.com (Tim Vaughan) Resent-Message-ID: <"bRmDc.0.LI7.bKxOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19000 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman, thank your for the excellant paper, "The Wallace Inventions, Spin Aligned Nuclei, The Gravitomagnetic Field, and The Tampere Experiment: Is there a connection?" I too have the Wallace patents and have been puzzled as to why nothing came of them. I wonder, does this also have anything to do with so called "torsion fields" which are said be created by aligned and unpaired spins in nuclei ? Tim ( tv juno.com ) _____________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 22:27:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA00423; Wed, 20 May 1998 17:18:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:18:50 -0700 Message-ID: <19980521001842.20553.rocketmail send1b.yahoomail.com> Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 17:18:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"HvEA33.0.O6.eBtOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/18990 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello atgroup/All, Looks like atgroup has posted a connection diagram of the 'black-box' coil configuration. Here's my take on it expressed in ASCII-Art. ______________[L1]___ |+ Signal Generator |- |__resistor____[L2]___[leds]____[L4]____[L3]___ This looks like some of Telsa's single wire transmission stuff to me..... 110khz and low voltage. Any idea what's happening here folks? Could this circuit actually work at all? Why are LEDs even lighting up? What exactly is L4 and L3 contributing that makes two or more [not 1 according to the page...1 would be a diode...two would allow some AC action] LEDs glow? some sort of out-of-phase [with L1-L2 relationship] sink that is alternated by L2? I think I'm getting to the edge of my Electronics knowledge here....time to be quiet ;) All for now, Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 22:30:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA02733; Wed, 20 May 1998 22:26:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:26:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980521012322.007e6c80 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 01:23:22 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Run 7 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980520234557.00825490 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980520204143.007bf720 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980520183507.00c17ec4 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xYizi2.0.dg.rhxOr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19001 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:45 PM 5/20/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >>Seems to indicate that this artifact is internal noise to the >>Earthtech system. > >The oscillations only occur in a narrow pressure range, and only on one of >my three temperature sensors. Also, I have confirmed them with a >battery-powered thermocouple instrument (normally the TC's are read by >Omega CN76000's). It is therefore unlikely that they are a result of >noise. Run 7 supports the hypothesis that the thermal oscillations are a >kind of relaxation oscillation of convection currents. Such an oscillation >would be dependant only upon the temperature gradients, pressure, and >viscosity of the gas, and the geometry of the gas space, which is why it >appeared both with an inert filler material and with the catalyst. > It is not a signal from the catalyst, since it was present without said catalyst. -------------------------------------------------- >>As such it might interfere with observing, or >>seriously ruling out, any putative effect. > >Actually, if you examine the Pout/Pin traces you will see that the >oscillations don't interfere at all with the power balance measurement, >which is what counts in the end. Pout and Pin traces are quite steady and >very very close to each other throughout the latter part of all of my Case >runs. If the goal is not to actually make a measurement, but to "disprove" the effect, then perhaps. However, it obviously interferes with any serious measurement. Since there are no long term baselines, no measurement of noise, and no thermal waveform reconstructions proving sensitivity and accuracy, any 'claims' must be considered in that absence. -------------------------------------------------- >>Also this again appears to confirm the need for long term baselines, >>cooling curves, and thermal waveform reconstruction. > >With a stable calorimeter system such as ours it is not necessary to >re-establish the baseline for every experiment. Our laboratory time is >better spent exploring the various operating parameters such as pressure, >temperature, gas loading protocol, etc. If we start to see something >unusual (e.g. over-unity or under-unity results), the first thing we check >is the baseline, then next the sensitivity. > There has never been such purported stability. The two do not appear to always match, and the outer has shown sensitivity to the room (and perhaps other things as well). Given such noise, and the cited drifts of the thermometry, it would seem that cooling curves, thermal waveform reconstruction, and other controls would be prudently required for each experiment. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 20 22:54:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA24100; Wed, 20 May 1998 22:52:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 22:52:33 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 21:53:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Power factor calculation questions Resent-Message-ID: <"b4Ju21.0.Ou5.W4yOr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19002 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I suppose this is now academic, but I have resolved some conceptual items a bit further: This is in regards to an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: I=0 | Imax __| | /| ---------|---------/ / / | / V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- / | / | / /----------|-------- Vmax |/ | | This shape was used to try to tune ou effects by reducing the input power factor, by increasing the area of the eye, because it shows when current and voltage are out of phase. It has occured to me that, for my application, the power factor could be computed from such a graph, because time spent at each interval of the V axis is known, because V = Vmax*cos(t), t in radians. The graph *is* representative of power factor, but is distorted, such that the greatest weight must be applied to the outer voltages. Suppose the graph is unitized into two sets U and L of data points (X[i], Y[i]) by setting X[i] = V[i]/Vmax, Y[i] = I[i]/Imax for every x,y pair in U and L. Set U is the upper set of values and set L is the lower set of values. We can now make two functions, u(x) and l(x) which, by interpolation, return the corresponding y values. Here is a kind of (untested) pseudocode to calculate the power factor from the I vs V data: INITIALIZE variables to zero nmax=10000 resolution to 10000 points FOR n=0 to nmax-1 ' look at nmax points t=-3.14159265 + n*6.283185307/nmax ' pick a time x=cos(t) ' pick a voltage with right probability y1=u(x) ' get corresponding current y2=l(x) ' and again Irms = Irms + y1*y1 ' compute sum of squares for rms Irms = Irms + y2*y2 Vrms = Vrms + x*x Preal = Preal + x*y ' sum real power NEXT n Irms=SQRT(Irms/nmax) Vrms=SQRT(Vrms/nmax) Preal=Preal/nmax PF = Preal/(Irms*Vrms)) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 02:56:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA07778; Thu, 21 May 1998 02:54:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 02:54:01 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 01:50:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) Resent-Message-ID: <"dbKfu2.0.1v1.nc_Or" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19003 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I suppose this is now academic, but I have resolved some conceptual items a bit further: This is in regards to an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: I=0 | Imax __| | /| ---------|---------/ / / | / V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- / | / | / /----------|-------- Vmax |/ | | This shape was used to try to tune ou effects by reducing the input power factor, by increasing the area of the eye, because it shows when current and voltage are out of phase. It has occured to me that, for my application, the power factor could be computed from such a graph, because time spent at each interval of the V axis is known, because V = Vmax*cos(t), t in radians. The graph *is* representative of power factor, but is distorted, such that the greatest weight must be applied to the outer voltages. Suppose the graph is unitized into two sets U and L of data points (X[i], Y[i]) by setting X[i] = V[i]/Vmax, Y[i] = I[i]/Imax for every x,y pair in U and L. It doesn't matter how you set the scales on the scope. Set U is the upper set of values and set L is the lower set of values. We can now make two functions, u(x) and l(x) which, by interpolation, return the corresponding y values. Here is a kind of (untested) pseudocode to calculate the power factor from the I vs V data: INITIALIZE variables to zero nmax=10000 ' resolution to 10000 points FOR n=0 to nmax-1 ' look at nmax points t=-3.14159265 + n*6.283185307/(nmax-1) ' pick a time x=cos(t) ' pick a voltage with right probability y1=u(x) ' get corresponding current y2=l(x) ' and again Irms = Irms + y1*y1 ' compute sum of squares for rms Irms = Irms + y2*y2 Vrms = Vrms + x*x Preal = Preal + x*y ' sum real power NEXT n Irms=SQRT(Irms/(2*nmax)) ' two sets of y values per x Vrms=SQRT(Vrms/(nmax) Preal=Preal/nmax PF = Preal/(Irms*Vrms)) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 04:01:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA27119; Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003201bd84a6$fe8f8ca0$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 04:55:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"a1LIH1.0.bd6.na0Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19004 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The energy required to effect fission of the H-H, D-D, or H-D Bond: H-H, 446,000 joule/mole (4.63 ev/bond) D-D, 444,000 joule/mole (4.61 ev/bond) H-D, 439,000 joule/mole (4.56 ev/bond) In the lattice of the Pd-Carbon Catalysts this can occur at temperatures as low as 300 K as long as the necessary thermal energy is provided. Since commercial catalysts have been used for this purpose as hydrogenation and other purposes,there is no reason for questioning the thermochemical effects involved. By the same token,if only a few ev (or less)is required to form the Hydrino-Deutrino or Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutron these should be formed in the Catalyst also, at some undetermined rate, with concurrent release of about 2 Kev EUV/event. The cross-section for subsequent reactions with Hydrogen or Deuterium, or Pd, for Fusion reactions would be quite small. Since Carbon(used as a reactor moderator) has a vanishingly small neutron absorption cross-section, it probably wouldn't be a reactant. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 04:21:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA07778; Thu, 21 May 1998 02:54:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 02:54:01 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 01:50:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) Resent-Message-ID: <"dbKfu2.0.1v1.nc_Or" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19003 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I suppose this is now academic, but I have resolved some conceptual items a bit further: This is in regards to an application where the input I vs V curve looks, with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: I=0 | Imax __| | /| ---------|---------/ / / | / V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- / | / | / /----------|-------- Vmax |/ | | This shape was used to try to tune ou effects by reducing the input power factor, by increasing the area of the eye, because it shows when current and voltage are out of phase. It has occured to me that, for my application, the power factor could be computed from such a graph, because time spent at each interval of the V axis is known, because V = Vmax*cos(t), t in radians. The graph *is* representative of power factor, but is distorted, such that the greatest weight must be applied to the outer voltages. Suppose the graph is unitized into two sets U and L of data points (X[i], Y[i]) by setting X[i] = V[i]/Vmax, Y[i] = I[i]/Imax for every x,y pair in U and L. It doesn't matter how you set the scales on the scope. Set U is the upper set of values and set L is the lower set of values. We can now make two functions, u(x) and l(x) which, by interpolation, return the corresponding y values. Here is a kind of (untested) pseudocode to calculate the power factor from the I vs V data: INITIALIZE variables to zero nmax=10000 ' resolution to 10000 points FOR n=0 to nmax-1 ' look at nmax points t=-3.14159265 + n*6.283185307/(nmax-1) ' pick a time x=cos(t) ' pick a voltage with right probability y1=u(x) ' get corresponding current y2=l(x) ' and again Irms = Irms + y1*y1 ' compute sum of squares for rms Irms = Irms + y2*y2 Vrms = Vrms + x*x Preal = Preal + x*y ' sum real power NEXT n Irms=SQRT(Irms/(2*nmax)) ' two sets of y values per x Vrms=SQRT(Vrms/(nmax) Preal=Preal/nmax PF = Preal/(Irms*Vrms)) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 05:28:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA04394; Thu, 21 May 1998 05:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 05:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980521072542.00825100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 07:25:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 7 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980521012322.007e6c80 world.std.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980520234557.00825490 mail.eden.com> <3.0.5.32.19980520204143.007bf720 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980520183507.00c17ec4 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"dLUI6.0.Z41.Bs1Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19005 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:23 AM 5/21/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > If the goal is not to actually make a measurement, but >to "disprove" the effect, then perhaps. You seem to be confused. Observing a Pout greater than Pin is how I plan to "prove" the effect. >There has never been such purported stability. Take a look at the Pout & Pin traces in Run 6: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run6.html They clearly demonstrate the system's stability. >The two do not appear >to always match, and the outer has shown sensitivity to the room >(and perhaps other things as well). Sounds like you are thinking of our Dual Method Calorimeter, which operated at sub-watt power levels. We're not using that system for the Case study. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 06:58:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA18038; Thu, 21 May 1998 06:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 06:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35642A10.650A skylink.net> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 06:20:16 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wallace & Tampere (Long) References: <3561BF4A.11ED skylink.net> <19980520.214257.12078.6.tv@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"k_0Q7.0.gP4.A63Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19006 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Tim Vaughan wrote: > I wonder, does this also have anything to do with so called "torsion > fields" which are said be created by aligned and unpaired spins > in nuclei ? Indeed. There are some articles in the new section Bill Beaty has started at his website about Spin-Waves, which look remarkably like the same thing. Maybe not only spin aligned nuclei -- also spinning magnets and spinning EM fields. http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/tors/ It can be no accident that in MKS dimensions the gravitomagnetic is a measure of spin per unit volume -- (angular momentum)/meter^3. In purely electrical units it is (Coulomb)(Weber)/m^3. I did not represent it this way in the appendix of the aricle, but should have done so. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 08:12:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA01166; Thu, 21 May 1998 08:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <000601bd84c8$454cf940$ce15ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:53:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Geh_c1.0.8I.q54Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19007 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Anton Rager To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 12:26 AM Subject: Re: Baffling Black Box We have assigned the correct research name to the Baffling Black Box and because of all the negative feedback do to the initial naming when presented we would like the thread with this name to discontinue. The circuit should now be referred to as ERES and our webmaster is now making needed changes on our site. > >Could this circuit actually work at all? I'm sure we will here the term fake, faked etc., but I have instruced the webmaster to post a picture of a working ERES. In order to stop some of the fake mail, the only reason we cut the pictures down to size is to reduce load time and maintain quality. In fact we often attempt to maintain qualtity to the point that you can read the color code on resistors. Never the less as you questioned (rightly so) does it work and can it work. Why are LEDs even lighting up? What exactly is L4 and L3 >contributing that makes two or more [not 1 according to the page...1 >would be a diode...two would allow some AC action] LEDs glow? some We read a post by a Hamdi Ucar which is very close to the theory we subscribe to on ERES operation and will cover this in coming days on our site. Thank you for the ASCII diagram, we have been asked a number of times for this and have not done it. We are about to add coil specfications and phasing requirements as well as impedance measurements at 10khz which is about the limit to offer reliable results. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 08:42:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08854; Thu, 21 May 1998 08:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0925 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:37:06 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"89sOL3.0.BA2.zg4Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19008 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Basically what you have here is a Lissajous figure, but non-linear. If it were linear, it would be an ellipse or circle. A quick look at your equations/program looks OK to me. The larger the figure, the more circulating power you have, by analogy to the Lissajous. If the current were a cosine, and the voltage a sine wave with the same amplitude, the figure would be a circle, the power factor would be zero, and the energy into the circuit on half the cycle would equal the power out the other half cycle. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 2:50 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) > > I suppose this is now academic, but I have resolved some conceptual > items a > bit further: > > This is in regards to an application where the input I vs V curve > looks, > with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: > > > I=0 > | > Imax __| > | /| > ---------|---------/ / > / | / > V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- > / | / | > / /----------|-------- Vmax > |/ | > | > > > This shape was used to try to tune ou effects by reducing the input > power > factor, by increasing the area of the eye, because it shows when > current > and voltage are out of phase. > > It has occured to me that, for my application, the power factor could > be > computed from such a graph, because time spent at each interval of the > V > axis is known, because V = Vmax*cos(t), t in radians. The graph *is* > representative of power factor, but is distorted, such that the > greatest > weight must be applied to the outer voltages. > > Suppose the graph is unitized into two sets U and L of data points > (X[i], > Y[i]) by setting X[i] = V[i]/Vmax, Y[i] = I[i]/Imax for every x,y pair > in U > and L. It doesn't matter how you set the scales on the scope. Set U > is > the upper set of values and set L is the lower set of values. We can > now > make two functions, u(x) and l(x) which, by interpolation, return the > corresponding y values. > > Here is a kind of (untested) pseudocode to calculate the power factor > from > the I vs V data: > > INITIALIZE variables to zero > nmax=10000 ' resolution to 10000 points > > FOR n=0 to nmax-1 ' look at nmax points > t=-3.14159265 + n*6.283185307/(nmax-1) ' pick a time > x=cos(t) ' pick a voltage with right probability > y1=u(x) ' get corresponding current > y2=l(x) ' and again > Irms = Irms + y1*y1 ' compute sum of squares for rms > Irms = Irms + y2*y2 > Vrms = Vrms + x*x > Preal = Preal + x*y ' sum real power > NEXT n > Irms=SQRT(Irms/(2*nmax)) ' two sets of y values per x > Vrms=SQRT(Vrms/(nmax) > Preal=Preal/nmax > PF = Preal/(Irms*Vrms)) > > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 08:55:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA11499; Thu, 21 May 1998 08:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0926 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:49:32 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"M-5GZ1.0.Zp2.js4Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19009 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace To play with this stuff a little, take an ordinary transformer, connect a resistor(about 2652 ohms)(better yet a pot) to one leg, a capacitor (say 1 microfarad, not electrolytic) to the other, and connect them together, and to the ground of your scope. connect one channel to the resistor, the other to the capacitor, and display in the X-Y mode. You should see a circle if my arithmetic is correct. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 2:50 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) > > I suppose this is now academic, but I have resolved some conceptual > items a > bit further: > > This is in regards to an application where the input I vs V curve > looks, > with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: > > > I=0 > | > Imax __| > | /| > ---------|---------/ / > / | / > V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- > / | / | > / /----------|-------- Vmax > |/ | > | > > > This shape was used to try to tune ou effects by reducing the input > power > factor, by increasing the area of the eye, because it shows when > current > and voltage are out of phase. > > It has occured to me that, for my application, the power factor could > be > computed from such a graph, because time spent at each interval of the > V > axis is known, because V = Vmax*cos(t), t in radians. The graph *is* > representative of power factor, but is distorted, such that the > greatest > weight must be applied to the outer voltages. > > Suppose the graph is unitized into two sets U and L of data points > (X[i], > Y[i]) by setting X[i] = V[i]/Vmax, Y[i] = I[i]/Imax for every x,y pair > in U > and L. It doesn't matter how you set the scales on the scope. Set U > is > the upper set of values and set L is the lower set of values. We can > now > make two functions, u(x) and l(x) which, by interpolation, return the > corresponding y values. > > Here is a kind of (untested) pseudocode to calculate the power factor > from > the I vs V data: > > INITIALIZE variables to zero > nmax=10000 ' resolution to 10000 points > > FOR n=0 to nmax-1 ' look at nmax points > t=-3.14159265 + n*6.283185307/(nmax-1) ' pick a time > x=cos(t) ' pick a voltage with right probability > y1=u(x) ' get corresponding current > y2=l(x) ' and again > Irms = Irms + y1*y1 ' compute sum of squares for rms > Irms = Irms + y2*y2 > Vrms = Vrms + x*x > Preal = Preal + x*y ' sum real power > NEXT n > Irms=SQRT(Irms/(2*nmax)) ' two sets of y values per x > Vrms=SQRT(Vrms/(nmax) > Preal=Preal/nmax > PF = Preal/(Irms*Vrms)) > > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 09:02:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA13344; Thu, 21 May 1998 08:59:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:59:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0927 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'Vortex-L'" Subject: FW: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected)(again) Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:57:18 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"hDCDT3.0.PG3.uz4Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19010 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Please change power to energy in the last sentence. > ---------- > From: Scudder, Henry J[SMTP:Henry.Scudder West.Boeing.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 8:37 AM > To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' > Subject: RE: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) > > Horace > Basically what you have here is a Lissajous figure, but > non-linear. If it were linear, it would be an ellipse or circle. A > quick > look at your equations/program looks OK to me. The larger the figure, > the more circulating power you have, by analogy to the Lissajous. If > the > current were a cosine, and the voltage a sine wave with the same > amplitude, the figure would be a circle, the power factor would be > zero, > and the energy into the circuit on half the cycle would equal the > power > out the other half cycle. > > Hank > > > ---------- > > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 2:50 AM > > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > > Subject: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) > > > > I suppose this is now academic, but I have resolved some conceptual > > items a > > bit further: > > > > This is in regards to an application where the input I vs V curve > > looks, > > with the corners very slightly rounded, about like: > > > > > > I=0 > > | > > Imax __| > > | /| > > ---------|---------/ / > > / | / > > V=0 ------/----------|---------/--------- > > / | / | > > / /----------|-------- Vmax > > |/ | > > | > > > > > > This shape was used to try to tune ou effects by reducing the input > > power > > factor, by increasing the area of the eye, because it shows when > > current > > and voltage are out of phase. > > > > It has occured to me that, for my application, the power factor > could > > be > > computed from such a graph, because time spent at each interval of > the > > V > > axis is known, because V = Vmax*cos(t), t in radians. The graph > *is* > > representative of power factor, but is distorted, such that the > > greatest > > weight must be applied to the outer voltages. > > > > Suppose the graph is unitized into two sets U and L of data points > > (X[i], > > Y[i]) by setting X[i] = V[i]/Vmax, Y[i] = I[i]/Imax for every x,y > pair > > in U > > and L. It doesn't matter how you set the scales on the scope. Set > U > > is > > the upper set of values and set L is the lower set of values. We > can > > now > > make two functions, u(x) and l(x) which, by interpolation, return > the > > corresponding y values. > > > > Here is a kind of (untested) pseudocode to calculate the power > factor > > from > > the I vs V data: > > > > INITIALIZE variables to zero > > nmax=10000 ' resolution to 10000 points > > > > FOR n=0 to nmax-1 ' look at nmax points > > t=-3.14159265 + n*6.283185307/(nmax-1) ' pick a time > > x=cos(t) ' pick a voltage with right probability > > y1=u(x) ' get corresponding current > > y2=l(x) ' and again > > Irms = Irms + y1*y1 ' compute sum of squares for rms > > Irms = Irms + y2*y2 > > Vrms = Vrms + x*x > > Preal = Preal + x*y ' sum real power > > NEXT n > > Irms=SQRT(Irms/(2*nmax)) ' two sets of y values per x > > Vrms=SQRT(Vrms/(nmax) > > Preal=Preal/nmax > > PF = Preal/(Irms*Vrms)) > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Horace Heffner > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 09:45:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA19765; Thu, 21 May 1998 09:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 09:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980521155502.11810.rocketmail send1c.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:55:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: atgroup's ERES To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"MU9lJ1.0.lq4._T5Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19011 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello again atgroup, ---atgroup wrote: > We have assigned the correct research name to the Baffling Black Box and > because of all the negative feedback do to the initial naming when presented > we would like the thread with this name to discontinue. The circuit should > now be referred to as ERES and our webmaster is now making needed changes on > our site. Anytime something different is published, negative feedback will occur. Keep at it. I think some of the negative feedback was not due to the name of the circuit....but due to the initial presentation and vagueness of your site. However, there will always be skeptics. > > > >Could this circuit actually work at all? > I'm sure we will here the term fake, faked etc., but I have instruced the > webmaster to post a picture of a working ERES. > I never said I thought it was a fake.....I am only wondering out loud _how/why_ it could work....why the diodes light up at all is quite a curious thing to me. I do, however, think that you will continue to get negative feedback until enough information is provided for others to verify your results. > Never the less as you questioned (rightly so) does it work and > can it work. > > Why are LEDs even lighting up? What exactly is L4 and L3 > >contributing that makes two or more [not 1 according to the page...1 > >would be a diode...two would allow some AC action] LEDs glow? some > > > We read a post by a Hamdi Ucar which is very close to the theory we > subscribe to on ERES operation and will cover this in coming days on our > site. Great -- Thanks. Looks like a work-in-progress sort of thing....I will try to be more patient in the future. Keep at it -- Regards, Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 10:53:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11147; Thu, 21 May 1998 10:51:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:51:03 -0700 Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:30:38 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Greg Watson Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805211332_MC2-3DC1-78DA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"32Fsu3.0.tj2.4c6Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19012 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Kyle Mcallister asks: Speaking of Greg Watson, does anyone here have any idea whats going on with him? Has he come through with kits, refunded money, etc.? No, he never delivered kits and he never refunded money, despite numerous requests from me and others. Whatever Watson started out to do, I conclude that he ended up running a low-grade scam. He defrauded people. Considering the effort he put into it reflected in the web page, drawings, descriptions and so on, he did not make much money, so it is difficult to this was intended to be a scam from the start. There are easier ways to steal money! In the years I have been dealing with CF and 'o-u' devices, I have seen a few frauds and a great many delusions and incompetent mistakes. I think I have only been taken in by two frauds: Potapov and Watson. The other failures I have been involved with were caused by honest mistakes or lack of knowledge. Many people have made incompetent mistakes and spent years and millions of dollars working on machines when they could have performed a simple test to prove the machine either works or it does not. CF and other thermal devices that produce less than 500% excess or less than 10 watts are difficult to test conclusively. So are machines that supposedly produce erratic output. But in principle the magic magnet motors, the Meyer, Watson, and Correa devices and all electrical gadgets should work in a self-sustaining mode, yet the inventors never do these tests. Some inventors never think to do the tests; it never occurs to them. They are idiots. Others refuse to do the tests. They are frauds. Some inventors are egomaniacs who tell me they are so sure the machine would pass the self-sustaining test, and their theories, simulations, and calorimetry are so solid, they see no reason to do an actual experiment. The outcome is a foregone conclusion, the test would be a mere formality. They intend to start by building [PICK ONE:] a 1,000 watt generator; a 10,000 watt co-gen unit; a megawatt electric plant. The other group I consider frauds are the inventors and scientists who refuse to let third parties observe their experiments and independently test their devices, even under a non-disclosure agreement. Many scientists fall in this category. They have done more harm than the DoE, the APS and all the other enemies of cold fusion combined. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 11:01:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA10082; Thu, 21 May 1998 10:58:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:58:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980521172007.13461.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:20:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: atgroup's ERES To: vortex-l eskimo.com, atgroup@wt.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"m80Km2.0.RT2.Oj6Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19013 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello All, Checked the site again this morn, and looks like more construction info is there. http://home.wt.net/atgroup/blackbox.htm Question for atgroup -- I'm a lefty, so could you be more specific on how coil4 is oriented when winding clockwise? Rotate drawings/pictures left or right for CW winding? Other than that, it looks like there is almost enough info for others to start construction. If only I had more time this week ;{ Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com == Anton Rager a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 11:16:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA11749; Thu, 21 May 1998 11:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 11:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980521101524.007bc180 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:15:24 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Run 7 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980521072542.00825100 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980521012322.007e6c80 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19980520234557.00825490 mail.eden.com> <3.0.5.32.19980520204143.007bf720 world.std.com> <3.0.1.32.19980520183507.00c17ec4 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"bPN912.0.Mt2.Hp6Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19014 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:25 AM 5/21/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >> If the goal is not to actually make a measurement, but >>to "disprove" the effect, then perhaps. > >You seem to be confused. Observing a Pout greater than Pin is how I plan >to "prove" the effect. > Not confused. Scott who must show accuracy and calibration of these derived values [and probably ought submit his paper to a serious peer-review at a journal]. Also, the need to PROVE which Scott Little states rather then accurately MEASURE, suggests a possible a priori bias BTW. Richard Murray must have some data on this. More importantly, science, - including Brendan Hall's comments re: BET analysis - is also impt and could be done. There is interesting material, and possibly nuclear, science there. ------------------------------------------ >>There has never been such purported stability. > >Take a look at the Pout & Pin traces in Run 6: >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run6.html >They clearly demonstrate the system's stability. > Au contraire. Scott mentions in his posts that some sensors were not presented because they were not stable and had exhibited noise previously. As just two examples, from two of his recent pages on his web site: 'I have had electrical noise problems with these thermocouples in the past so it did not seem unusual.' and in another 'This result supports the hypothesis that the thermal oscillations I have observed are due to unstable convection currents.' (presently discussed) These are two forms of intrinsic noise - one to the sensor, another to the system. This - in the absence of quantifying it, and in the absence of a baseline showing the 'impulse response', and the absence of other features already suggested - weakens any derived argument or information from the expt. ------------------------------------------ >>The two do not appear >>to always match, and the outer has shown sensitivity to the room >>(and perhaps other things as well). > >Sounds like you are thinking of our Dual Method Calorimeter, which operated >at sub-watt power levels. We're not using that system for the Case study. Good point. That system too was missing some of the calibration data, and isolation from the environment. [and may have never apparently been corrected. BTW, were the beads at the low input power levels reexplored?] Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 11:40:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03193; Thu, 21 May 1998 11:34:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 11:34:41 -0700 Message-ID: <000901bd84e6$8262a7d0$1f15ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Request a chemist response. Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:30:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD84BC.98798220" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"vnv9n2.0.kn.zE7Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19015 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD84BC.98798220 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? sic). Is it toxic to humans ? Thanks, Rex ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD84BC.98798220 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? = sic). Is it=20 toxic to humans ?
 
Thanks, = Rex
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD84BC.98798220-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 11:50:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA05622; Thu, 21 May 1998 11:44:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 11:44:45 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:44:26 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Greg Watson Resent-Message-ID: <"F6urV.0.SN1.QO7Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19016 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 1:30 PM 5/21/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex > >Kyle Mcallister asks: > > Speaking of Greg Watson, does anyone here have any idea whats going on > with him? Has he come through with kits, refunded money, etc.? > >No, he never delivered kits and he never refunded money, despite numerous >requests from me and others. > >Whatever Watson started out to do, I conclude that he ended up running a >low-grade scam. He defrauded people. [snip] Jed and Kyle, It seems to be a bit early to so thoroughly condemn Greg Watson. Greg said he wouldn't post or discuss the issues until his agreement ran out in late May. We have at most only 10 more days to wait to see the next chapter of this great drama unfold! At 10:54 AM 3/30/98, Greg Watson wrote: >Hi All, > >The DMEC deal is a mess. I don't give it much hope of working. > >The agreement expires late May, 1998. > >If the SMOT kits are not shipped by DMEC by then, I will personally >REFUND each & every purchaser's money as a gesture of good faith. This >refund DOESN'T cancel my personal obligation to ship a working OU device >to each of the original purchasers. The refund just lets me sleep >better at night. > >At present, a PMOD class device looks like the way to go. > > >Best Regards to you all, > Greg Watson Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 12:02:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA10397; Thu, 21 May 1998 11:56:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 11:56:22 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 10:21:18 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? Resent-Message-ID: <"aw3Vs1.0.1Y2.HZ7Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19017 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:55 AM 5/21/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The energy required to effect fission of the >H-H, D-D, or H-D Bond: > >H-H, 446,000 joule/mole (4.63 ev/bond) >D-D, 444,000 joule/mole (4.61 ev/bond) >H-D, 439,000 joule/mole (4.56 ev/bond) > >In the lattice of the Pd-Carbon Catalysts this can occur at temperatures as >low as 300 K as long as the necessary thermal energy is >provided. So, for the Case effect to occur on this basis, there must be a cycle of some kind, otherwise the small quantity of H2 or D2 should dissappear along with the effect. In this cycle the catalyst volume must cool, and the plenum or top of the vessel must heat due to recombination. The more this reaction cycle occurs the less ou the device will look, by Case's comparative method, because the thermocouple is located closest to the catalyst. If the above hypothesis is true then the H-D should produce the worst results (lowest catalyst temperature) due to the higher likelyhood of the availablility of the threshold thermal energy. H-D would be followed by D-D, followed by H-H. Therefore, producing a higher catalyst temperature, H2 should look like the best ingredient, which it does not, true? An interesting test of this and other hypotheses might be to use a 50/50 mix of H2 and D2, which should rapidly convert to DH, and thus should produce a prolonged depression in the catalyst temperature. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 12:58:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA03258; Thu, 21 May 1998 12:54:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 12:54:33 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980521195443.0068acf0 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: Thu, 21 May 1998 15:54:43 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Request a chemist response. Resent-Message-ID: <"lWJuH.0.do.uP8Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19018 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:30 PM 5/21/98 -0500, you wrote: >What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? sic). Is it toxic to humans ? > >Thanks, Rex > > > > > > > > >
What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? sic). Is it >toxic to humans ?
>
 
>
Thanks, Rex
If you mean PCl3 (Phosphorus trichloride), then it is very reactive in the presence of moisture, forming HCl, H3PO3 and heat. Yes, it is toxic. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 13:03:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06290; Thu, 21 May 1998 12:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 12:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:36:46 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 7 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZaOKV2.0.2Y1._R8Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19019 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oops! I wrote: "If water is getting into your cell, it must be coming from the D2 bottle. You and Case bought the D2 from the same supplier." The observed temperature cycling/oscillating effect as a function of pressure and temperature is coming during the H2 segment not the D2 segment of the experiment. In the earthtech experiment, if the effect is due to water, then there must be water in the H2 bottle or supply line, not the D2 bottle. In Case's experiment, air is introduced, so trace levels of water are inevitable. Don't know why the D2 would have less. D2O characteristics are not all that different. It should have a pressure/temperature range where it oscillates in temperature as well. I suppose evaporation and drip of an internal liquid is one of the least likely hypotheses, but it just keeps coming back as a possibility. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 13:09:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06357; Thu, 21 May 1998 12:57:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 12:57:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 08:24:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Power factor from I vs V plot (corrected) Resent-Message-ID: <"Imxjc3.0.7Z1.FS8Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19020 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:37 AM 5/21/98, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Horace > Basically what you have here is a Lissajous figure, but >non-linear. If it were linear, it would be an ellipse or circle. If it is linear then I=K*V. The plot is a line. I believe a capacitor provides a circle as the energy out equals the energy in. PF = 0. >A quick >look at your equations/program looks OK to me. The larger the figure, >the more circulating power you have, by analogy to the Lissajous. The more symmetric the circle the more circulating power you have. It doesn't matter how you scale it. >If the >current were a cosine, and the voltage a sine wave with the same >amplitude, the figure would be a circle, the power factor would be zero, >and the energy into the circuit on half the cycle would equal the energy >out the other half cycle. > >Hank Yes. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 13:27:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA10824; Thu, 21 May 1998 13:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:20:50 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:23:34 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd84f6$542eb3d0$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"TRZl71.0._e2.Mo8Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19021 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Vince, The following data from the CRC Handbook is the vapor pressure of K vs temperature. - T ----------mmHg 341 C 1 443 C 10 524 C 40 586 C 100 708 C 400 - Your last run was at about 6" Hg ~= 150 mmHg. With the large difference in ionization voltage between H and K, my experience with similar differences between Ar and Hg would give a larger number of K ions when the partial pressure of K approaches 1% of the H2 pressure. This would happen at about 350 C. A discharge color change could provide an indicator of the changing discharge dynamics. - You wrote: >When I had the sensor halfway between the electrodes (recording a >lower temperature) it was running ~550 C. K was melted in the >bottom of the tube surrounding the lower electrode. I estimate around >300-400 C here (lower electrode). - The K ions could easily dominate the discharge process at your estimated temperatures! - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 13:37:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA16478; Thu, 21 May 1998 13:28:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:28:46 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980521202849.00680edc freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny freeway.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:28:49 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Request a chemist response. Resent-Message-ID: <"AO7LG2.0.814.xv8Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19022 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:30 PM 5/21/98 -0500, you wrote: >What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? sic). Is it toxic to humans ? > >Thanks, Rex > > > > > > > > >
What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? sic). Is it >toxic to humans ?
>
 
>
Thanks, Rex
My first response was a fast off the top of my head response in order to get the information to you as fast as possible. All the chloride containing phosphorus compounds, phosphorous trichloride, phosphorous pentachloride, phosphorous oxytrichloride, must be handled with great care. They are highly irritating and corrosive to skin and mucous membranes. They react violently with water. The same goes for the corresponding flouro and bromo compounds of phosphorous. Phosphrous pentoxide is also highly reactive with water. Goggles and rubber gloves should be worn and work with these substances should be done in a hood. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 13:47:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA21653; Thu, 21 May 1998 13:43:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 13:43:44 -0700 Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:30:17 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Greg Watson Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805211632_MC2-3DC0-7570 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"7JznH3.0.vH5.x79Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19023 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Horace Heffner writes: It seems to be a bit early to so thoroughly condemn Greg Watson. Greg said he wouldn't post or discuss the issues until his agreement ran out in late May. We have at most only 10 more days to wait to see the next chapter of this great drama unfold! Maybe. But I am sorry, I ran out of patience. I contacted Greg repeatedly, asking for a refund or a delivery schedule. He kept telling me and this forum different stories, and ever-more-implausible reasons for the delay. Finally he stopped communicating altogether. I cannot help drawing the obvious conclusions. I wouldn't mind being wrong. If next chapter shows that Watson is on the up and up after all, nobody will be more pleased than me. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 14:06:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA18199; Thu, 21 May 1998 14:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:03:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: atgroup Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 15:05:46 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000901bd84e6$8262a7d0$1f15ecd0 atgroup> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: Request a chemist response. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"KKi2v2.0.CS4.eQ9Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19024 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 21-May-98, atgroup wrote: >What is TriCloridePhosphate ( ? sic). Is it toxic to humans ? >Thanks, Rex How about turning off your HTML genorator. Thanks, __Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 14:07:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00879; Thu, 21 May 1998 14:01:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:01:47 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ab01bd84fb$4b528980$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:58:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"JBLFO1.0.fD.wO9Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19025 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 12:59 PM Subject: Re: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? Horace wrote: >At 4:55 AM 5/21/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>The energy required to effect fission of the >>H-H, D-D, or H-D Bond: >> >>H-H, 446,000 joule/mole (4.63 ev/bond) >>D-D, 444,000 joule/mole (4.61 ev/bond) >>H-D, 439,000 joule/mole (4.56 ev/bond) >> >>In the lattice of the Pd-Carbon Catalysts this can occur at temperatures as >>low as 300 K as long as the necessary thermal energy is >>provided. > >So, for the Case effect to occur on this basis, there must be a cycle of >some kind, otherwise the small quantity of H2 or D2 should disappear along >with the effect. Disappear,about 14 grams of D2? As I see it the basic function of the catalyst is to adsorb-absorb the D2 molecule into it's surface molecules/atoms,where the D2 atoms tend to "forget" which electrons it belongs to, provided the 46 electrons of the Pd or 6 electrons of the Carbon are receiving energy from the environment or a heat source. This allows for D2 + H2 ----> 2 HD or exchange of spin types ie, Ortho-Para exchange. CATALYSTS CANNOT DRIVE ENERGETICALLY UNFAVORABLE REACTIONS UNLESS ENERGY IS MADE AVAILABLE. But, exothermic chemical reactions or Hydrino-Deutrino formation etc., can provide the energy. >In this cycle the catalyst volume must cool, and the >plenum or top of the vessel must heat due to recombination. The more this >reaction cycle occurs the less ou the device will look, by Case's >comparative method, because the thermocouple is located closest to the >catalyst. If the above hypothesis is true then the H-D should produce the >worst results (lowest catalyst temperature) due to the higher likelihood of >the availability of the threshold thermal energy. H-D would be followed >by D-D, followed by H-H. Therefore, producing a higher catalyst >temperature, H2 should look like the best ingredient, which it does not, >true? No. H-H bond-breaking (Fission)requires the most energy. You cannot make new bonds 2(H-D) or 2 H <---> H-H, 2 D <---> D-D, DH <---> H-D until you break an H-H and a D-D set. IOW, ALL POSSIBILITIES are going on in the lattice of the catalyst even if it is in the first few atom layers, provided the energy is available. The only question to answer is whether or not the 30 degree temperature is an artifact due to thermal effects or is self sustaining heat from o/u effects. If there is NO HD or H2 after purging, then things get really interesting! Then again there is about 750 cm^2 of hot metal(whatever the WW II oxygen bottle is made of) around the 1540 cm^3 of hot D2 gas, too. > >An interesting test of this and other hypotheses might be to use a 50/50 >mix of H2 and D2, which should rapidly convert to DH, and thus should >produce a prolonged depression in the catalyst temperature. Don't BET* on it. :-) *Stephen Brunauer,Paul Emmett,and Edward Teller. Wrote the equation for determining the surface area for a monolayer of material adsorbed on a surface, thus BET technique. I think they use Carbon Tetrachloride Too. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 14:17:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA05058; Thu, 21 May 1998 14:13:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 14:13:50 -0700 Message-ID: <000a01bd84fc$c9b26a60$6e15ecd0 atgroup> From: "atgroup" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Point of contact. Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:09:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD84D2.DFF5ABE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"gsefj1.0.yE1.Ea9Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19026 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD84D2.DFF5ABE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you wish to communicat with a specific person at ATGroup, please = address your email to (Rex Allen), I am the lead engineering technician = with the group. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD84D2.DFF5ABE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If you wish to communicat with a = specific person=20 at ATGroup, please address your email to (Rex Allen), I am the lead = engineering=20 technician with the group.
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BD84D2.DFF5ABE0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 15:29:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA25146; Thu, 21 May 1998 15:25:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 15:25:10 -0700 From: "George Holz" To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Question for Scott Little Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 18:29:44 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd8507$f46c85a0$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"j5WXx2.0.786.zcAPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19027 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Scott, I am considering building a version Vince's H2/K experiment. Could you tell me where to obtain the metal membrane in line H2 purifying filter you used in your BLP experiments. Thanks, George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 16:40:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA12236; Thu, 21 May 1998 16:35:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:35:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <001a01bd8511$364d0f40$5b11ecd0 satellite> From: "atgroup" To: Subject: Re: Request a chemist response. Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 18:35:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"kHQsS3.0.1_2.MfBPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19028 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Edwin Strojny To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 3:47 PM Subject: Re: Request a chemist response. >My first response was a fast off the top of my head response in order to get >the information to you as fast as possible. All the chloride containing >phosphorus compounds, phosphorous trichloride, phosphorous pentachloride, Thank you for the help, not being very smart in this area you have prevented us from making a big mistake. It appears the compound we have has lost some of its reactiveness. Anyway we will now use due caution. Again thanks for the fast response. Rex. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 16:50:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA14179; Thu, 21 May 1998 16:46:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:46:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD84E8.31060880 pm3-126.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 18:42:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD84E8.310F3040" Resent-Message-ID: <"jihb.0.ST3.ZpBPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19029 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD84E8.310F3040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Rick Monteverde[SMTP:monteverde worldnet.att.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 4:46 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 >Yes, but the real question is: what is required to *do* it? Lets consider the problem: The author speaks of the reason an electron = falls toward the earth is because it tries to keep its electric field = undistorted. Therefore, it would seem that we need a device that can = create a distorted electric field, and produce a force to equalize the = distortion. Perhaps, just perhaps, this is the effect observed by none = other than Thomas Townsend Brown. If so, then perhaps the experiment = performed by Talley, who used only up to 20kV even though greater = voltages were specified, was inconclusive in disproving the = Biefield-Brown effect. It bothers me that NASA does not perform = worthwhile replications of experiments, and claims experiments by others = that are not worthwhile as damning evidence against such effects. IMHO, = this experiment should be replicated in a high vacuum with voltages on = the order of 100kV+. Then we shall see if the effect is real or not. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD84E8.310F3040 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhYXAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABADgAAABSRTogTW9y ZSBvbiBHcmF2aXR5IHByb3B1bHNpb24gIGVwcmludDogcGh5c2ljcy85ODA1MDI4ANASAQWAAwAO AAAAzgcFABUAEgAqABQABABDAQEggAMADgAAAM4HBQAVABIAIwAwAAQAWAEBCYABACEAAABEMjI2 RTM2NERBRjBEMTExQTc1RUU4RTAwQUMxMDAwMAAbBwEDkAYAEAYAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAA AAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5ACAJ0RgShb0BHgBwAAEAAAA4AAAAUkU6IE1v cmUgb24gR3Jhdml0eSBwcm9wdWxzaW9uICBlcHJpbnQ6IHBoeXNpY3MvOTgwNTAyOAACAXEAAQAA ABYAAAABvYUSGNF/VwCC8NoR0ade6OAKwQAAAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAA FwAAAHN0a0BzdW5oZXJhbGQuaW5maS5uZXQAAAMABhA4nxFJAwAHEMsDAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAt LS0tLS0tLS0tRlJPTTpSSUNLTU9OVEVWRVJERVNNVFA6TU9OVEVWRVJERUBXT1JMRE5FVEFUVE5F VFNFTlQ6V0VETkVTREFZLE1BWTIwLDE5OTg0OjQ2QU1UTzpWT1JURVgtAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAYgQA AF4EAAA1BwAATFpGdY3QGQD/AAoBDwIVAqQD5AXrAoMAUBMDVAIAY2gKwHNldO4yBgAGwwKDMgPG BxMCg7ozEw19CoAIzwnZOxX/eDI1NQKACoENsQtgbvBnMTAzFCALChQiDAEaYwBAIAqFCotsaTEE ODAC0WktMTQ0zw3wDNAcwwtZMTYKoANg9nQFkAVALR7nCocdmwww9R5mRgNhOh/uHmYMggfwmGlj awXQAiFldgSQgQ2wW1NNVFA6BGCJJBZAdwWwbGRuEgDULmECQC4l8V0fjyCdbwZgAjAhzyLbVwmA JfBzsGRheSwF0CtAIAHQAStgMTk5OCA0OjQ0NhNwTSa/IJ1Ubwso/yLbdhWhZXgtbEpAB5BrB3Bv LgWgbeMszyfOdWJqHqEu7yLcLmU0YCPwFgAgAiAgR2ByYXZpdCugHmFwzHVsAJA20SBlHmALgBE0 UXBoeQCQY3MvwSwgMDUwMjga7xvzbDM2HWcaOT47TR5mWZMHkCtgYnUFQHRoNrCTFgAHQCBxClBz dDfy+wQANGB3EcAFQAQAPrE/EAZpFgE+cG8gKmRv8io/kHQ/Oi87PRtMO1/8IEwSAAQgBaAAgQSB PnOrHmECYGUhsVQ+kWE+UFJoBbFzcD7QawQgb9pmPnZzNtEDkWVHAB6wuwNgA6BmB0A30EDhdwsR 1z5zPtAAIGhAImIFkEeQnxHwQWE+cAiBSlIgawng/nBBYQQgSYQjsEoACJAl0HAgdW5kBABA8DDh ZP4uR0IWAAIQFgArYEwxJaC/N8BA0BHwRxA+cUABdzawsyXwQMFhIA2wNzBjNrD/UNNL0AOgBQA+ 0B6QUZJOpp9NfStgAHBA0B5hZHVSAT9RoE+RUgJBAEBxB0Bpet9SEjawTpU38U8gUASQEcD6cD4R akvwBUBIEFgVPoB/QDFAMUrjDdAeokbgEfBy6yRAQNBiK6BuAiA2sT6Bv0ZiA5FHUANxBCAuwHcA gLsJ8EDQQgNgXOBPIElIgN9JEFlCCfBYxkrUeFjRB3FfAjBYwk+RB4BbA1RKIWW/K1E/4EEAS/FA 0AIgbCugznVNIEDxAdBrVjgwJEDzA6BHsXVnS2AJwVLxBcD1MMBsAZBnB5FRIDahSAG+YwaQCJBU wUqQWZFuRfH+YwpAAJAkQGXRU0IeYTcw2xkAPnNCCJBOEy1dU1oVf12hBUAG4FuyBCAHgFDETuhB U0FRsG8HkVtQX9f/UBFLQT/gAxA+ogtQI7AmMH838UhTX0g+EVTyZjALcG3/TWFtmFsSaYVQ0wrA UTFrIfdr2VyRKzBtAwBnYVHRDbDbZfBHcWcLcVihc1VwS2DFWiRzXaFNSE9ZRV9J/nNjMU5BS7Bs d0DBZrFRoMtZcGNhdgDQdXVrsTdA/3exZCY20T6CBbBGQkhxGSD9YpErTyMDoFEhdeBKIVByfz+Q SIRaJUAzPuEFsWsRLqk5vEt5bFFSTyBNS9BfSjBOoQSQQ7UVIQCAQAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAA AEAABzDgSd4uEYW9AUAACDDgSd4uEYW9AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AAAv3g== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD84E8.310F3040-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 17:07:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA17963; Thu, 21 May 1998 17:02:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 17:02:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 15:55:42 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 Resent-Message-ID: <"dtfHh.0.bO4.Q2CPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19030 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:42 PM 5/21/98, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: [snip ascii content] >Kyle R. Mcallister >Content-Type: application/ms-tnef > >Attachment converted: Hard Disk:RE- More on Gravity propulsion >(????/----) (0000C89E) Kyle (or anyone who knows), What did you send as an attachment? Note it is application/ms-tnef, whatever that is. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 17:23:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21025; Thu, 21 May 1998 17:20:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 17:20:52 -0700 Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 17:20:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805220020.RAA14182 pop4.ucdavis.edu> X-Sender: szdanq peseta.ucdavis.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Dan Quickert Subject: RE: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 Resent-Message-ID: <"1siN83.0.P85.ZJCPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19031 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace, >Kyle (or anyone who knows), > >What did you send as an attachment? Note it is application/ms-tnef, >whatever that is. It was probably formatting junk from Microsoft Mail (or whatever it's called this week). He may or may not be able to turn that off; I use Eudora to post to the list because of that, even though I use MS Exchange as my normal mail program. The attachment can safely be ignored... There's getting to be a lot of miscellaneous attachments coming in on Vortex, it's sometimes a pain to figure out what might be worth trying to decipher, isn't it? (hey, it's hard enough to decipher some of the *ascii* ;-) Dan Quickert From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 17:55:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA27460; Thu, 21 May 1998 17:51:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 17:51:34 -0700 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:49:32 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Subject: Greg Watson and CETI. In-Reply-To: <199805211332_MC2-3DC1-78DA compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rpv1x.0.vi6.LmCPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19032 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 21 May 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > The other group I consider frauds are the inventors and scientists who refuse > to let third parties observe their experiments and independently test their > devices, even under a non-disclosure agreement. Many scientists fall in this > category. They have done more harm than the DoE, the APS and all the other > enemies of cold fusion combined. > When Scott and I tried to independently verify the CETI device soon after the POWERGEN demo, we were refused twice. I'm now sure that the reason we were refused the second time was that Dennis Cravens tried to produce the thing on a small scale and only got a very small effect if any at all. Since then we've heard lots of rumblings about big things happening there but no output. Seriously I don't know how the POWERGEN results could have been the result of error but given the lack of reproducibility I would have to say the results are questionable. Given this it is my current view that CF is a mistake. In many cases the mistakes are honestly (if naively made). But the fact is nothing has stood up to open, honest, review or has scaled up to a full sized demo. As for Greg, my view is that he fooled himself after his lovely ramps showed a rise and drop and after he got a number to link on a level surface. It is easy to fool yourself with this scheme. You only need a little downward slope to see a roll away. I think the description of a self-sustainer was a piece of illusion based on his own self-deception. He THOUGHT he could make it work given just a bit more time. This is the classic response of lawyer "borrowing" money from a trust fund. He plans to pay it back when he takes it out, he just has to cover some short-term expenses or finance that little project.... It is all typcal behaviour. I admit I was taken in too, because I spent quite a lot of time playing with my balls :-) Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 18:23:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA28047; Thu, 21 May 1998 18:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 18:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805220115.UAA02293 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: question? Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 20:24:02 -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: <"EzwNm1.0.7s6.19DPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19033 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello All, I have a 33 amp 12 volt gel cell battery. I have (1) 500,000 MF 25 VDC and (4) 1200UF 20 VDC caps in series. I'm using a double pole dual relay to charge the caps "WHEN" the relay drops out. The relay drops out when the voltage drops to about 4.5 volts. When the relay kicks in momentairly, it charges the caps to about 9.35 volts. I added a 1,000,000 25 VDC cap in series to this system and "still" get about 9.35 volts when the relay drops out to charge the caps. The time the relay remains "kicked" in, is the same because as soon as it gets enough voltage from the caps, it "kicks" out. Should'nt the voltage drop with the added cap? Maybe someone could replicate or explain? Regards, Robert H. Calloway. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 18:43:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA06178; Thu, 21 May 1998 18:41:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 18:41:53 -0700 Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 21:40:36 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Greg Watson and CETI. Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805212140_MC2-3DD0-22BF compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA06148 Resent-Message-ID: <"BAkts1.0.NW1.VVDPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19034 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Martin I found an uphill slope guaranteed a rollaway. I couldn't get it to work on a level surface at all, if I raised the start point by 1 mm it worked and it rolled away....even uphill. Agreed, this was interesting but non-conclusive. I recall Chris Tinsley disappearing into our makeshift lab and saying he had "one more test" to do before he dismissed the whole thing. I got sidetracked and didn't observe the "one more test" but he returned saying it didn't work.....that was good enough for me. Greg promised me SMOT Mk I - I haven't received it yet. -Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 19:25:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA24421; Thu, 21 May 1998 19:20:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 19:20:57 -0700 Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 22:16:00 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Greg Watson and CETI. Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805212218_MC2-3DD2-D9FB compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"95xsC1.0.Sz5.74EPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19035 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Martin Sevior >INTERNET:msevior liszt.ph.unimelb.edu.au Martin Sevior writes: When Scott and I tried to independently verify the CETI device soon after the POWERGEN demo, we were refused twice. I'm now sure that the reason we were refused the second time was that Dennis Cravens tried to produce the thing on a small scale and only got a very small effect if any at all. Yo, Martin: Why are you sure? Did Dennis Cravens tell you that? If he did not, you should not be sure. Suspicious, maybe . . . Given this it is my current view that CF is a mistake. In many cases the mistakes are honestly (if naively made). But the fact is nothing has stood up to open, honest, review or has scaled up to a full sized demo. That's absurd. Claytor's work has stood up year after year to harsh internal reviews at Los Alamos. McKubre's work has been put through the wringer by EPRI, SRI and the peer-reviewed journals. There is a *world* of difference between their work and the preliminary, half-secret stuff that CETI has revealed. The top, mainstream CF papers are as good as the best scientific papers in any field of science, and the S/N ratio is astronomically high. The fact that an effect cannot be scaled up (or down) has never been held as a reason to disbelieve it in other fields. We cannot scale up or commercialize high temperature superconductors despite hundreds of millions of dollars of investment. We cannot scale down thermonuclear bombs, despite billions invested in Tokamak reactors. That is no reason to question their existence. I challenge Martin to show me ANY significant potential errors in papers by Claytor, McKubre, Fleischmann, Bockris, Will, Huggins, Miles or Storms. People who say "CF is a mistake" should be willing to defend their point of view. What mistake? Be specific! Get the peer reviewed paper by McKubre and show me where you think he made a mistake, or at least, where you find significant weaknesses and doubts. If you cannot point to any significant weaknesses then I say have no rational reason to doubt. Compelling, replicated, high Sigma scientific data must compel belief in a rational person. I think that a scientist cannot choose not believe without evidence, and he cannot choose *not to believe* when the evidence is overwhelming. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 19:49:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA11434; Thu, 21 May 1998 19:42:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 19:42:37 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <39256d9b.3564e577 aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 22:39:50 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"7WxKv1.0.Vo2.POEPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19036 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-21 16:21:58 EDT, you write: <> > The K ions could easily dominate the discharge > process at your estimated temperatures! > George Holz george varisys.com > Varitronics Systems Hmm...I guess thats ok.. as long as there is plenty of atomic H around to make use of all those K ions for the Mills/Farrell hydrino reactions. Thanks, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 19:57:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA14084; Thu, 21 May 1998 19:55:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 19:55:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805212140_MC2-3DD0-22BF compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 16:52:23 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Greg Watson and CETI. Resent-Message-ID: <"BB1UQ3.0.-R3.DaEPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19037 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Soo - > I couldn't get it to work on a level surface at > all, if I raised the start point by 1 mm it > worked and it rolled away....even uphill. Could you go over that in a little more detail? What exactly do you mean "uphill"? I'm assuming you don't mean it went for a net height gain... - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 20:03:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA05900; Thu, 21 May 1998 19:58:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 19:58:52 -0700 Message-ID: <3564E33B.6672 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 22:30:19 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: question? References: <199805220115.UAA02293 neon.prysm.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"gMgH91.0.cR1.gdEPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19038 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Calloway wrote: > > Hello All, I have a 33 amp 12 volt gel cell battery. I have (1) 500,000 MF > 25 VDC and (4) > 1200UF 20 VDC caps in series. I'm using a double pole dual relay to charge > the > caps "WHEN" the relay drops out. The relay drops out when the voltage drops > to > about 4.5 volts. When the relay kicks in momentairly, it charges the caps > to about > 9.35 volts. I added a 1,000,000 25 VDC cap in series to this system and > "still" get > about 9.35 volts when the relay drops out to charge the caps. The time the > relay > remains "kicked" in, is the same because as soon as it gets enough voltage > from the > caps, it "kicks" out. Should'nt the voltage drop with the added cap? > Maybe someone > could replicate or explain? Regards, Robert H. Calloway. Well, Robert, if you have caps in series, say, C1, C2, C3, C4 and C5; the total capacitance of the series, Ct, is: 1/Ct = 1/C1 + 1/C2 + 1/C3 + 1/C4 + 1/C5 so, before you add the 1,000,000 MFD in series, I get your capacitance Ct to equal 299.8 MFD. If you add the 1,000,000 MFD in series to that, you will get a "big" change to 299.7 MFD. The trick with series caps is that the reciprocal of the result is equal to the sum of the reciprocals of each series cap. Just the 4, 1200 MFD caps in series would give you 300 MFD - so you can see that the big series caps have almost no effect on the result. Why don't you connect the caps in parallel? - plus to plus and minus to minus? This is the way to get more MFDs with caps. If you did this, you just sum all the individual cap values to get: 1,000,000 + 500,000 + 1200 + 1200 + 1200 + 1200 = 1,504,800 MFD at the voltage of the lowest rated cap, = 20 VDC So, instead of 299.7 MFD with all in series, you get 1,504,800 MFD with all in parallel. NOT GOOD TO SERIES CAPS OF DIFFERENT VALUES and you still need to be very careful with added voltage dividing resistors, etc. Try them in parallel and you will see a BIG difference. Now, did I understand your circuit OK? I'm not sure! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 20:13:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA16465; Thu, 21 May 1998 20:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 20:09:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff Message-ID: <6451df4f.3564ebc6 aol.com> Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 23:06:45 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Greg Watson WAS RE: Baffling Black Box Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78 Resent-Message-ID: <"dJPXU3.0.A14.gnEPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19039 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 5/20/98 2:37:30 PM, you wrote: <> Nothing shown up here yet. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 20:40:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA16132; Thu, 21 May 1998 20:37:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 20:37:13 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <012f01bd8532$948a6a00$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 21:34:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"QUGP4.0.yx3.dBFPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19040 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some interesting similarities between K+ and Pd reactions with hydrogen, Vince. Shell "population" Element No.of Electrons K L M N H 1 1 - - - He 2 2 - - - Li 3 2 1 - - Na 11 2 8 1 - K 19 2 8 8 1 Ni 28 2 8 16 2 Pd 46 2 8 18 18 Okay? Now, an intrepid H atom gets into this "swarm" in a K+ ion or the Pd lattice and "forgets" where it's electron is supposed to be orbiting and opts for one of the higher energy electrons of the K or Pd. Walla, it forms a Hydrino-Deutrino or Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutrino releasing EUV/Heat!. :-) Time to go back and review Chemistry 101 to see why K, Pd, and Ni are preferred. Keep up the good work. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 20:47:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA17688; Thu, 21 May 1998 20:42:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 20:42:59 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <013601bd8533$6bed9300$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Greg Watson WAS RE: Baffling Black Box Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 21:40:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"d992j2.0._J4.-GFPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19041 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Puthoff To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 9:10 PM Subject: Re: Greg Watson WAS RE: Baffling Black Box Hal wrote: > >In a message dated 5/20/98 2:37:30 PM, you wrote: > ><him? Has he come through with kits, refunded money, etc.?>> > >Nothing shown up here yet. Don't hold your breath,Hal, unless it's because of the smoke from the Rain Forest Fire in Mexico. This visibility range was less than a mile here for most of the day. Regards, Frederick > >Hal Puthoff > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 20:52:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA22373; Thu, 21 May 1998 20:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 20:47:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 23:44:02 EDT To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr, vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Vesselin Petkov paper (physics/9805028 on xxx.lanl.gov) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78 Resent-Message-ID: <"n2ReG.0.NT5.vKFPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19042 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 5/20/98 7:11:39 AM, you wrote: <> >From what I can tell it is simply the difference in stored Coulomb field energy of the constituent quarks in the proton, presumably because of difference in geometry between the proton and electron. It's not clearly spelled out. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 20:58:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA20247; Thu, 21 May 1998 20:54:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 20:54:39 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <013d01bd8535$0dc33620$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: question? Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 21:52:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"84rRO.0.Hy4.-RFPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19043 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 9:02 PM Subject: Re: question? Frank Stenger wrote: > >Well, Robert, if you have caps in series, say, C1, C2, C3, C4 and C5; > >the total capacitance of the series, Ct, is: > > 1/Ct = 1/C1 + 1/C2 + 1/C3 + 1/C4 + 1/C5 > >so, before you add the 1,000,000 MFD in series, I get your capacitance >Ct to equal 299.8 MFD. If you add the 1,000,000 MFD in series to that, >you will get a "big" change to 299.7 MFD. The trick with series >caps is that the reciprocal of the result is equal to the sum of the >reciprocals of each series cap. Gee, Frank. I just finished watching "The Wizard of Oz" yesterday for the 33 1/3 time, which goes with having five grandchildren,and Darn if you don't sound just like the Straw-Man! Grinning ducking and running. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 21 21:58:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA30289; Thu, 21 May 1998 21:55:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 21:55:03 -0700 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 00:48:32 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: TOXIC Re: Request a chemist response. (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_t-XY1.0.6P7.cKGPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19044 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Do NOT fool around.... 1] get a copy of a good chemical supply handbook, they will describe toxic properties. 2] don't do chemical work unless you know what you are doing. 3] there is risk of creating organo-phosphates and halogenated OPs.... these can kill you. 4] most ER rooms can do little for you if you accidentally poison yourself with some non standard stuff. 5] many poisons will nly manifest as symptoms AFTER it is too late 6] there are many cases where there is NO SECOND CHANCE 7] things can be MUCH worse than the above 8] think about others ....you can damage them too My first response was a fast off the top of my head response in order to get the information to you as fast as possible. All the chloride containing phosphorus compounds, phosphorous trichloride, phosphorous pentachloride, phosphorous oxytrichloride, must be handled with great care. They are highly irritating and corrosive to skin and mucous membranes. They react violently with water. The same goes for the corresponding flouro and bromo compounds of phosphorous. Phosphrous pentoxide is also highly reactive with water. Goggles and rubber gloves should be worn and work with these substances should be done in a hood. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 00:04:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA13707; Fri, 22 May 1998 00:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 00:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 01:59:45 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Run 8 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ukMqD1.0.5M3.YAIPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19046 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All 32 hours of Run 8 can be studied at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run8.html Despite 8 complete charging cycles with D2 gas, no sign of excess heat was observed. I did succeed in getting deuterium to exhibit thermal relaxation oscillations similar to hydrogen (protium) but they occur in a somewhat lower pressure range. As indicated in the writeup, my next step is to invite Dr. Case to bring his apparatus to our lab for an accurate (+/- 0.5 watt or better) measurement of the heat being evolved from it. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 00:09:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA13695; Fri, 22 May 1998 00:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 00:00:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522013227.0082c720 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 01:32:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Question for Scott Little In-Reply-To: <01bd8507$f46c85a0$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"qqCWk2.0.vL3.XAIPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19045 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:29 PM 5/21/98 -0400, George Holz wrote: >Could you tell me where >to obtain the metal membrane in line H2 >purifying filter you used in your BLP >experiments. Sure George, it's REB Research (http://www.rebresearch.com). Talk to Robert Buxbaum. He'll remember me (I pestered him enuf!). I found them quite willing to work with me. For example, they were the only guys I could find who were willing to sell me the bare module, without the heaters, controls, and fancy enclosure that runs the price up into the thousands. The one I got was about $300. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 00:17:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA14530; Fri, 22 May 1998 00:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 00:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:06:14 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3565248F.6DA45E79 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:09:03 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vesselin Petkov paper... and Lockyer model References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MGiEN1.0.yY3.aNIPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19047 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Puthoff wrote: > > In a message dated 5/20/98 7:11:39 AM, you wrote: > > < electron?>> > > >From what I can tell it is simply the difference in stored Coulomb field > energy of the constituent quarks in the proton, presumably because of > difference in geometry between the proton and electron. It's not clearly > spelled out. > > Hal Puthoff Yes, this is logical, remind me Lockyer's model for elementary particles. In his model, proton and neutron is defined as nesting 18 layer of spinning cubic structures, each having alternately positive and negative charges. Each cube was made by E (electri c vector), B(magnetic vector) and S(combined vectors) vertices, S is not explicitly spelled out as Poynting vectors. What is extraordinary about Lockyer's model is the neutron and proton masses are accurately calculated using electron mass as input. What is bother me on description of gravity in general and also in Petkov paper is its static (time independent) nature. I don't believe that the gravity is induced statically, as static electric field. If Petkov paper is free of errors and ambiguities, if offer very simplistic way to describe the gravity. Of course electromagnetic origin of gravitational force is a natural choice, and from the beginning of electromagnetic theory and introducing of special relativity there was attempt to describe gravity starting from Maxwell equations. Now it is widely acc epted the incompleteness of Maxwell theory, and electro-gravity connection is realistically considered. In past, these attempts are was not successful due the to mathematical models compatible to Maxwell equations had not satisfied physical reality. Rick's question was "Yes, but the real question is: what is required to *do* it?" I have a clue: :-) Emulate the matter properties on macroscopic scale. As the matter inherent gravitational interaction, building a macroscopic system have similar quantum properties (states) of matter allows to generating gravitational interaction on macroscopic scale. Ind eed Bose-Einstein condensates having such properties and SC-gravity connection is fitting this idea. (Actually I fitted my idea to them :-) Rule is simple: If you don't know how to do it, mimic it. :-) Alternatively, the familiar electric and magnetic fields configured "appropriately" may induce gravity, by the same logic of carrying microscopic properties of matter to macroscopic scale. Essentially these fields are basic properties of the matter (parti cles), and we are using these fields comfortably for hundreds years by moving electrons in bulk. Indeed all conventional electromagnetic field we are using are scale up of the phenomena inside the matter. Ideas converge when one look the electron charge. No one yet able explain what is the charge practically. (I assume the high-energy physics have some answers using strings, with extra dimensions and with hypothetical particles and with a sophisticated mat hematical languages). But I think it (charge) should have more simplistic description why charge occurs( Ross have a complete theory on this, but I exclude it in this context as we don't know how to manage "the ether" practically) Interestingly Lockyer model of particles have not external charge attributes. Charge of the particle born from internal structure, from the topology of model. This is very promising and it is very important that his model is basically a kind of electromag netic wave or a topology of electromagnetic nodes. So his model is fully dynamic. What is missing or need to be defined is mathematical definition of the vectors (E,B,S) forming the vertices of the cube. I don't think the conventional meaning of these vec tors match his model. Actually, Lockyer's model give us an other clue about the gravity if we use mass-inertia relation. If we break the equivalence principle, we need find the origin of gravitation constant (why matter has mass and gravitational attraction, and why the all ki nd of matter have same mass/inertia ratio) from basic structure of the matter. Lockyer model is successful for calculating p/e, n/e mass ratios. This is important because the model describe the *mass* of proton not by multiplying the mass of the electron by a constant extracted from his model, but mass arose from geometrical factor by nesting 18 cubes. May a careful examination of Lockyer work could give answer about the nature of the charge and the mass or gravity. it is unfortunate that Lockyer work is not free of ambiguities, kind of logical errors and strongly leaking scientific standards. His presentation could hardly be accepted scientifically. (Lockyer has a site on web) Yesterday I encountered a new released paper on LANL archive considering negative masses and received an award. Claiming or considering highly improbable things are not handicaps on physics. Every idea, even highly unrealistic ones could be introduced and be considered seriously if presented with correct attitude and using scientific rules. I think this is the major cause of why many alternate physics theories and ideas could not found audience in main scientific area. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 03:25:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA25242; Fri, 22 May 1998 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522061629.007d74f0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 06:16:29 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Run 8 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"6RfYy2.0.GA6.h4LPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19048 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:59 AM 5/22/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >All 32 hours of Run 8 can be studied at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run8.html > >Despite 8 complete charging cycles with D2 gas, no sign of excess heat was >observed. > >I did succeed in getting deuterium to exhibit thermal relaxation >oscillations similar to hydrogen (protium) but they occur in a somewhat >lower pressure range. > >As indicated in the writeup, my next step is to invite Dr. Case to bring >his apparatus to our lab for an accurate (+/- 0.5 watt or better) >measurement of the heat being evolved from it. > Run 8 report explicitly mentions its goal to "measure" the heat, but there is still the absence of suggested features to make that claim accurate. Also, suggest you mark on the charts where the gases are inserted. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 03:41:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA27143; Fri, 22 May 1998 03:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 03:40:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <3564FF1A.59B9922C mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 04:29:15 +0000 From: "Taylor J. Smith" X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.0.31 i486) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 8 References: <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZfsCN3.0.1e6.AOLPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19049 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: ... As indicated in the writeup, my next step is to invite Dr. Case to bring his apparatus to our lab for an accurate (+/- 0.5 watt or better) measurement of the heat being evolved from it. ... Hi Scott, This is the best idea yet in the drinking bird thread, and it's generous of you. Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 03:42:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA15930; Fri, 22 May 1998 03:41:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 03:41:42 -0700 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 06:40:32 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Re: Greg Watson and CETI. Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805220640_MC2-3DDE-E6D compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id DAA15906 Resent-Message-ID: <"UISe_3.0.pu3.aPLPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19050 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick < What exactly do you mean "uphill"? I'm assuming you don't mean it went for a net height gain...> You're right, I didn't mean that, but in a sense it *did* go uphill a little. We knew the floor was completely uneven and there was a very slight elevation to the right. We compensated for this by using a technique we saw an amateur light aircraft builder use to ensure his worktable was level (with water in tubes strung along the edge of the table)....CT reckoned spirit levels were crap. But I used to purposely try to get a rollaway upwards and it worked every time, but that was with a 1mm thick washer underneath the start ramp. His last ditch attempt was carried out in the "lab" where we knew the floor was absolutely level (as far as made little difference) as it had been very professionally underpinned and reinforced following an argument with some tree roots. regards Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 03:45:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA16215; Fri, 22 May 1998 03:43:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 03:43:31 -0700 Message-Id: <199805221043.FAA25361 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Re: question? Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 05:51:41 -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: <"smP352.0.Hz3.IRLPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19051 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Francis, I'm sorry..I had a long day yesterday..I meant to say parallel. Maybe all this RF is getting to me..:) Robert Calloway. ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: question? > Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 9:30 PM > > Robert Calloway wrote: > > > > Hello All, I have a 33 amp 12 volt gel cell battery. I have (1) 500,000 MF > > 25 VDC and (4) > > 1200UF 20 VDC caps in series. I'm using a double pole dual relay to charge > > the > > caps "WHEN" the relay drops out. The relay drops out when the voltage drops > > to > > about 4.5 volts. When the relay kicks in momentairly, it charges the caps > > to about > > 9.35 volts. I added a 1,000,000 25 VDC cap in series to this system and > > "still" get > > about 9.35 volts when the relay drops out to charge the caps. The time the > > relay > > remains "kicked" in, is the same because as soon as it gets enough voltage > > from the > > caps, it "kicks" out. Should'nt the voltage drop with the added cap? > > Maybe someone > > could replicate or explain? Regards, Robert H. Calloway. > > Well, Robert, if you have caps in series, say, C1, C2, C3, C4 and C5; > > the total capacitance of the series, Ct, is: > > 1/Ct = 1/C1 + 1/C2 + 1/C3 + 1/C4 + 1/C5 > > so, before you add the 1,000,000 MFD in series, I get your capacitance > Ct to equal 299.8 MFD. If you add the 1,000,000 MFD in series to that, > you will get a "big" change to 299.7 MFD. The trick with series > caps is that the reciprocal of the result is equal to the sum of the > reciprocals of each series cap. > Just the 4, 1200 MFD caps in series would give you 300 MFD - so you can > see that the big series caps have almost no effect on the result. > > Why don't you connect the caps in parallel? - plus to plus and minus to > minus? This is the way to get more MFDs with caps. If you did this, > you just sum all the individual cap values to get: > > 1,000,000 + 500,000 + 1200 + 1200 + 1200 + 1200 > = 1,504,800 MFD at the voltage of the lowest rated cap, = 20 VDC > > So, instead of 299.7 MFD with all in series, you get 1,504,800 MFD with > all in parallel. NOT GOOD TO SERIES CAPS OF DIFFERENT VALUES and you > still need to be very careful with added voltage dividing resistors, > etc. Try them in parallel and you will see a BIG difference. > Now, did I understand your circuit OK? I'm not sure! > > Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 04:02:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA29726; Fri, 22 May 1998 03:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 03:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 13:51:33 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356558FC.B67337C4 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 13:52:44 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex , atgroup Subject: ERES additional mesurements proposal Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"x_Bw_1.0.KG7.QgLPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19052 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I propose two methods to better understand the operation: 1) Monitoring LED optical output by a opto-diode or xsistor with good freq. BW, maybe you already did them already. 2) Monitoring output power vs input power. it is possible to change input signal intensity with a resistor voltage divider if the signal generator does not allows smooth change I will doubt of extra energy production if the I/O curve is highly linear. On contrary, existence of steps and negative slops imply something interesting is occurring. To vortex: I sent a direct post to atgroup about on a extraneous pulse present on L4 shot cup41.jpg. I did not post it to vortex to not waste bw with 20 KB image data. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 04:34:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA19722; Fri, 22 May 1998 04:33:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 04:33:13 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522073217.007f6100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:32:17 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Cold Fusion In-Reply-To: <199805212218_MC2-3DD2-D9FB compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"U4Sv73.0.4q4.u9MPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19053 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:16 PM 5/21/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell, in response to Martin Sevior, wrote: >Martin Sevior writes: > When Scott and I tried to independently verify the CETI device soon > after the POWERGEN demo, we were refused twice. I'm now sure that the > reason we were refused the second time was that Dennis Cravens tried > to produce the thing on a small scale and only got a very small effect > if any at all. (zip) > Given this it is my current view that CF is a mistake. In many cases the > mistakes are honestly (if naively made). But the fact is nothing has > stood up to open, honest, review or has scaled up to a full sized demo. > >That's absurd. Claytor's work has stood up year after year to harsh internal >reviews at Los Alamos. McKubre's work has been put through the wringer by >EPRI, SRI and the peer-reviewed journals. There is a *world* of difference >between their work and the preliminary, half-secret stuff that CETI has >revealed. The top, mainstream CF papers are as good as the best scientific >papers in any field of science, and the S/N ratio is astronomically high. The >fact that an effect cannot be scaled up (or down) has never been held as a >reason to disbelieve it in other fields. We cannot scale up or commercialize >high temperature superconductors despite hundreds of millions of dollars of >investment. We cannot scale down thermonuclear bombs, despite billions >invested in Tokamak reactors. That is no reason to question their existence. > >I challenge Martin to show me ANY significant potential errors in papers by >Claytor, McKubre, Fleischmann, Bockris, Will, Huggins, Miles or Storms. Jed has some good points, and so does Martin (except for his point of lumping and dismissing all the cf phenomena). Vertical flow calorimetry can lead to the amplification of the small cf effect. This amplification effect, and driving below the noise level, produce inaccuracy, but can also give rise to large expectations from an effect which is smaller in magnitude, and generally difficult to achieve. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 04:39:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA20308; Fri, 22 May 1998 04:38:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 04:38:37 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01de01bd8575$cba68e40$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Off Topic, Class Reuion Notice Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 05:35:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"esGoK.0.9z4.yEMPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19054 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Notice to all graduates of the Acne High Class of '48. The 50th anniversary class reunion will be held on Sunday May 31st 1998, in Ashtabula. BYOL, and make sure you are armed to the teeth. Parking for heavy tanks will be provided for a modest $25.00 donation. RSVP. FJS From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 06:40:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA16432; Fri, 22 May 1998 06:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 06:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35657F95.4427 interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:37:25 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: question? References: <199805221043.FAA25361 neon.prysm.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3BXFj2.0.b04.m_NPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19055 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Calloway wrote: > > Hello Francis, I'm sorry..I had a long day yesterday..I meant to say > parallel. Maybe all this RF is getting > to me..:) Robert Calloway. > "Never mind!" Anyway, Robert, if all you do is add capacitance to the circuit, all it should do is change the "time constant" of the charge- discharge operation. I don't see why it should change your voltage control points. More capacitance means more energy stored in the caps - means it will deliver power longer to a fixed load. Did you measure the discharge time? - or is it too fast to "eyeball"? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 06:44:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA08437; Fri, 22 May 1998 06:42:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 06:42:16 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01ec01bd8587$1bef7900$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Case Run #8 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:39:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"1QAr91.0.k32.t2OPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19056 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Nice going, Scott. I think the 5+ pound O2 Cylinder that Case is using for his experiments is enough thermal mass to allow for all kinds of things to happen in the 1.5 liter gas space with the 14 or so grams of D2 and 50+ grams of catalyst. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 07:22:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA22858; Fri, 22 May 1998 07:20:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:20:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980522091906.00c23450 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:19:06 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run #8 In-Reply-To: <01ec01bd8587$1bef7900$398cbfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"oXC4j.0.1b5.3dOPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19058 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 07:39 5/22/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Nice going, Scott. Thanks >I think the 5+ pound O2 Cylinder that Case >is using for his experiments is enough thermal >mass to allow for all kinds of things to happen >in the 1.5 liter gas space with the 14 or so grams of D2 and 50+ grams of >catalyst. I agree. It's high time to make a calorimetric measurement on Case's own apparatus and find out what's really going on. Barry, are you still conscious?.... 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 May 22 07:27:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA22830; Fri, 22 May 1998 07:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980522091622.00c1d130 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:16:22 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 8 In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980522061629.007d74f0 world.std.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"N8lHV2.0.Xa5.xcOPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19057 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:16 5/22/98 -0400, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > Run 8 report explicitly mentions its goal to "measure" the heat, >but there is still the absence of suggested features to make that >claim accurate. In my Case runs, the measured Pout is precisely equal to the measured Pin. Do you suspect that this occurred because the calorimeter's zero drifted downward in precise synchrony with the appearance of an equal amount of excess heat? >Also, suggest you mark on the charts where the >gases are inserted. I tried adding arrows and labels to the graphs and didn't think it was worth the trouble. Maybe I should reconsider. Anyway, on Run 8 you can clearly see where the chamber was evacuated and pressurized by the observing the "Press" trace (cyan). When it falls abruptly to -14 psi, that means the chamber was evacuated (its a "gauge" pressure sensor)...when it rises to 50 psi that means the chamber was filled with 50 psi of deuterium. 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 May 22 07:38:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA21624; Fri, 22 May 1998 07:37:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:37:02 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8564.983CFF00 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:31:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8564.9844A020" Resent-Message-ID: <"zhdIj.0.oH5.DsOPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19059 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8564.9844A020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 6:55 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 >Kyle (or anyone who knows), >What did you send as an attachment? Note it is application/ms-tnef, >whatever that is. I didn't send an attachment. I use microsoft outlook as my mail program, perhaps it is a glitch? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8564.9844A020 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjUOAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABADgAAABSRTogTW9y ZSBvbiBHcmF2aXR5IHByb3B1bHNpb24gIGVwcmludDogcGh5c2ljcy85ODA1MDI4ANASAQWAAwAO AAAAzgcFABYACQAfAAcABQAkAQEggAMADgAAAM4HBQAWAAkAHgAHAAUAIwEBCYABACEAAABCNzRB QjEwMTU3RjFEMTExQTc1RUU4RTAwQUMxMDAwMAAFBwEDkAYADAQAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAA AAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AED480GOhb0BHgBwAAEAAAA4AAAAUkU6IE1v cmUgb24gR3Jhdml0eSBwcm9wdWxzaW9uICBlcHJpbnQ6IHBoeXNpY3MvOTgwNTAyOAACAXEAAQAA ABYAAAABvYWOQfNaDOui8VcR0ade6OAKwQAAAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAA FwAAAHN0a0BzdW5oZXJhbGQuaW5maS5uZXQAAAMABhAMQRhCAwAHEFkBAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAt LS0tLS0tLS0tRlJPTTpIT1JBQ0VIRUZGTkVSU01UUDpISEVGRk5FUkBDT1JFQ09NTkVUU0VOVDpU SFVSU0RBWSxNQVkyMSwxOTk4Njo1NVBNVE86Vk9SVEVYLUxARVNLSU1PAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAXgIA AFoCAACtBAAATFpGdf+UsDX/AAoBDwIVAqQD5AXrAoMAUBMDVAIAY2gKwHNldO4yBgAGwwKDMgPG BxMCg7ozEw19CoAIzwnZOxX/eDI1NQKACoENsQtgbvBnMTAzFCALChQiDAEaYwBAIAqFCotsaTEE ODAC0WktMTQ0zw3wDNAcwwtZMTYKoANg9nQFkAVALR7nCocdmwwwdR5mRgNhOh/uHmYMgiC2SAWw ANBlI5ANwW4EkABbU01UUDpoaE0kJEAFoQWRbS4kUHR+XR+PIJ0GYAIwIc8i21SCaAhwc2RheSwF 0BEqsCAyMSrQMTk5EDggNjoYQCBQTbMmPyCdVG8ofyLbdhWhoGV4LWxAB5BrB3Acby4lsSw/J051 YmqnHqEuXyLbUkUz0E0lgRIgAiAgRyPAdml0YysQHmFwdWwAkDZBII5lHmALgDPBcGh5AJAIY3Mv K5AwNTAyZjga7xvzMzYdZxo5PqM6vR5mS3lsI/AoBbENAHB5AiAj8HdobyCAa25vd3MpLDkuNzrf O+8edVcRwAVAZGmkZCA+EHUgEfBuQxD+YQQgA5FCwAGQEbAHgAIw6j83kE4egSA2sEUwQ9EecAtQ OHBCwDdhL21z9C10JFBmPwY//0EPHleTPmBCwGV2BJAgdEKyPQQALjmfOq0bTEdvIEm5QuJuJwVA Q3RECi5PATJ1EfAgbThwA2Bzb5MBgDYwdXQVkG9rQ7I+bSsQAMADER5hCcBhbW0q0HAEkBHAcAQg RUUgamccIHQRsD85LD1jUlVQwE1F8GwcIHMekHILTSUVIQBXwAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAA BzAAnPAdjoW9AUAACDAAnPAdjoW9AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AACoFw== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8564.9844A020-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 08:14:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA27043; Fri, 22 May 1998 08:12:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:12:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522111130.007ee100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:30 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Run 8 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980522091622.00c1d130 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980522061629.007d74f0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"_s1Mq.0.Rc6.UNPPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19060 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:16 AM 5/22/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: > >>Also, suggest you mark on the charts where the >>gases are inserted. > >I tried adding arrows and labels to the graphs and didn't think it was >worth the trouble. Maybe I should reconsider. At that magnification (try separating out and EXPANDING Pout and Pin and Plotting one vs the other), and without the arrows, it is simply not clear. The other issues remain unaddressed. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 08:32:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03099; Fri, 22 May 1998 08:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:28:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001e01bd8595$c31b27c0$3f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" , Subject: Question for the Hot Fusioneers Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:24:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"xZOVO1.0.Hm.rcPPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19061 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: What plasma temperature and N-Tau would it take to get the same conditions as a Deuteron sees in the L-shell of a Pd, Ni, or K atom? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 08:32:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA29586; Fri, 22 May 1998 08:29:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:29:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980522113237.00bcd310 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:32:37 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Case Run 8 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980522091622.00c1d130 mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19980522061629.007d74f0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"P18_F1.0.6E7.QdPPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19062 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:16 AM 5/22/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >I tried adding arrows and labels to the graphs and didn't think it was >worth the trouble. Maybe I should reconsider. Anyway, on Run 8 you can >clearly see where the chamber was evacuated and pressurized by the >observing the "Press" trace (cyan). When it falls abruptly to -14 psi, >that means the chamber was evacuated (its a "gauge" pressure sensor)...when >it rises to 50 psi that means the chamber was filled with 50 psi of deuterium. I had missed this detail. Is Case also using gage pressure? If not, does that mean that he is running at a pressure where you are seeing instabilities in deuterium but not in hydrogen? 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 May 22 08:54:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA06705; Fri, 22 May 1998 08:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35659EF8.6A8AB3D1 loc1.tandem.com> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:51:20 -0700 From: Bob Horst X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case Run 8 References: <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> <3.0.1.32.19980522091622.00c1d130@mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"doqu9.0.he1.jyPPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19063 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > I tried adding arrows and labels to the graphs and didn't think it was > worth the trouble. Maybe I should reconsider. Anyway, on Run 8 you can > clearly see where the chamber was evacuated and pressurized by the > observing the "Press" trace (cyan). When it falls abruptly to -14 psi, > that means the chamber was evacuated (its a "gauge" pressure sensor)...when > it rises to 50 psi that means the chamber was filled with 50 psi of deuterium. Scott -- For this experiment, your graph is perfectly understandable, although it would be a little easier to read with the arrows. I know what a pain it is to add the arrows, so here is another idea. Assuming you have another DA channel availble, you could add one more trace to your display, but drive it from a power supply or switch box generating 5-10 different discrete voltage levels. Each time you manually change an experiment parameter, change the voltage. Then you could just append a legend to each graph that says something like: 0=vaccuum, 1-H fill at x PSI, 2 = D fill at y PSI, 3 = heater change,... Your graphs seem to have lots of room at the bottom where this trace would not interfere with the data channel traces. -- Bob From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 09:00:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA01936; Fri, 22 May 1998 08:58:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:58:16 -0700 Message-Id: <199805221556.LAA10887 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Re: Case Run 8 Date: Fri, 22 May 98 12:01:04 -0400 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"WsDYe1.0.5U.N2QPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19064 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott wrote: >As indicated in the writeup, my next step is to invite Dr. Case to bring >his apparatus to our lab for an accurate (+/- 0.5 watt or better) >measurement of the heat being evolved from it. Good, but I hope he comes up with a self-sustainer first, then goes to EarthTech. He said his leak problems would be cured by early next week. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 09:35:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA07012; Fri, 22 May 1998 09:27:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:27:17 -0700 Message-ID: <3565D1F4.66DB bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:28:52 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 References: <01BD8564.983CFF00 oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lxEqI.0.Uj1.aTQPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19065 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > ---------- > From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 6:55 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: More on Gravity propulsion eprint: physics/9805028 > > >Kyle (or anyone who knows), > > >What did you send as an attachment? Note it is application/ms-tnef, > >whatever that is. > > I didn't send an attachment. I use microsoft outlook as my mail program, perhaps it is a glitch? > > Kyle R. Mcallister > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Part 1.2 Type: application/ms-tnef > Encoding: base64 LOL! See above. There is a way to turn the attachment off; but, you'll have to look in your 'help' file to find out how. I use Netscape email and love it. I'm glad to see Janet Reno protecting their interests. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 11:12:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA31585; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:04:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:04:54 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:04:27 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? Resent-Message-ID: <"fcDZq2.0.ui7.5vRPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19066 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:58 PM 5/21/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >-----Original Message----- >From: Horace Heffner >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Date: Thursday, May 21, 1998 12:59 PM >Subject: Re: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? > >Horace wrote: > > >>At 4:55 AM 5/21/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>>To: Vortex >>> >>>The energy required to effect fission of the >>>H-H, D-D, or H-D Bond: >>> >>>H-H, 446,000 joule/mole (4.63 ev/bond) >>>D-D, 444,000 joule/mole (4.61 ev/bond) >>>H-D, 439,000 joule/mole (4.56 ev/bond) >>> >>>In the lattice of the Pd-Carbon Catalysts this can occur at temperatures >as >>>low as 300 K as long as the necessary thermal energy is >>>provided. >> >>So, for the Case effect to occur on this basis, there must be a cycle of >>some kind, otherwise the small quantity of H2 or D2 should disappear along >>with the effect. > >Disappear,about 14 grams of D2? Your above value for mass of D2 seems way off. For Case's 1.6 liter device at 50 psia I get 0.9174 g of D2. However, I was refering to the very small volume of D2 or H2 evolved from the carbon during a run when the opposite gas is loaded into the chamber. This amount must be very small in Scott's experiment now that he is evacuating for 10 minutes between fills. My point was meant to be, if the processs is due primarily to conversion of H-D, that the process could not last long producing major heat transfer (watts) if the H-D was consumed in the process. Therefore, if your hypothesis is correct ther must be a cyclical process involved. I figured that was self evident and assumed in your thinking, but stated it anyway in an attempt at clearly defining the assumptions. > >As I see it the basic function of the catalyst >is to adsorb-absorb the D2 molecule into it's surface molecules/atoms,where >the D2 atoms tend to "forget" which electrons it belongs to, >provided the 46 electrons of the Pd or 6 electrons of the Carbon are >receiving energy >from the environment or a heat source. > >This allows for D2 + H2 ----> 2 HD or exchange >of spin types ie, Ortho-Para exchange. CATALYSTS CANNOT DRIVE ENERGETICALLY >UNFAVORABLE REACTIONS UNLESS ENERGY IS MADE AVAILABLE. But, exothermic >chemical reactions or Hydrino-Deutrino formation etc., can provide the >energy. Yes. But your hypothesis is the heat is supplied to the catalyst to drive the reaction. Therefore, the vicinity of the catalyt must cool when the reaction is being driven. The meat must be resupplied, in equilibrium, to maintain the process. The heat of recombination is released, eventually, to the top of the chamber, thus providing the heat pipe effect. > >>In this cycle the catalyst volume must cool, and the >>plenum or top of the vessel must heat due to recombination. The more this >>reaction cycle occurs the less ou the device will look, by Case's >>comparative method, because the thermocouple is located closest to the >>catalyst. If the above hypothesis is true then the H-D should produce the >>worst results (lowest catalyst temperature) due to the higher likelihood of >>the availability of the threshold thermal energy. H-D would be followed >>by D-D, followed by H-H. Therefore, producing a higher catalyst >>temperature, H2 should look like the best ingredient, which it does not, >>true? > >No. H-H bond-breaking (Fission)requires the >most energy. You cannot make new bonds 2(H-D) or 2 H <---> H-H, 2 D <---> >D-D, >DH <---> H-D until you break an H-H and a D-D set. IOW, ALL POSSIBILITIES >are going on in >the lattice of the catalyst even if it is in the first few atom layers, >provided the energy is available. That doesn't matter. If the preponderance of bond breaking is breaking of the H-H, then that process will require (take) more heat from the vicinity of the catalyst than breaking of a lessor bond. My point is that the more heat taken by the bond breaking, the cooler the calatyst area becomes with a given supply of heat fromthe bottom. The cooler the catalyst looks, the worse the results from Case's point of view, in that he records a lower temperature there. In other words, the better the heat ransfer from bottom to top of the cell, the worse the apparent COP Case gets. >From Scott's results, the thermal instability of the H2 in Case's pressure and temperature range provides better heat transfer, so the better D2 looks in relation to H2. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 14:33:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA17120; Fri, 22 May 1998 14:22:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:22:47 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980522162308.00c21d38 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:23:08 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Case Run 8 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980522113237.00bcd310 spectre.mitre.org> References: <3.0.1.32.19980522091622.00c1d130 mail.eden.com> <3.0.5.32.19980522061629.007d74f0 world.std.com> <3.0.5.32.19980522015945.00838820 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"jYpyl1.0.MB4.boUPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19067 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:32 5/22/98 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > I had missed this detail. Is Case also using gage pressure? Yes, I have a photo of his setup and he uses a simple Bourdon tube gauge. >If not, >does that mean that he is running at a pressure where you are seeing >instabilities in deuterium but not in hydrogen? Actually it's the other way around. At 50 psi (in my chamber) the instabilities occur with hydrogen but not with deuterium. Importantly, the instabilities cause the average temperature of the gas to drop. So I see cooler gas when hydrogen is in the chamber than when deuterium is in the chamber. An actual record and discussion of this can be found in the latter part of my Run 6 report (http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run6.html) where I show the Run 5 data with the Tgas trace turned on. Horace pointed out that Case's temperature probe comes down from the top of this chamber, through the gas, into a relatively shallow layer of catalyst on the bottom. If his system is exhibiting the same oscillations as mine, conduction thru the stem of the sensor could result in the "Case phenomenon" (higher sensor temps with D than with H). 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 May 22 14:52:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA21374; Fri, 22 May 1998 14:45:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 14:45:26 -0700 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:40:58 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kinetic Furnace, Case device non-updates Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805221744_MC2-3DE9-8C83 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Vy4Ar.0.pD5.s7VPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19068 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Here at Infinite Energy our efforts to verify the Kinetic Furnace (KF) and the Case device are temporarily stalled. We expect renewed progress next week. The KF was apparently damaged in transit from Georgia to New Hampshire. Pope has sent a replacement machine, which should arrive in a few days. In preliminary tests at Bow, the machine ran for 18 minutes without reaching the critical onset temperatures at which large excess heat usually appears. When we tested this unit in Georgia it reached the critical temperature in 6 minutes. Unit #2 in Georgia also reaches it in 6 minutes. These machines have been damaged on other occasions when they were shipped to test labs. I suspect two possibilities: 1. The bearings may be damaged. These are NASA developed leak-proof ceramic bearings, with tight tolerances. They are not expensive, fortunately. 2. There is a leak and a bubble, or a shard of metal blocking the flow somewhere. The replacement machine, #2, was brought up to spec after the first unit was shipped. It reportedly works better than #1. In tests in Georgia with #1 we observed a C.O.P. peak at 1.27. Pope says #2 achieves a C.O.P. greater than 2.0. Case had a pinhole leak in the new cell. His regular expert welder was busy, so an inexperienced person tried to fix the leak and ended up making three new leaks instead. Case has made an appointment with the expert on Monday. Case is now able to sustain a 200 deg C temperature in his Dewar insulated container with about 20 watts input. I hope this will be enough to allow a self-sustaining reaction, but if it is not -- because Case cannot squeeze 20 watts out of his material, the new test may still go a long way towards proving the point. As I said before, I think the biggest unknown with his present cell is gas thermal conductivity. With the present system, external heating is 92 watts and the excess is ~7 watts. Based on Mizuno's data I think this is the right order of magnitude for a conductivity artifact. I can imagine an 8% error. However I cannot imagine a conductivity artifact would allow you to reduce input power from 20 to 10 watts, a 50% difference. I do not think that any of the artifacts proposed here could produce a 50% error. On the other hand, if the new test shows 1 or 2 watts of excess heat, it could well be a conductivity artifact scaled down. Naturally our best hope remains that Case will achieve 20 watts or better, and the input can be turned off completely. I still say that would prove the issue beyond question. The debate here petered out after Merriman said he fears we will test with only one thermocouple, and I got upset with him and pointed out that we repeatedly said we would never do that. We published our plans here in detail. We said we will use a mercury thermometer plus the thermocouple. I am still upset with Barry Merriman, for two reasons: 1. He paid no attention to my earlier messages, which I copied directly to him. 2. He never retracted, apologized for missing my point, or followed up. He bugged out! This isn't fair. It isn't helpful. We are trying to work with the community here, to solicit ideas and constructive criticism. When someone catches me making a dumb mistake, like overlooking a simple statement, I immediately post a response. I say: "Whoops! Yes of course, sorry I missed your point. That settles it, I do not know of any other potential problems with your plans." Here is a last minute news flash from Case. This report is a little sketchy. Case will fax us additional information, this evening we hope, and I will post another message. Anyway, here is the story with News at Eleven, as they say on TV: Today he is running one of his old-style cells, with poor insulation. He has the temperature up 36 deg C above the hydrogen baseline, and it holding fairly steady. This is one of the biggest Delta T temperatures he has observed. I am not sure how well insulated this cell is, or what the input power is, but he is at this moment carefully reducing the heater input power to bring the temperature back down to the hydrogen baseline. He will determine whether the power reduction corresponds to the calibrated putative excess heat. In other words . . . assume this is the cell he brought to Bow and blanket heater power is 92 watts. That raised the temperature 160 deg C above ambient with hydrogen, so each watt of blanket power makes the temperature go up 1.7 deg C . . . and 1 deg C indicates 0.58 watts. Okay? So the 13.2 deg C temperature rise Gene observed indicated ~8 watts, and this 36 deg C Delta T indicates ~20 watts. Case should be able to turn the input power way down, to around 70 watts. Please note however, that heating curves are not linear at these high power levels, so I may be off by a considerable margin. My point is, if this an artifact caused by thermal conductivity it should not survive when blanket heating is reduced by ~24%. There is no way the difference between D2 and H2 would allow that! The other artifacts discussed here also seem unlikely to survive this test. On the other hand if Case finds he *cannot* back off the heater power by ~20 watts, that is good evidence this *is* an artifact. We'll see . . . If this test works it means he is up at the 20 watt range and he can generate enough power to make the insulated cell self-sustain next week. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 15:28:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA29513; Fri, 22 May 1998 15:24:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 15:24:50 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805220640_MC2-3DDE-E6D compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:24:25 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Greg Watson and CETI. Resent-Message-ID: <"8hPkR3.0.3D7.oiVPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19069 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Soo - > But I used to purposely try to get a rollaway > upwards and it worked every time, but that was > with a 1mm thick washer underneath the start > ramp. Ok, now I'm *sure* it's just all the Kona coffee molecules adhering to my synapses that is preventing me from understanding this, but I beg your continued indulgence. I still don't know quite what you mean "get a rollaway upwards". The way I'm reading this is that the start point was a bit elevated (1mm), and the ball rolls downhill into the ramp/magnet start area, then the entire ramp is tilted upwards. Well, I assume you guys must have concluded that the PE of the ball where it comes to rest is lower than what it had at the start, but from your description it still sounds like you got "real" rollaways somehow. You didn't, did you? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 15:58:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA03043; Fri, 22 May 1998 15:55:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 15:55:38 -0700 Message-Id: <199805222255.RAA21893 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Re: question? Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 18:03:59 -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: <"VzIzz1.0.Sl.f9WPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19070 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello Francis! The relay is to quick for me to measure by eyeball, I just figuired adding that much more capacitance, the relay would be noticeably slower in loading with the added capacitance. But it doesnt seem to be, so I thought I should see a voltage drop. Maybe not. I hear you are the "strawman" now.. Next thing will be Fred calling me the "tin-man"...:) You watch that fellow close Francis.. Thanks. Robert Calloway. ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: question? > Date: Friday, May 22, 1998 8:37 AM > > Robert Calloway wrote: > > > > Hello Francis, I'm sorry..I had a long day yesterday..I meant to say > > parallel. Maybe all this RF is getting > > to me..:) Robert Calloway. > > > > "Never mind!" Anyway, Robert, if all you do is add capacitance to the > circuit, all it should do is change the "time constant" of the charge- > discharge operation. I don't see why it should change your voltage > control points. More capacitance means more energy stored in the > caps - means it will deliver power longer to a fixed load. Did you > measure the discharge time? - or is it too fast to "eyeball"? > > Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 16:07:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA04998; Fri, 22 May 1998 16:05:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:05:06 -0700 From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <9271f7a3.35660478 aol.com> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 19:04:23 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Greg Watson and CETI Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"54CZW1.0.-D1.WIWPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19071 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I'm going to ANS in June. I'll try and get the scope about CETI. Frank Z From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 17:03:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA20807; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35661121.64C1 interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 19:58:25 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: question? References: <199805222255.RAA21893 neon.prysm.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qgdBq1.0.w45.X6XPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19072 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Calloway wrote: > > Hello Francis! The relay is to quick for me to measure by eyeball, I just > figuired adding that much more capacitance, the relay would be noticeably > slower in loading > with the added capacitance. You have about 1.5 farad of capacitance, Robert - so, if you charged at an average current of 30 amps: Q = C x V = 1.5 farads x 10 volts = 15 coulombs of charge on the caps at full charge. Time for 15 coulombs at 30 amps = 15/30 = 0.5 seconds. Yeh, it'll charge up pretty fast! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 17:19:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA22783; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:16:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:16:03 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:16:07 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Kinetic Furnace, Case device non-updates Resent-Message-ID: <"wzykf2.0.pZ5.2LXPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19074 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:40 PM 5/22/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >Case is now able to sustain a 200 deg C temperature in his Dewar insulated >container with about 20 watts input. I hope this will be enough to allow a >self-sustaining reaction, but if it is not -- because Case cannot squeeze 20 >watts out of his material, the new test may still go a long way towards >proving the point. Great news! Sounds like case is beginning to do some calorimetry, at least some calibrating. So he has a calorimeter constant of about 0.111 W/(deg. C). >As I said before, I think the biggest unknown with his >present cell is gas thermal conductivity. With the present system, external >heating is 92 watts and the excess is ~7 watts. Based on Mizuno's data I think >this is the right order of magnitude for a conductivity artifact. I can >imagine an 8% error. However I cannot imagine a conductivity artifact would >allow you to reduce input power from 20 to 10 watts, a 50% difference. I do >not think that any of the artifacts proposed here could produce a 50% error. If there is a phase change involved then there could be a much larger artifact than 50%. Clinker tubes, heat pipes, conduct heat very well. Only careful calorimetry or a self-sustaining run will tell the story for a poorly insulated cell. Running in the well insulated cell will eliminate cyclical phase change/state change arguments entirely though, as well as the effect if it is so based. [snip] >Today he is running one of his old-style cells, with poor insulation. He has >the temperature up 36 deg C above the hydrogen baseline, and it holding fairly >steady. This is one of the biggest Delta T temperatures he has observed. I am >not sure how well insulated this cell is, or what the input power is, but he >is at this moment carefully reducing the heater input power to bring the >temperature back down to the hydrogen baseline. He will determine whether the >power reduction corresponds to the calibrated putative excess heat. It sure would have been a good idea for him to look for a thermal waveform in the H2 run! He should be able to see such a waveform easily by carefully watching/recording the temperature data for 10 minutes. > >In other words . . . assume this is the cell he brought to Bow and blanket >heater power is 92 watts. That raised the temperature 160 deg C above ambient >with hydrogen, so each watt of blanket power makes the temperature go up 1.7 >deg C . . . and 1 deg C indicates 0.58 watts. Okay? So the 13.2 deg C >temperature rise Gene observed indicated ~8 watts, and this 36 deg C Delta T >indicates ~20 watts. Case should be able to turn the input power way down, to >around 70 watts. Please note however, that heating curves are not linear at >these high power levels, so I may be off by a considerable margin. My point >is, if this an artifact caused by thermal conductivity it should not survive >when blanket heating is reduced by ~24%. There is no way the difference >between D2 and H2 would allow that! If a phase or state change is involved 24% is small. Case's prodcedures are sure to introduce water, and we already know that a phase change can occur between the top and bottom of his cell at the temperature/pressure range in which he operates. >The other artifacts discussed here also >seem unlikely to survive this test. On the other hand if Case finds he >*cannot* back off the heater power by ~20 watts, that is good evidence this >*is* an artifact. We'll see . . . That's not an accurate test. If a cyclical phase change is operational in a narrow pressure/temperature range, changing that range is bound to get different results. Scott's work indicates there *is* such a narrow range of pressure/temperature operant. The fact that it is isotopically dependent indicates a narrow range also. > >If this test works it means he is up at the 20 watt range and he can generate >enough power to make the insulated cell self-sustain next week. > >- Jed Thanks for the interesting and exciting update. Best wishes for success! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 17:20:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA22742; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:15:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:15:57 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:16:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: question? Resent-Message-ID: <"eU9YR2.0.GZ5.yKXPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19073 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:03 PM 5/22/98, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello Francis! The relay is to quick for me to measure by eyeball, I just >figuired adding that much more capacitance, the relay would be noticeably >slower in loading >with the added capacitance. But it doesnt seem to be, so I thought I should >see a >voltage drop. Maybe not. I hear you are the "strawman" now.. Next thing >will be >Fred calling me the "tin-man"...:) You watch that fellow close Francis.. >Thanks. >Robert Calloway. If Frank is the strawman, then I'd be very happy to be the lion - 'cause I'm terrrrrrrrribly afraid of this experiment'n stuff. Come to think of it, maybe Fred Sparber is better qualified to be the lion. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 17:27:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA24565; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:22:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:22:56 -0700 Message-Id: <199805230022.TAA26277 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Re: question? Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 19:31:15 -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: <"Dc98F2.0.l_5.WRXPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19075 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Horace! Who's To-To? :) Regards, Robert Calloway. ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: question? > Date: Friday, May 22, 1998 7:16 PM > > At 6:03 PM 5/22/98, Robert Calloway wrote: > >Hello Francis! The relay is to quick for me to measure by eyeball, I just > >figuired adding that much more capacitance, the relay would be noticeably > >slower in loading > >with the added capacitance. But it doesnt seem to be, so I thought I should > >see a > >voltage drop. Maybe not. I hear you are the "strawman" now.. Next thing > >will be > >Fred calling me the "tin-man"...:) You watch that fellow close Francis.. > >Thanks. > >Robert Calloway. > > > If Frank is the strawman, then I'd be very happy to be the lion - 'cause > I'm terrrrrrrrribly afraid of this experiment'n stuff. Come to think of > it, maybe Fred Sparber is better qualified to be the lion. 8^) > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 17:41:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA26069; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:35:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hydrogen-Deuterium Bond Splitting in Pd-Carbon. Case? Resent-Message-ID: <"FN6s2.0.FN6.EfXPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19076 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:04 AM 5/22/98, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 2:58 PM 5/21/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >>No. H-H bond-breaking (Fission)requires the >>most energy. You cannot make new bonds 2(H-D) or 2 H <---> H-H, 2 D <---> >>D-D, >>DH <---> H-D until you break an H-H and a D-D set. IOW, ALL POSSIBILITIES >>are going on in >>the lattice of the catalyst even if it is in the first few atom layers, >>provided the energy is available. > >That doesn't matter. If the preponderance of bond breaking is breaking of >the H-H, then that process will require (take) more heat from the vicinity >of the catalyst than breaking of a lessor bond. My point is that the more >heat taken by the bond breaking, the cooler the calatyst area becomes with >a given supply of heat fromthe bottom. The cooler the catalyst looks, the >worse the results from Case's point of view, in that he records a lower >temperature there. In other words, the better the heat ransfer from bottom >to top of the cell, the worse the apparent COP Case gets. [snip] Oh course you could argue that, considering a *pure* H2 environment vs a *pure* D2 environment, that the energy to break the H-H bond is less likely to be carried by individual molecules of H2 gas at the same temperature as the D2 gas, thus less heat transfer would occur, thus hydrogen would look more ou than D2. But H2 doesn't look more ou than D2, so that is a moot point. It is also interesting that H2 is comprised of a portion of DH and D2. I don't know how pure the D2 gas is, how free it is of protium. DH, having a lessor binding energy, should provide much more likely state change heat transfer, so H2 gas should look much cooler than a pure D2 in the case cell, if DH is the major player and the D2 is pure. Again, it would be a scientifically meaningful, though tangential, experiment to check out a 50-50 mixture of H2 and D2, which would quickly become mostly DH, to see how important DH is to the thermal conductivity. Though this would answer some questions, it is relatively unimportant compared to doing calorimetry or obtaining a self-sustainer. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 17:45:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA26804; Fri, 22 May 1998 17:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:43:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 16:41:51 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: question? Resent-Message-ID: <"vZeJb3.0.kY6.wkXPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19077 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:31 PM 5/22/98, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello Horace! Who's To-To? :) Regards, Robert Calloway. Hmmmm..., a well beloved little troube maker that yaps a lot... I refuse to answer on the grounds that's not a self incriminating question! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 18:08:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA00680; Fri, 22 May 1998 18:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 18:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 17:03:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case Run 8 Resent-Message-ID: <"5XWwB1.0.XA.I3YPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19078 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:59 AM 5/22/98, Scott Little wrote: >All 32 hours of Run 8 can be studied at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/run8.html If liquid-gas phase change is involved, and the quantity of liquid is very small, then maybe there is an explanation for the temperature waveform with the spike. The spike at the end could be due to a sudden boiloff. The liquid condenses and falls on the catalyst, cooling it. It works its way down to the heating surface. When it boils, as the amount of water remaining to boil diminishes, and as the last of the water makes it to the bottom of the catalyst bed, the cooling effect of water boiling/evaporating from the catalyst surface diminishes, and the last bit of water on the catalyst surface rapidly evaporates from the steam heat from the last of the water on the bottom of the cell plus the rising temperature of the catalyst due to direct heat transfer from the bottom, thus producing the spike at the end of the thermal pulse in the gas temperature. The cycle doesn't begin again until enough water condenses on top to drip. A bit of a wild idea, but not too far fetched? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 18:14:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA01263; Fri, 22 May 1998 18:13:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 18:13:22 -0700 Message-Id: <199805230113.UAA28691 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Re: question? Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 20:21:39 -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: <"NKZ_S3.0.fJ.nAYPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19079 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Horace! Oh..! You must mean the bad old witch of the south.. or was it north? Hell... I cant keep series and parallel straight.. much less north and south..:) Regards, Robert Calloway. ---------- > From: Horace Heffner > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: question? > Date: Friday, May 22, 1998 7:41 PM > > At 7:31 PM 5/22/98, Robert Calloway wrote: > >Hello Horace! Who's To-To? :) Regards, Robert Calloway. > > Hmmmm..., a well beloved little troube maker that yaps a lot... > > I refuse to answer on the grounds that's not a self incriminating question! > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 20:18:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26577; Fri, 22 May 1998 20:13:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 20:13:01 -0700 Message-Id: <199805230311.XAA01528 mercury.mv.net> Subject: Excellent News from Dr. Case! Date: Fri, 22 May 98 23:13:25 -0000 x-sender: zeropoint-ed pop.mv.net x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: "E.F. Mallove" To: "VORTEX" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Resent-Message-ID: <"GApYs3.0.9V6.ywZPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19080 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians: Jed Rothwell just heard this from me, but I am so happy about the news, I thought I'd send this in parallel with Jed's likely transmission to you: Fax recceived at Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. May 22, 1998, 9:35 p.m. from Fusion Power, Inc.: ************************************** May 22, 1998 Scott Little EarthTech (By Fax) Dear Scott:. I have now received and checked out the G-75E, the exact same batch you received and used. It is very active, showing a temperature increase of 36 deg C for D2 over H2, almost three times what Gene and I obtained with G-75D. Further, I cut back on the power in, to maintain the temperature near what was obtained with H2, namely 190 deg C and which required 93 watts. With D2, 73.5 watts were required to maintain 193 deg C. And 71 watts maintained 186 deg C. Thus, about 73 watts or less maintained 190 deg C. By difference, the D2 fusion supplied about 20 watts or slightly more, for 45.8 grams of catalyst. Thus, the power output was in the range of 0.4 to 0.5 watts per gram. It seems very clear that there is some fundamental flaw in your equipment or technique. Unfortunately, I am quite busy, and have no time for anomalous results. Very truly yours, Les Case Fusion Power, Inc. [Handwritten portion on Gene's fax from Les Case:] "Gene: Given the surprisingly large delta-T, everything is consistent with what we found. Self-sustainment seems near at hand, maybe (probably?) next week." *********************************************** Best wishes and "Happy Cold Fusion Age -- we hope, all fingers crossed for the final step!" Gene Dr. Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief Infinite Energy Magazine Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Ph: 603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 editor infinite-energy.com P.S. Infinite Energy magazine, Issue #19, with the first installment on Dr. Case's work, has just been mailed. Issue #20, with much more on these developments will be out in July. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 20:50:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA22107; Fri, 22 May 1998 20:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 20:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 23:41:31 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Message from Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805222344_MC2-3DF1-14B0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"CsV4e3.0.LP5.aQaPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19081 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Well, I transcribed the fax from Case and I am ready to upload it, but Gene beat me to the punch . . . Anyway, here is the editorial message I wrote to go along with it. I was right, for once! I predicted the temperature Case should see, and he saw it. We are not out of the woods yet, but the first phase worked. Power was successfully reduced and the temperature remained high. This does not eliminate the possibility of an artifact, but it does mean that Case can proceed to the self-sustainer test next week. I think today's test eliminates some classes of artifacts, especially the ones I have been worrying about: gas conductivity. Horace Heffner points out that phase changes are still a possibility. Scott Little observes a large temperature difference between the top and bottom of his cell. This is a much larger thermal gradient than I would have predicted, and it is cause for concern, because it might cause (or reflect) some kind of artifact. Attached is a fax that Case sent to Scott Little with a copy to us. This note may sound a little bombastic and dismissive towards Scott Little, but the tone should be discounted a bit. This is how Case talks. His first presentation at ICCF7 was worse! If Case succeeds with the self-sustainer then of course his judgement of Little's experiment will be vindicated: it will prove there is "some fundamental flaw in the equipment or technique." I am sure there is no fault in Little's calorimetry itself, and off-hand I cannot see what error he might be making in the technique, but there are many large differences in temperature, pressure, geometry and so on. If the self-sustainer works, Little will be motivated to track down the crucial differences. I'd like to point out something about the calorimeter. I am sure Little's calorimeter does measure heat correctly, but it might not "work" in the sense that it might have a deleterious effect on the experiment. It might prevent the reaction! The calorimeter is not a passive element. It removes heat from the cell, and heat plays a vital role in this reaction. Some calorimeters remove the heat too quickly or unevenly. A thermal shock will stop the reaction; that is how Case turns his cells off. It sounds far-fetched, but I think the calorimeter-as-culprit hypothesis should be taken seriously. Fleischmann is convinced flow calorimeters inhibit the all-important feedback loop that pushes Pd-D2O CF into higher and higher levels of performance. By the end of ICCF6, McKubre said Fleischmann may be right. Don't forget there might be unknown differences between batches of G-75E catalyst. Hidden differences in materials have plagued this field from day one. - Jed May 22, 1998 Scott Little EarthTech (by fax) Dear Scott: I have now received and checked out the G-75E, the exact same batch you received and used . . . [Since Gene uploaded this, I'll delete the rest.] From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 21:00:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA23125; Fri, 22 May 1998 20:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 20:58:27 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 06:50:06 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <35664891.49E6BEF3 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 06:54:57 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: ... Paper on negative mass: gr-qc/9805075 References: <01BD8566.1C8B6DE0 oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cEybt.0.Ef5.XbaPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19082 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > > >Yesterday I encountered a new released paper on LANL archive > >considering negative masses and received an award. [snip] > Which paper was it? I'd like to read it. > > Best regards, > Kyle R. Mcallister General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, abstract gr-qc/9805075 From: TORRES Diego Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 16:36:31 GMT (9kb) Wormholes, Gamma Ray Bursts and the Amount of Negative Mass in the Universe Authors: Diego F. Torres, Gustavo E. Romero, Luis A. Anchordoqui Comments: Essay awarded ``Honorable Mention'' in the Gravity Foundation Research Awards, 1998 In this essay, we assume that negative mass objects can exist in the extragalactic space and analyze the consequences of their microlensing on light from distant Active Galactic Nuclei. We find that such events have very similar features to some observed Gamma Ray Bursts and use recent satellite data to set an upper bound to the amount of negative mass in the universe. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 21:15:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA01792; Fri, 22 May 1998 21:07:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 21:07:31 -0700 Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 00:00:59 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: case's old unit running Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"sdcfK1.0.wR.2kaPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19083 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Dr. Case and Vo., If you have a running 'old style' unit then it should be a simple matter to insulate it, while you are waiting for the new one. Some suggestions for a layered 'po boy' insulation I have used in the past. The layers are from container outward; a] standard pink, yellow or white fiber glass, one layer, same as used ofr building insulation, abbreviated FG. b] heavy aluminum foil, shiney side in. c] FG d] foil To this point everything should be loose e] FG f] foil ... this last should be sealed with metal aluminum duct tape g] 3 sets of foil and FG, but use 1 inch FG. h] one last set foil... and seal with tape. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 23:01:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA10391; Fri, 22 May 1998 22:55:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 22:55:06 -0700 Message-ID: <356656D6.5553 earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 23:55:51 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rmforall earthlink.net, Vortex-L@eskimo.com, info@csicop.org, letters csicop.org, europe@csicop.org, skeptic@listproc.hcf.jhu.edu, neonleo aol.com, editors@sciam.com Subject: Murray: Puthoff: biography & reports 05/22/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5iFEj3.0.CY2.vIcPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19084 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: May 22, 1998 [Comments by Rich Murray] Today I found in Skeptical Inquirer, May-June, 1998, pages 13-15 and 60, "Zero-Point Energy and Harold Puthoff", by Marin Gardner, now 83, the eminent skeptical writer, whom I have long enjoyed and respected for his erudition, clarity, and decency. I am saddened to find that his usually fully justified skepticism has caused him to portray Hal Puthoff [puthoff aol.com] in an unfairly biased fashion. This in turn reflects on the credibility of Skeptical Inquirer and CSICOP. I have perused every issue of SI, and as a psychic and mystic, value and appreciate their commitment to fair and rigorous, albeit lively, skepticism. The enclosed list of Puthoff's papers show that the papers which Gardner describes as: "Many of Puthoff's recent conjectures are far out on the fringe of physics.", which I have copies of, and know to be mathematically detailed, on stability of matter, on gravity, and on inertia as derivable from zero-point fluctuations, have been published in Physics Review in 1987, 1989, 1993, and 1994: these papers received very supportive welcome in The Sciences (NY Academy of Sciences), (Nov/Dec 1994). If this peer-reviewed work has attracted any expert critical rejection, I would like to have the references. It is, of course, still true, as Gardner hastened to cite, that Puthoff has often speculated much more freely in some very fringy publications. As an amateur, I have been involved for two years in critical discussions of cold fusion and new energy research, first with naive enthusiasm and for 16 months as a pragmatic skeptic, and so I can testify that Puthoff and his very competent experimentalist, Scott Little, of EarthTech International, have systematically, painstakingly, and publicly proved null results with a number of systems: including the Potapov generator, the Ragland electrolytic cell, and the CETI Patterson cell. Since I have the soapbox for a frail moment, I want to yield to the eminent Gardner's article: "Other physicists have since proposed slightly different ways a quantum fluctuation in a vacuum devoid of space and time could create a runaway universe, though how something could fluctuate without space and time is unclear. Of course our universe could not emerge from absolutely nothing. There would have to be quantum fields to fluctuate, leaving unanswered the ultimate question of where quantum fields and their laws come from, or why there is something rather than nothing." I ask, "Three centuries after Newton, is science almost finished, or barely beginning?" Harold E. Puthoff, PhD http://www.eden.com/~little/ EarthTech International EarthTech International [Austin, Texas] is dedicated to the exploration of new frontiers in physics. Our activities are primarily centered around investigations into various aspects of the zero-point field. In addition we perform evaluations of reported "over-unity" energy devices. We specialize in performing accurate power-balance measurements using calorimetry. H.E. Puthoff, PhD.....President, physicist, theoretician (biography) Scott R. Little.....experimentalist, physicist, mechanical engineer David B. Clifton.....experimentalist, physicist, electrical engineer EarthTech Calorimetry Experiments, Reports, etc. Photo Gallery …………………………………Here's an Austin map with directions to EarthTech http://www.eden.com/~little/halbio.html [start of Harold E. Puthoff biography] BIOGRAPHY H. E. Puthoff, Ph.D. Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin 4030 Braker Lane W., Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78759 Dr. Harold E. Puthoff is Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin. A theoretical and experimental physicist specializing in fundamental electrodynamics, his research ranges from theoretical studies of quantum vacuum states as they apply to the stability of matter, gravitation, cosmology and energy research, to laboratory studies of innovative approaches to energy generation. A graduate of Stanford University in 1967, he has published over 30 technical papers in the areas of electron-beam devices, lasers and quantum zero-point-energy effects,* has patents issued and pending in the laser, communications, and energy fields, and is co-author of a textbook Fundamentals of Quantum Electronics (Wiley, 1969), published in English, French and Russian. Dr. Puthoff's professional background includes engineering work at General Electric and Sperry; three and a half years with the U.S. Department of Defense, where his work on high-speed opto-electronic computers resulted in the award of a DoD Certificate of Commendation for Outstanding Performance; post-doc appointments at Stanford University as Research Associate, Ginzton Laboratories, and Lecturer, Dept. of Electrical Engineering; Director of the Cognitive Sciences Program at SRI International for over a decade, where he was responsible for large-scale, innovative, government-funded research programs; and, since 1985, Director of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin. Puthoff regularly serves various government agencies, the Executive Branch and Congress as consultant on leading-edge technologies and future technology trends; is a member and officer of several professional organizations (NY Academy of Sciences, Amer. Assoc. for the Advancement of Science, Amer. Physical Soc., Soc. for Scientific Exploration); is listed in American Men and Women of Science, Who's Who in Science and Engineering, Who's Who in the South and Southwest and in Who's Who in the World; and has been designated a Fetzer Fellow (1991). *See, for example, recent publications: H. E. Puthoff, "Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-Point-Fluctuation-Determined State," Phys. Rev. D 35, 3266 (1987). H. E. Puthoff, "Zero-Point Fluctuations of the Vacuum as the Source of Atomic Stability and the Gravitational Interaction, "Proc. of the British Soc. for the Philosophy of Science Intern'l Conf. "Physical Interpretations of Relativity Theory," Imperial College, London, ed. M. C. Duffy (Sunderland Polytechnic, 1988). H. E. Puthoff, "Gravity as a Zero-Point-Fluctuation Force," Phys. Rev. A 39, 2333 (1989); Phys. Rev A 47, 3454 (1993). H. E. Puthoff, "On the Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic Zero-Point Energy," Phys. Rev. A 40, 4857 (1989); Errata and Comments, Phys. Rev. A 44, 3382, 3385 (1991). H. E. Puthoff, "Everything for Nothing," New Sci. 127, 52 (28 July 1990). H. E. Puthoff, "The Energetic Vacuum: Implications for Energy Research," Spec. in Sci. and Technology 13, 247 (1990). H. E. Puthoff, "Zero-Point Energy: An Introduction," Fusion Facts 3, No. 3, 1 (1991). H. E. Puthoff, "On the Feasibility of Converting Vacuum Electromagnetic Energy to Useful Form," Intern'l Workshop on the Zeropoint Electromagnetic Field," Cuernavaca, Mexico, March 29 - April 2, 1993. D. C. Cole and H. E. Puthoff, "Extracting Energy and Heat from the Vacuum," Phys. Rev. E 48, 1562 (1993). See also Fusion Facts 5, No. 3, 1 (1993). B. Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff, "Inertia as a Zero-Point Field Lorentz Force," Phys. Rev. A 49, 678 (1994). See also Science 263, 612 (1994). B. Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff, "Beyond E = mc2," The Sciences (NY Acad. of Sciences) 34, 26 (Nov/Dec 1994). H. E. Puthoff, "SETI, The Velocity-of-Light Limitation, and the Alcubierre Warp Drive: An Integrating Overview," Physics Essays 9, 156 (1996). B. Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. E. Puthoff. "Physics of the Zero-Point Field: Implications for Inertia, Gravitation and Mass," Spec. in Sci. and Technology 20, 99 (1997). H. E. Puthoff, "Space Propulsion: Can Empty Space Itself Provide a Solution?" Ad Astra 9 (National Space Society), 42 (Jan/Feb 1997). H. E. Puthoff, "Can the Vacuum be Engineered for Spaceflight Applications? Overview of Theory and Experiments," Proc. NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop, NASA Lewis Research Center, August 1997 (in press). H. E. Puthoff and M. A. Piestrup, "On the Possibility of Charge Confinement by van der Waals/Casimir-type Forces," subm. to Phys. Lett. B (1997). H. E. Puthoff, "The New Vision in Physics and Cosmology," State of the World Forum, San Francisco (Nov. 4-9, 1997). H. E. Puthoff, "Condensed-Charge Technology," Technical briefing package, including vugraphs and videotape, presented to numerous government agencies and panels, corporations, and academic colloquia, 1987 - present. [end of Puthoff biography] A nice photo and more life details and publications are at: http://www.fringeware.com/~hambone/web/puthoff.html Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 22 23:21:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA11793; Fri, 22 May 1998 23:15:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 23:15:05 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980523011542.00831200 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 01:15:42 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Case Zero Run Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"nqCA3.0.Bu2.ebcPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19085 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: After Run 8 I decided to check the zero on the calorimeter system used for our Case experiments. Today I ran the system just as I had for the Case runs except no power was delivered to the chamber heaters. The results were quite satisfactory and do not alter our conclusions about the Case runs. The data, with comments, may be viewed at: http://www.eden.com/~little/case/zero5.html Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 00:59:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA18529; Sat, 23 May 1998 00:55:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 00:55:53 -0700 Message-ID: <3566734B.EE7 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 01:57:15 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Clifford A. Pickover, genius 05/23/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pQ-6t3.0.RX4.84ePr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19086 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/home.htm My primary interest is finding new ways to continually expand creativity by melding art, science, mathematics and other seemingly-disparate areas of human endeavor. I seek not only to expand the mind, but to shatter it. Clifford A. Pickover Research Staff Member IBM Thomas Watson Research Center cliff watson.ibm.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 04:22:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA23029; Sat, 23 May 1998 04:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 04:19:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <010801bd863c$116da500$3f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Dr. Case's Miracle Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 05:14:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"9cgsG.0.ld5.E3hPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19087 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Here's what we're looking at: Our Sun Surface Temp 6050 C Volume 1.44E33 cm^3 Mass 2.0E33 grams Heat out 3.86E26 watts watts/gram 3.86E26/2.0E33 = 1.93E-7 watts/cm^3 3.86E26/1.44E33 = 2.69E-7 Dr. Case's Miracle Catalyst Temperature 180 C (avg) watts/gram 0.4 - 0.5!! watts/cm^3 1.0 - 1.25!! Arrogance has a price. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 04:38:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA30036; Sat, 23 May 1998 04:35:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 04:35:04 -0700 Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 06:34:28 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805231134.GAA03381 dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: What's the definition in Case's device? To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"HT_58.0.9L7.dHhPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19088 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 23, 1998 To Vortex, I must have missed someone describe "self-sustaining" in Case's device. What setup conditions and output is being sought to have excess energy output from Case's new improved device be described as "self sustaining"? Or am I asking too much? -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 07:14:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA04048; Sat, 23 May 1998 07:10:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 07:10:49 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC Message-ID: <4cbb9711.3566d842 aol.com> Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 10:08:01 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Puthoff@aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"zRVRY.0.A_.dZjPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19089 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I spent the the 1980's and 1990's studying physics and preforming ZPE experiments. In fact, I'm still going to college and just got another A in my latest adventure programming with C++. For the longenst time I was sure, opportunity was just around the next bend. Scientific educuation and ZPE were the keys to the fucture. If I didn't have it myself I would find out who had it first and invest in it! If I knew how electrons interact I could make top dollar! ......................................................... If I had to do it all over again I would have put ZPE on the back burner and devoted an equal zeal (with the limited free time that I had) to investments and the stock market. for example................................................................. $2,000 invensted in INTEL in 1983 would be worth $5 million today. Fidelity home finance FSVLX has yielded 30.34% on average over the last five years. Over the last ten it has yielded 26.83%. At 30% money doubles every 2.4 years. If you had invested in FSVLX where would you be now? Benham BEQGX Equity Growth has doubled in value over the last three years. It has no loads and a very small management fee. In the 1980's I never bothered to ask what an equity option was. I believed, "Management fees that was for someone else. I was thinking, got to tap the ZPE. No time for the other stuff." This was a very big mistake. Microsoft has be growing at 40% a year. I used MS DOS in the late 1980's. Was I blinded by imaginary cold fusion opportunities? I should have saw the opportunity that was in the disk right in my hand. Iomega increased in value by a factor of 40 between 1992 and 1996. Instead of looking to Power Gen I should have been looking at the memory crunch and backup problems with my hard drive. I even bought one of these IOMEGA devices and thought about the technology but not about the opportunity. I was not very bright at all. .................................................................. For me in my life time the real opportunity has not been in ZPE but rather in the market. In 1990 I began to wake up. Finally for the last three years I have been doing the right stuff. For the prior 20 years of my working life I let much of the real opportunity go right down the drain. Stick these numbers into your calculartor. What opportunity have you lost? For those of who post frequently on the Vortex it my be time to refocus. Take it from me I've been there. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 07:29:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA10422; Sat, 23 May 1998 07:26:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 07:26:03 -0700 Message-ID: <3566DC96.3C8F interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 10:26:30 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost References: <4cbb9711.3566d842 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"UkAng.0.mY2.wnjPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19090 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC wrote: > > For those of who post frequently on the Vortex it my be time to refocus. Take > it from me I've been there. Dang it Frank! - sounds like we've lost you to wall street. Now we know where to come for funds! :-) Frank S. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 08:35:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA14949; Sat, 23 May 1998 08:30:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 08:30:38 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <013601bd865f$725db1c0$3f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 09:28:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"7G76u1.0.Uf3.TkkPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19091 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 23, 1998 8:26 AM Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost >FZNIDARSIC wrote: >> > >> For those of who post frequently on the Vortex it may be time to refocus. Take >> it from me I've been there. > >Dang it Frank! - sounds like we've lost you to wall street. Now we >know where to come for funds! :-) Which one of us is the BROKER-BROKEST? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Frank S. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 08:37:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA16092; Sat, 23 May 1998 08:34:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 08:34:46 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 07:34:47 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost Resent-Message-ID: <"HbPeu.0.Hx3.MokPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19092 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:08 AM 5/23/98, FZNIDARSIC wrote: [snip] >Stick these numbers into your calculartor. What opportunity have you lost? >For those of who post frequently on the Vortex it my be time to refocus. Take >it from me I've been there. Free energy research has less chances of payoff than winning a big lottery. It is a way of *giving* to society, not taking. On the other hand, the rewards could be much greater, and it doesn't hurt to dream, as long as you are realistic about the odds. The rewards for me have been in the *learning.* The stock market boom is history. If you have big bucks invest in rental properties on a low margin - at least that will give you a job renting it and keeping it up. Otherwise, invest at least 50 percent in something secure, like government securities. You can't relive the past, unless its cyclical, but then you have to wait for the cycle to return to catch the wave. The stock market wave is about to crest big time, IMHO. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 10:55:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08870; Sat, 23 May 1998 10:45:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 10:45:50 -0700 Message-Id: <199805231745.NAA26925 mail.enter.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robert G. Flower" Organization: Applied Science Associates To: FZNIDARSIC , vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 14:02:54 -0500 Subject: Re: Update Low level nuclear reaction conference Reply-to: chronos enter.net Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52) Resent-Message-ID: <"qLX_V1.0.VA2.CjmPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19093 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 19 May 98 at 14:24, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: > From: FZNIDARSIC > Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 14:24:45 EDT > Low level nucear reaction conference. "cold fusion conference" > Date Wednsday June 9 and Workshop Wednsday June 10th. > Place Opprey Land Hotel Nashville. Do you have specific data such as e-mail, phone, fax, or address of the organizers? (Sorry if I missed it.) Best regards, Bob Flower ============================================= Robert G. Flower - Applied Science Associates > Scientific Software & Instrumentation < > Quality Control Engineering < ============================================= From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 15:25:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA07500; Sat, 23 May 1998 15:21:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 15:21:07 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 12:20:20 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost Resent-Message-ID: <"-TmsB2.0.0r1.IlqPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19094 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - > Free energy research has less chances of payoff > than winning a big lottery. It is a way of > *giving* to society, not taking. Bingo! > The stock market boom is history. ...and again. All stock market activity except that occuring at this very instant is by definition history. The rest is pure risk. If you can afford it, or you're very very smart and/or an insider, or are just damn lucky, go for it. Otherwise, a person could go out and actually do something valuable with their life instead of just scrambling over money. I think Frank's investigations into ZPE and gravity and so forth have been more valuable than he believes. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 16:01:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18650; Sat, 23 May 1998 15:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 15:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 14:57:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity Resent-Message-ID: <"8ZObJ2.0.JZ4.rIrPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19095 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:20 PM 5/23/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: >I think Frank's investigations into ZPE and gravity and so forth have been >more valuable than he believes. Yes, I do also. And it is way to early to know all of what good he has done or who he has inspired to go further. It is said most men lead lives of quiet desperation. I know for sure, from his postings, and his video, that Frank's exploits have given him many hours of great excitement, interest and joy. There's a lot positive to be said for that. It's an interestng life - and that's almost always a curse and a joy at the same time. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 17:01:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA23676; Sat, 23 May 1998 16:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 16:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980523185743.00831a80 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 18:57:43 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: What's the definition in Case's device? In-Reply-To: <199805231134.GAA03381 dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"uSc-_3.0.sn5.zAsPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19096 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:34 AM 5/23/98 -0500, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >What setup conditions and output is being sought to have excess energy >output from Case's new improved device be described as "self >sustaining"? Hi Aki, It's a simple concept. Case's effect is stimulated by applying heat (not electrical current). Once stimulated it apparently produces excess heat....the same thing that stimulated it. Thus it should be possible to construct a sufficiently well-insulated device that, once started, will sustain itself and stay hot WITHOUT external heat input. Case is presently trying to achieve this goal. To my knowledge, he has not yet succeeded. I hope to hear from him within a week or two. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 17:36:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21932; Sat, 23 May 1998 17:30:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 17:30:07 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980523202911.007cd100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 20:29:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: What's the definition in Case's device? In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980523185743.00831a80 mail.eden.com> References: <199805231134.GAA03381 dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"vZW_5.0.XM5.FesPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19098 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:57 PM 5/23/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 06:34 AM 5/23/98 -0500, Akira Kawasaki wrote: > >>What setup conditions and output is being sought to have excess energy >>output from Case's new improved device be described as "self >>sustaining"? > >Hi Aki, > >It's a simple concept. Case's effect is stimulated by applying heat (not >electrical current). Once stimulated it apparently produces excess >heat....the same thing that stimulated it. Thus it should be possible to >construct a sufficiently well-insulated device that, once started, will >sustain itself and stay hot WITHOUT external heat input. Why is it simple? It would seem that the second system is much more complicated than Case's original design, and be more difficult to achieve. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 17:41:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA27059; Sat, 23 May 1998 17:29:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 17:29:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980523202653.007cb7c0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 20:26:53 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Case Zero Run Cc: little eden.com In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980523011542.00831200 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"E7Gwm3.0.jc6._dsPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19097 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:15 AM 5/23/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >After Run 8 I decided to check the zero on the calorimeter system used for >our Case experiments. Today I ran the system just as I had for the Case >runs except no power was delivered to the chamber heaters. > >The results were quite satisfactory and do not alter our conclusions about >the Case runs. > >The data, with comments, may be viewed at: > >http://www.eden.com/~little/case/zero5.html > > Good start to study the intrinsic nature of the system, including the response time which does seem to be several hours. Suggest a ten hour baseline (omitted in run "zero") followed by a step function (i.e. up, plateau, then down), then another (minimum) 10 hour fall off to get the cooling curve. Might also consider expanding the scale a bit for Pin and Pout, if possible. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 19:21:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA06400; Sat, 23 May 1998 19:15:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 19:15:46 -0700 Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 22:12:17 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: What's the definition in Case's device? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805232215_MC2-3DFD-6C71 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"TWdfR2.0.vZ1.GBuPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19099 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Mitchell Swartz writes: Why is it simple? It would seem that the second system is much more complicated than Case's original design, and be more difficult to achieve. That is incorrect. The self-sustaining cell has the same design as the previous one, no more or less complicated in any way. The only difference is that #2 has better insulation. This is not complicated. To the contrary it is the simplest and best possible test anyone could devise. There is no reason to think it will be more difficult to achieve than any previous test. The only difficulty encountered so far has been pinhole leaks in the new cylinder. That sort of problem always crops up. Assuming the performance seen in the test on Friday was real and not an artifact, there are no remaining roadblocks and no reason to believe the self-sustaining test will fail. There are also no rational scientific reasons to doubt this test. It will be *absolutely* definitive, one way or the other. If it succeeds, it will prove that cold fusion is real and beyond chemistry. It will be as definitive as the 1903 flight at Kitty Hawk or the 1945 test explosion of the atom bomb. I expect that hard core "skeptics" (including some people here) will deny this, but their arguments fly in the face of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics. The power level will be ~20 watts. The walls of the new container will radiate little heat. Most of the heat will come out of the top, where the temperature probe wires and whatnot are connected. With a 20 watt heat source inside the Dewar flask, and a substantial thermal mass held at 200 deg C, I expect the top of the Dewar will be palpably warm, perhaps hot. In other words, the proof that this is real will be apparent to the unaided human senses, without the need for intervening instruments, calibration, complication, potential errors or misinterpretation. When we distribute demonstration kits, anyone who understands and believes the laws of thermodynamics and trusts his own sense of touch will be forced to admit that cold fusion is real. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 19:59:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA12657; Sat, 23 May 1998 19:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 19:56:20 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa eisa.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Sonic stiffness Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 02:54:11 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3568716c.6444341 mail.eisa.net.au> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"awgoN3.0.f53.HnuPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19100 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I read recently (New Scientist I think), that a chain of rods connected by flexible joints can be made to go rigid by inducing a longitudinal oscillation in the assembly. Suppose that this were also true of a metallic lattice (yes I know a metal is already rigid :). What I mean is that the longitudinal oscillation prevents the rods from moving transversely. If ultrasound were to also prevent (or reduce) transverse vibrations in a metal crystal, then CF might be enhanced due to lengthening of the DeBroglie wavelengths, and the consequent increase in tunnelling probability. This could partially be behind the success of the ultra-sound based technologies. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Address for messages with attachments larger than 1.5MB: rvanspaa ozemail.com.au (If you use this address, then please also send informative short message to first address). From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 20:38:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA16002; Sat, 23 May 1998 20:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 20:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980523233252.007c1eb0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:32:52 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: What's the definition in Case's device? In-Reply-To: <199805232215_MC2-3DFD-6C71 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IYKRn2.0.xv3.LMvPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19101 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:12 PM 5/23/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Why is it simple? It would seem that the second system is much more > complicated than Case's original design, and be more difficult to > achieve. > >That is incorrect. The self-sustaining cell has the same design as the >previous one, no more or less complicated in any way. Not necessarily. Same design, but why should it necessarily work. The physics have barely been grokked. Other than your notion, there is no salient basis. In fact, we have examined the impact of feedback in the electrolytic systems, and it is SIGNIFICANT and usually underestimated in its impact. Like vertical flow calorimetry, and phonon-stealing flow calorimetry which I have described in publications since at least 1993, these impose additional challenges. ------------------------------------------------- >The only difference is >that #2 has better insulation. This is not complicated. To the contrary it is >the simplest and best possible test anyone could devise. There is no reason to >think it will be more difficult to achieve than any previous test. The only >difficulty encountered so far has been pinhole leaks in the new cylinder. Nope. See above. ------------------------------------------------- >That sort of problem always crops up. Assuming the performance seen in the >test on Friday was real and not an artifact, there are no remaining >roadblocks and no reason to believe the self-sustaining test will fail. Nope. See above. Alternatively, do the math. ------------------------------------------------- >There are also no rational scientific reasons to doubt this test. It will be >*absolutely* definitive, one way or the other. If it succeeds, it will prove >that cold fusion is real and beyond chemistry. Investigate the water-picks, HVAC, coupled motor and urine systems if you want, Jed. However, cold fusion classic (Pd-D2O and Ni-H2O) is real, and way beyond chemistry; more information can be gotten at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 23:28:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04866; Sat, 23 May 1998 23:25:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:25:30 -0700 Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3567BD56.5C1F math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:25:26 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Kinetic Furnace, Case device non-updates References: <199805221744_MC2-3DE9-8C83 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NBGGS1.0.tB1.PrxPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19102 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I am still upset with Barry Merriman, for two reasons: > > 1. He paid no attention to my earlier messages, > which I copied directly to him. Which earlier messages---i.e. regarding Case, or Pope? No matter, I'm sure I read them all. > > 2. He never retracted, apologized for missing my point, or followed up. If you feel I missed your point, then I apologize. But I also feel you missed my point to some extent. So, I imagine the reason we missed eachothers points is becuase we wre both addressing different points. I guess your point was that, based on your workings with Case, that he was trying to build a self-sustainer that would quite clearly demonstrate a large heat anomaly, beyond any reasonable criticism. However, my fundamental point was---why can't he just put a working model into the the hands of Mallove and/or Little NOW, and they can busy themselves studying while he does whatever he pleases with his time, e.g. (trying to) build a self-sustainer, bass fishing, or whatever. The other subtext of my point was that a "self-sustainer" would have to be pretty outrageous in its performance to be beyond scientific reproach---basically, no matter how amazing it is, a true scientist is still going want/need to break it apart and diagnose what is going on. Thus, the fact that it is self-sustaining becomes secondary to the fact that it is repeatable with a large signal. But, his present non-self-sustainer is already said to be repeatable with a large signal, therefore it would more than suffice for the essential scientific study. To an outsider such as myself, it simply appears that Case is avoiding the obvious tests of his device while he works on the never-ending quest to improve it. Of course, I'm happy to wait and see what he comes up with, but I find the the overall behavior irrational if he does want to convincing EarthTech of the reality of his effect. Little's Calorimetry would trivially verify the excess heat effect in a matter of days, if not hours, using just the device Case demoed for Mallove. In any case, I support your efforts. The only useful advice I was trying to give is ancient: a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 23:40:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04243; Sat, 23 May 1998 23:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:37:33 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <3567BFB1.7BC7 math.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:35:29 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ZPE has proven to be opportunity lost References: <4cbb9711.3566d842 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1dZHO1.0.C21.h0yPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19103 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: FZNIDARSIC wrote: > > Stick these numbers into your calculartor. What opportunity have you lost? > For those of who post frequently on the Vortex it my be time to refocus. Take > it from me I've been there. > > Frank Znidarsic Hey Frank, glad to see you've checked back into reality. You are right, someone with your technical ability who had focused on the markets could have made a killing in the past decade. You are also right in that there is no reason to think there is any oppurtunity lost in ignoring the "anomalous energy" crowd. My advice is to maintain it strictly as a hobby, for those so inclined, and to maintain an open mind (paricularly, open to the likelyhood that there is nothing there.) -- Barry Merriman Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program email: barry math.ucla.edu homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 23 23:55:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA08382; Sat, 23 May 1998 23:52:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 23:52:05 -0700 Message-ID: <35671A02.56286AC9 ihug.co.nz> Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 06:48:34 +1200 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Silicon References: <8483e6cb.35571f87 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ER5MN1.0.j22.KEyPr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19104 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: How thin are these wafers? I would be very interested in a few plain wafers, any chances that the offer is open to me also? John Berry VCockeram wrote: > In a message dated 98-05-11 10:44:46 EDT, you write: > > Horace Heffner wrote: > > There is probably a > > > lot of good science to be done with vaporized silicon compounds. > > < > OK, Horace, I have a 1100 gram chunk of pure (not semiconductor grade) > > silicon. If you want to vaporize some of it - have at it! > > Frank Stenger > And Horace, I have about 20 or so 4 inch silicon wafers, some etched > with circuts (50 or 60 on each wafer) and some plain. I assume these > wafers are semiconductor grade. > If you want to have at them, let me know. > > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 00:17:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA07285; Sun, 24 May 1998 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 00:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35671EDD.2903599A ihug.co.nz> Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 07:09:17 +1200 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Silicon References: <8483e6cb.35571f87 aol.com> <35671A02.56286AC9@ihug.co.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Nk4ev2.0.ln1.VZyPr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19105 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Oops! I did not realize the email I replied to was 12 days old, quite a long time for email! John Berry wrote: > How thin are these wafers? > I would be very interested in a few plain wafers, any chances that the offer > is open to me also? > > John Berry > > VCockeram wrote: > > > In a message dated 98-05-11 10:44:46 EDT, you write: > > > Horace Heffner wrote: > > > There is probably a > > > > lot of good science to be done with vaporized silicon compounds. > > > > < > > OK, Horace, I have a 1100 gram chunk of pure (not semiconductor grade) > > > silicon. If you want to vaporize some of it - have at it! > > > Frank Stenger > > And Horace, I have about 20 or so 4 inch silicon wafers, some etched > > with circuts (50 or 60 on each wafer) and some plain. I assume these > > wafers are semiconductor grade. > > If you want to have at them, let me know. > > > > Vince Cockeram > > Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 02:57:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA20962; Sun, 24 May 1998 02:54:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 02:54:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004201bd86f9$16245360$708cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 03:48:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Lc9PS3.0.P75.Pv-Pr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19106 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex A mix of copper powder and sulfur when heated to about 290 C will exotherm forming Cu2S and give a thermal spike that goes over 500 C: By the same token the action of a catalyst will shift the ortho(o)-para(p) spin-pairing of Deuterium: pD2 to oD2 over a Pd-Carbon Catalyst which will exotherm and lower the thermal conductivity of the D2 gas. In either case if these are kept in a thermos bottle, sans heat loss they could be considered: "self-sustaining". Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 03:28:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA02932; Sun, 24 May 1998 03:25:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 03:25:06 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005401bd86fd$f8e75540$708cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 04:22:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"k_I-l2.0.jj.1M_Pr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19107 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott I'll buy the flash bulbs if you will put one in your calorimeter setup, and either fire it with a millijoule pulse, or heat the chamber until it fires on it's own. PLEASE DO NOT PRESSURIZE WITH H2 or D2! Always did want to know how many joules they put out. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 04:59:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA26333; Sun, 24 May 1998 04:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 04:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980524075326.007b6d00 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 07:53:26 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: A closer look at one "negative" result Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"rr0DQ.0.KR6.fh0Qr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19108 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ==================================================== This announcement at this time, and excerpt are only for contributors to vortex-l. (c) 1998 JET Energy Technology, Inc. This and the excerpt may not be copied, redistributed, or transmitted in any form electronic, magnetic, paper, photographic, or otherwise. ==================================================== ==================================================== There is much talk here about cold fusion. Some of it is incorrect. JET Technology, now JET Energy Technology, Inc. has confirmed cold fusion with others' materials, and then developed higher yield systems, and reported the results in Fusion Technology and other publications. In addition to JET Energy Technology being open to tests some other systems, and developing our own second, and third generation systems, we have applied our technology to investigate others' results. Part of that will be available in the detail elsewhere in the paper "Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light Water Experiments" [Proc. of ICCF-7, July 1998]. However, one section is relevant to ongoing discussions in vortex-l about cold fusion. For vortex-l readers who are interested in science, the excerpt is entitled 'RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE EARTHTECH "KS"-BEAD EXPERIMENT' and is located at http://world.std.com/~mica/littleks.html More info on cold fusion (Pd-D2O and Ni-H2O) can be gotten at http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 05:25:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA10564; Sun, 24 May 1998 05:19:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 05:19:16 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980524072013.0082d540 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 07:20:13 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? In-Reply-To: <005401bd86fd$f8e75540$708cbfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"nP3su.0.-a2.311Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19109 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:22 AM 5/24/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Scott > >I'll buy the flash bulbs if you will put one >in your calorimeter setup, and either fire >it with a millijoule pulse, or heat the chamber >until it fires on it's own. Fred, your proposal raises an interesting issue about that calorimeter. With a 1 hour time constant and about a 1 watt detection limit, a rough estimate of my detection limit for a pulse of heat is 3600 joules. To do your flashbulb justice, I think we'd need a special low-mass calorimeter. Hmmm! The one I showed at ICCF-7 would be significantly better (maybe 10X) but I can imagine one that would be LOTS better than either of these two. Don't you imagine that a flashbulb is only a few joules? It's like a 1000 watt lightbulb for .01 seconds...i.e. 10 joules. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 07:07:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA17991; Sun, 24 May 1998 07:03:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 07:03:51 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006d01bd871c$85087540$708cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 08:01:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"mKnWM1.0.1P4.7Z2Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19110 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 6:23 AM Subject: Re: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? Scott wrote: >At 04:22 AM 5/24/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>Scott >> >>I'll buy the flash bulbs if you will put one >>in your calorimeter setup, and either fire >>it with a millijoule pulse, or heat the chamber >>until it fires on it's own. > >Fred, your proposal raises an interesting issue about that calorimeter. >With a 1 hour time constant and about a 1 watt detection limit, a rough >estimate of my detection limit for a pulse of heat is 3600 joules. To do >your flashbulb justice, I think we'd need a special low-mass calorimeter. >Hmmm! The one I showed at ICCF-7 would be significantly better (maybe 10X) >but I can imagine one that would be LOTS better than either of these two. > >Don't you imagine that a flashbulb is only a few joules? It's like a 1000 >watt lightbulb for .01 seconds...i.e. 10 joules. I think you could flash one in a small Dewar with a bit of water and measure the heat rise and response time? Regards, Frederick > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 07:15:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA19800; Sun, 24 May 1998 07:12:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 07:12:41 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980524091305.00832e40 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 09:13:05 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? In-Reply-To: <006d01bd871c$85087540$708cbfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9N4k.0.Br4.Nh2Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19111 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:01 AM 5/24/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >I think you could flash one in a small >Dewar with a bit of water and measure the >heat rise and response time? OK, that's a reasonable proposal. Now, is this just an academic investigation or do you suspect that flashbulbs are "o-u"? Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 08:05:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA25827; Sun, 24 May 1998 08:02:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 08:02:44 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008301bd8724$afa76ec0$708cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 09:00:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"hODDp.0.OJ6.JQ3Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19112 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 8:13 AM Subject: Re: Scott Little's Flashbulb Experiment? >At 08:01 AM 5/24/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > >>I think you could flash one in a small >>Dewar with a bit of water and measure the >>heat rise and response time? > >OK, that's a reasonable proposal. Now, is this just an academic >investigation or do you suspect that flashbulbs are "o-u"? Only when a reporter flashes them in your eyes. :-) I do think that heat pipe technology using copper or silver "pipes" would be the way to get much faster response in a calorimeter application, though: Cu 0.385 J/gK thermal k 3.95 373 K Ag 0.235 J/gK thermal k 4.26 373 K Heat pipes can be concentric tubes with a vapor space using a minimal quantity of water without a wick, up to the critical temp of the water (which is well above most CF temps :-))or they can act in conjunction with thermocouples as heat-conducting "probes". Regards, Frederick > > >Scott Little >EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 >512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) >little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 08:43:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA12796; Sun, 24 May 1998 08:41:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 08:41:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 07:39:00 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Case's self sustainer Resent-Message-ID: <"ztlT23.0.p73.H-3Qr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19113 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Why is it that so many otherwise astute people here seem to be missing the obvious. Case's self sustaining attempt will produce about a 20 watt heat flow to ambient. It is not possible to make a perfectly insulated chamber. The main *difficulty* is obtaining enough insulation to attempt a self sustaining run, due to the need to run at over 150 C. At 5:40 PM 5/22/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >Case is now able to sustain a 200 deg C temperature in his Dewar insulated >container with about 20 watts input. I hope this will be enough to allow a >self-sustaining reaction, but if it is not -- because Case cannot squeeze 20 >watts out of his material, the new test may still go a long way towards >proving the point. [snip] This Case cell is now clearly a calorimeter with a roughly defined calorimeter constant of about (20 W)/(200 C - 23 C) = 0.11. All that remains is that sufficient catlyst can be placed in the above cell to produce the 20 watts, or at least enough watts to maintain a criticaltemperature to self-sustain. However, that requirement was quickly met by Case, as conveyed to vortex by Gene Mallove: At 3:13 PM 5/22/98, E.F. Mallove wrote: [snip] >Further, I cut back on the power in, to maintain the temperature near >what was obtained with H2, namely 190 deg C and which required 93 watts. >With D2, 73.5 watts were required to maintain 193 deg C. And 71 watts >maintained 186 deg C. > >Thus, about 73 watts or less maintained 190 deg C. By difference, the D2 >fusion supplied about 20 watts or slightly more, for 45.8 grams of >catalyst. Thus, the power output was in the range of 0.4 to 0.5 watts >per gram. [snip] > Very truly yours, > > Les Case > Fusion Power, Inc. Case's self sustaining attempt will produce about a 20 watt heat flow to ambient. The question remaining to be answered is weather the heat output will occur, will self-sustain, when the cell is more highly insulated. If the effect is due to a cyclical phase change or state change phenomenon, i.e. heat pumping, then the effect will diasappear in the highly insulated cell. The energy to drive the cyclical heat pump type phenomena must be provided at the base of the cell. If there is no heat supplied at all then any such explanation is nonsense. Run sufficiently long, the self sustaining test is definitive. Replicated sufficiently it is also conclusive beyond any reasonable doubt. The problem comes if the self-sustainer doesn't work. It then becomes merely a scientific curiosity, and there may be some curious enough to do post mortum work. It is a lot more exciting to work on something that appears to be anomalous, than to fiure out what is going on in something that is almost certainly behaving by the rules. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 11:47:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24367; Sun, 24 May 1998 11:43:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 11:43:57 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 14:37:25 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: hu ... Bio (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"yRqjD.0.ay5.jf6Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19114 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 14:34:37 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: hu ... Bio > > With Viagra such a hit, Pfizer is bringing forth a whole line of > > >drugs oriented towards improving the performance of men in today's > > >society > > > > > >DIRECTRA - a dose of this drug given to men before leaving on car > > trips caused 72 percent of them to stop and ask directions when they got lost, compared to a control group of 0.2 percent. > > > > >PROJECTRA - Men given this experimental new drug were far more > > >likely to actually finish a household repair project before starting a new one. > > > > >CHILDAGRA - Men taking this drug reported a sudden, over-whelming > > urge to perform more child-care tasks - especially cleaning up spills and "little accidents." > > > > >COMPLIMENTRA - In clinical trials, 82 percent of middle-aged men > > >administered this drug noticed that their wives had a new > > >hairstyle. Currently being tested to see if its effects extend to > > noticing new clothing. > > > > > >BUYAGRA - Married and otherwise attached men reported a sudden > > >urge to buy their sweeties expensive jewelry and gifts after > > >taking this drug for only two days. Still to be seen: whether the > > drug can be continued for a period longer than your favorites store's return limit. > > > > > >NEGA-VIAGRA - Has the exact opposite effect of Viagra. Currently > > >undergoing clinical trials on sitting U.S. presidents. > > > > >NEGA-SPORTAGRA - This drug had the strange effect of making men want to turn off televised sports and actually converse with other family members. > > > > >PRYAGRA - About to fail its clinical trial, this drug gave men in the test group an irresistible urge to dig into the personal affairs of other people. Note: Apparent over-dose turned three test subjects into "special prosecutors." > > > > > LIAGRA - This drug causes men to be less than truthful when being > asked about their sexual affairs. Will be available Regular, Grand Jury and Presidential Strength versions. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 12:24:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01498; Sun, 24 May 1998 12:21:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 12:21:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 12:20:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ZPE - opportunity lost ,etc. In-Reply-To: <3567BFB1.7BC7 math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"a55Zh1.0.JN.mC7Qr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19115 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo, I've been "lurking" here for several months not contributing very much because I really don't have anything to say about how cold fusion works or doesn't work (sorry) but, there was a recent posting that I'd like to comment on : This was Fred Z's post about how cold fusion appears to be a big time waster for people who would be much better off if they had spent their time writing code for Bill Gates or investing in the stock market. Well maybe that's true if your main concern in life is raking in big bucks by hitching a ride on someone else's apple cart but most of the contributors to Vortex have a demonstrated passion for innovation that transcends motives of personal gain. On the other hand I think Fred is right that the chances of upscaling whatever o/u effects there might be to a practical system that will power one's home in any of our average remaining lifetimes are extremely remote . I have demonstrated that is is perfectly possible to live out in the middle of nowhere where there are no power lines for extended periods of time and still have most if not all the comforts of life. This can be accomplished with not - too - expensive Solar panel arrays and some ordinary deep cycle batteries to run a modest 12v electrical system in one's RV. With a laptop connected to a cellphone input , you even get net access! Of course when it gets too hot out here in the desert ya gotta give it up because with the 4500 watts or so it takes to run the airconditioner a "modest" solar panel array just won't cut it. But all ya gotta do THEN is move to where it's cooler , that's all.... But WAIT... what about that JOB you got in the city? You gotta make a living so what are you going to do about THAT? You can't just pick up and LEAVE !!! Well Fred I think is on the right track in his learning C++ programming skills that he can take with him wherever he and his cellphone can go. Ya see , the plan then becomes real simple in that you don't need to show up in any particular place to go to work. You just work on your part of the code that you have been assigned to by your boss Bill Gates on your laptop in God's Country USA , and upload your revs every now and then with your cell phone link. Can anyone here at Vo imagine a more fun and relaxing life than THAT? I can ... How about doing all of the above , but NOT working for Bill Gates ? Right now I bet you think this is just a big come on for some kind of Multi - Level - Marketing Amway-Scamway venture for software artists ... Well... it's not. I hate that crap . What I'm saying is that given the right talent and pooling of effort for an internet - connected programming team working in their spare time , Bill Gates can be given a run for his money (as this money represents the huge market share monopoly that Windows 3.x - 9x has) . We don't necessarily have to re-invent the wheel , either. Gates proved that himself when Apple sued him and lost. What has to be overcome is Windows' inherent balkiness , slowness and crash-prone-ness . It's just a lousy Dos shell that hangs up , stops , and mouse-locks for various reasons. It's also new user unfriendly giving out unapologetic, dictatorial error messages such as: " STOP ! This application has violated system integrity due to execution of an invalid instruction and will be terminated. Quit all applications , quit Windows and restart your computer." Sounds like it must be ALL THE USER'S FAULT, doesn't it? Well this error message can result from trying to run programs from WinDOZE that run perfectly fine under regular Dos. The problem is that with all the file-swapping activity that Windows runs on your HD you get unresolvable stack space conflicts and the cpu just won't deal with it. This almost NEVER happens on non-GUI Dos Shells like Xtree. For programs that DO hang in Xtree it's usually due to lack of RAM memory needed to run both the application and Xtree at the same time. This can be readily dealt with , I think by some routine that detects this sort of problem before running the app fully . If ram starts getting too crowded , the program could kick it out in time to reduce the amount of memory used by the shell and reallocate enough memory for the program to run properly. If there just isn't enough memory then it could write another batch file to dos to run the requested program off the batch file after terminating itself . Of course you'd have to manually re-boot your interface when your program was finished but then again the new batch file could contain the command to do THAT too. So if anybody out there is getting weary of spending so much energy on fruitless CF quests then email me or post a response here. I'll be "lurking as usual" - Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 15:30:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA25082; Sun, 24 May 1998 15:27:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:27:06 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3567BFB1.7BC7 math.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 12:26:14 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... Resent-Message-ID: <"yVUk_2.0.p76.vw9Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19116 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim - > What has to be overcome is Windows' inherent > balkiness , slowness and crash-prone-ness . > It's just a lousy Dos shell that hangs up , stops > , and mouse-locks for various reasons. That's why Jobs & Woz came up with the Mac. Works fine for me and millions of others. Baywatch is the world's favorite TV show, Big Mac is the favorite food, Windows is the favorite OS, hot fusion the favorite hope for future energy, lawyers the favorite profession, etc. Makes a fellow want to move out to the boonies in an RV, doesn't it. So how are those cell phone connections to the net from nowhere? Cheap too, yeah? ;) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 15:51:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA29673; Sun, 24 May 1998 15:50:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:50:20 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 18:46:49 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805241849_MC2-3E01-C7CA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"QfsQl3.0.YF7.hGAQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19117 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:fjsparb sprintmail.com Frederick J. Sparber writes: A mix of copper powder and sulfur when heated to about 290 C will exotherm forming Cu2S and give a thermal spike that goes over 500 C . . . . . . In either case if these are kept in a thermos bottle, sans heat loss they could be considered: "self-sustaining". Yes, of course, but not indefinitely. The reaction will not last for days, weeks or months. The "thermal spike" is a measure of power, not energy, and power is irrelevant. The net energy from a CF can be thousands of times beyond chemistry, but even a small chemical fire produces much more power than Case's 20 watt reaction. 47 grams of chemical fuel reacting at any measurable power level will soon be used up. Furthermore, the Case cell contains only catalyst and deuterium, not copper and sulphur, or deuterium and oxygen. The catalyst and deuterium cannot react, and there is never any evidence of a chemical reaction after the cells produce excess heat. Finally, copper and sulphur do not cause transmutations or the appearance of helium at levels higher than the atmospheric concentration. Given these extreme and obvious differences between chemical and a nuclear cells, I do not see the point of Fred's comments. One might as well say that coal and uranium can both be used to generate excess heat, and both can be used to run a thermal electric generator. Yes, but so what? You would never confuse one with the other. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 15:51:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA29742; Sun, 24 May 1998 15:50:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:50:33 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 18:47:06 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Kinetic Furnace, Case device non-updates Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805241849_MC2-3E01-C7CB compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"GACrN3.0.YG7.tGAQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19118 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Barry Merriman writes: Which earlier messages---i.e. regarding Case, or Pope? No matter, I'm sure I read them all. The issue was this, Barry: you claimed that we might test the Case cell with only one thermocopule. Obviously one thermocouple might indicate a spurious temperature. I wrote several messages before you posted that, and two emphatic messages after (which I delivered to you directly), insisting that we would *never* accept a test with only one thermocouple, that was never part of our plan. We will have multiple, independent methods of measuring temperature. I also said we hope the cell is palpably hot, which would make temperature measurment techniques immaterial. I am sure you got that message, and I too am sure you read it. Furthermore, I am sure you understood it perfectly the first time and every subsequent time I sent it. I am forced to conclude that your comments about "one thermocouple" in a cell "sitting in the corner" were gratitous bunk intended to confuse the issue and sew doubts about our plans and our competance. However, my fundamental point was---why can't he just put a working model into the the hands of Mallove and/or Little NOW . . . He did! It was in Mallove's hands two weeks ago. Full details were published here. Mallove was satisfied with the test, so he asked Case to go on to phase 2 and 3: power reduction and the self-sustainer. Phase 2 was performed on Friday. It proved that the apparent excess heat is not linked with or proportionaly too the input heater power. The apparent excess does not change when heater power is reduced by one-fourth. It seems to me this disproves all of the artifact hypotheses proposed here. For example, if the shape of the catalyst was directing warm air towards the thermocouple, or a phase change was causing rain to fall inside the cell, it seems to me these reactions *must* be affected by a drastic reduction in heater power. Perhaps I do not understand these hypotheses well enough. Phase 3 is the self-sustainer. It has been delayed slightly, but Case is doing it more swiftly than Mallove could. Case is moving swiftly to do exactly what we asked him to do. I do not see how a working model in any other hands would speed things up. If Case can provide us with a self-sustainer, it will give us the iron-clad proof we need to convince investors, and this will allow us to manufacture, test and distribute hundreds of exact working duplicates of the cell. That's what everyone wants, right? The other subtext of my point was that a "self-sustainer" would have to be pretty outrageous in its performance to be beyond scientific reproach . . . This statement makes no sense to me. Define "outrageous." If the thing is 200 deg C internally and it contains only 47 grams of material it cannot remain hot for long. If it is still hot a day later it will be one of the most "outrageous" experiments in the history of science. Similar experiments peformed by Pons and Fleischmann and others have outraged scientists world-wide for nine years. What more can you ask for? How much power or what temperatures will convince you? Do you *really* insist the thing must heat to incandescence, as you previously hinted? This is the most unreasonable demand any "skeptic" has ever made, that I know of. You want CF do to what a fission reactor cannot do without self destructing. If 20 watts is not enough, would 2000 be sufficiently "outrageous"?!? I think that any macroscopic, obvious power level will do. I cannot understand why 20 watts would be less outrageous than 20 megawatts, as scientific proof. The first fission reactor at U. Chicago in 1942 produced less than a watt, but nobody observing the experiment had any doubt it was real. ---basically, no matter how amazing it is, a true scientist is still going want/need to break it apart and diagnose what is going on . . . We will publish a full description of the contents of the cell. There will be no reason for anyone to break this particular one apart. Furthermore, a true scientists should be willing to consider this as a black box that produces heat, and a true scientist should be willing to grant that it is beyond chemistry. A scientist who argues he cannot believe that until he looks inside does not undertand the fundamentals of thermodynamics. No "true" scientist would question a 200 deg C temperature measured with two thermometer types, and heat which makes a body palpably hot. No sane person would question that. In any case, true scientists who insist on breaking the thing apart will be given the opportunity to purchase one and break it to their heart's content. Little's Calorimetry would trivially verify the excess heat effect in a matter of days, if not hours, using just the device Case demoed for Mallove. Maybe it would. On the other hand it might cool the cell too rapidly or unevenly, preventing the reaction. This often happens with conventional Pd D2O CF. As I said, it is a mistake to think of a calorimeter as a passive tool that has no effect on the experiment. In any case, I support your efforts. The only useful advice I was trying to give is ancient: a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Yes, that is why we want Case to perform the Phase 3 test, rather than asking him to send equipment to Scott Little, who has no experience with this type of cell and who proposes to test it with a calorimeter that has not been used with this cell. Case is the bird in hand: a test by Little or anyone else would be a crap shoot, and probably a waste of time. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 15:52:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA29880; Sun, 24 May 1998 15:51:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:51:09 -0700 Message-ID: <3568A266.E39 skylink.net> Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:42:46 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vesselin Petkov paper... and Lockyer model References: <3565248F.6DA45E79@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BUssk1.0.lI7.SHAQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19119 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hamdi Ucar wrote: > Yes, this is logical, remind me Lockyer's model for elementary particles. Lockyer's cubical geometry for elementary particles seems to me to be intuitively wrong, yet it is remarkable how he can accurately derive so much data for so many particles. Lockyer begins with a model of the photon, which seems to make good sense. He argues that our existing model of the photon, having in-phase transvere E and B fields is contradictory to Maxwells equations. You can not induce a B field, and vice versa an E field, with a wave consisting only of in-phase components. He presents a model for a vertically polarized photon which consists of conjugate (B,E) and (E,B) fields, each having one field element in the transverse direction and one field element in the longitudinal direction. All the fields, transverse and longitudinal, are time-varying, however the resultant longitudinal fields also have a DC component. A wave of this form is compatible with Maxwells equations, and will boot-strap itself to move at light speed. All the above happens in the reference frame of the photon. In the laboratory reference frame, the longitudinal field components are moving at light speed in a direction parallel to the velocity, and due to relativistic effects may appear to be zero. For a circularly polarized photon (spin 1), two of Lockyer's photon elements acting in space and time quadrature, would result in a photon having two time-space quadrature transverse (E,B) fields, as well as longitudinal E and B fields. This is remarkably similar to the B3 model of Vigier, Evans, et al. It is said that a particle having spin 1/2, such as an electron must be turned twice to come back to its original geometry, while a particle of spin 1 such as a photon must be turned only once. A particle of spin 2, such as a gravitational wave, must look exactly like itself after turning 180 degrees. A particle constructed from two circularly polarized B3 type photons, having equal and opposite transverse E fields, and equal and opposite transverse B fields -- a scalar wave, would result in a wave with spin 2 characteristics. If you rotate it half way around, it looks exactly the same. Although, all the transverse E and B fields cancel, none the less they are still there and are required to propagate the wave. The only thing that does not cancel is the longitudinal fields, seemingly moving along by themselves at light speed, and just like gravity always having the same polarity. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 15:57:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA23638; Sun, 24 May 1998 15:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:56:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 15:54:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <199805242254.PAA03905 joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Case's self sustainer Resent-Message-ID: <"uUlnr3.0.Fn5.AMAQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19120 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: The problem comes if the self-sustainer doesn't work. It then becomes merely a scientific curiosity, and there may be some curious enough to do post mortum work. It is a lot more exciting to work on something that appears to be anomalous, than to fiure out what is going on in something that is almost certainly behaving by the rules. --- I disagree---***everything*** is almost certainly behaving by the rules, whether it appears anomalous or not. The odds of finding new "fundamental" physics in such common regimes are infinitesimal. The only worthwhile outcome I expect to see from "cold fusion" work is precisely in the post-mortem work to understand what makes people think they are observing anomalous heat and element creation. I agree it adds an entertaining element of excitement to investigate something that seems to be "O/U" or "transmutating", but the real discoveries will come from figuring out the source of the apparent anomalies---not because they are new physics, but because they highlight errors in our understanding of existing physics. Alchemy never worked---yet the quest for alchemy gave us modern chemistry. The most I would seriously hope for fromcold fusion is a similar type of dividend. Of course, I don't categorically rule out real "cold fusion", or low energy nuclear reactions, etc, but given the state of the field, it seems much more likely that other effects are aliasing as fusion and transmutation. I would like to know what those effects are, in at least one high profile case, and I think it is highly worthwhile from a scientific point of view to determine the causes of these observations, even though I don;t think they are "new physics". From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 16:55:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29031; Sun, 24 May 1998 16:54:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 16:54:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003f01bd876e$adea2ec0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: , Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 17:49:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"L61W71.0.X57.SCBQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19121 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 4:51 PM Subject: Chemical Self-Sustainers? >To: Vortex; >INTERNET:fjsparb sprintmail.com Jed "Powerhouse-Pepper" Rothwell writes: >Frederick J. Sparber writes: > > A mix of copper powder and sulfur when heated to about 290 C will > exotherm forming Cu2S and give a thermal spike that goes over > 500 C . . . > > . . . In either case if these are kept in a thermos bottle, sans heat > loss they could be considered: "self-sustaining". > >Yes, of course, but not indefinitely. The reaction will not last for days, >weeks or months. The "thermal spike" is a measure of power, not energy, and >power is irrelevant. Wow! I'll keep that in mind the next time I light a match. :-) The net energy from a CF can be thousands of times beyond >chemistry, but even a small chemical fire produces much more power than Case's >20 watt reaction. The "net" solar energy incident on a Four-Leaf Clover over a growing season is in the Megajoules, but I don't think you could POWER a 747 on one. :-) > 47 grams of chemical fuel reacting at any measurable power >level will soon be used up. Furthermore, the Case cell contains only catalyst >and deuterium, not copper and sulphur, or deuterium and oxygen. You miss the point, Jed. A thermal ENERGY RELEASE in a bottle with no heat capacity to speak except the 5 lbs of iron of Case's O2 bottle can achieve high temperatures with very small heat content. For instance you can stick your hand in an oven at 400 F with no discomfort. Now stick a pan of water in the oven for a while then try sticking your hand in. BURN DISCLAIMER! Snip the 5th grade physics lesson etc. Regards, Frederick > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 17:21:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA02804; Sun, 24 May 1998 17:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 17:19:45 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <3216d5ac.3568b878 aol.com> Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:16:55 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"_h-j63.0.hh.VaBQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19122 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, I finished up mounting the capacitors in the power supply and tested power up 1/2 wave using the old diode. The caps hold a nasty charge. I had built a crowbar circut with a heavy duty relay and a 100 ohm 10 W resistor. When power is turned off the relay drops shorting the caps thru the resistor. This worked fine when the caps were under 2 kV. When I tried it at full voltage (~3kV) , the resistor exploded. No fragments were released in my direction. (a lot inside the PS though!) Solved that problem by using a 100 W 300 ohm resistor. Works fine now with multiple (10 per minute) power up/crowbar cycles at full voltage and the resistor just gets slightly warm. The caps drain to zero v in about 1/2 second. Wanting things neat, I drew up a schamatic of the supply and now see another problem; The high voltage transformer secondary is grounded at one end. This means that the high voltage DC cannot have a common ground and if I am running at say 2kV, each leg of the HV will be 1 kV above and below ground. This is decidly, not very safe. I am going to have to disassamble the supply again and see if the grounded end of the HV secondary can be disconnected and brought out to a terminal for connection to the full wave bridge rectifier. If it can't be done I will have to go looking for a transformer with around a 2 kV secondary or 4 kV center tapped. I have contacts at Young Electric Sign Co. here in town and if needed, will get one from them. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 18:33:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09396; Sun, 24 May 1998 18:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 18:29:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 12:25:29 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"3j89E1.0.bI2.9cCQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19123 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I missed the original message, but I never miss a chance to plug Linux ;-). On Sun, 24 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Jim - > > > What has to be overcome is Windows' inherent > > balkiness , slowness and crash-prone-ness . > > It's just a lousy Dos shell that hangs up , stops > > , and mouse-locks for various reasons. Such an operating exists and is available for for free. Download linux from ftp://ftp.redhat.com. or pay $49 and get it on a CD with a TON of documanetation. http://www.redhat.com Working in the linux world is great fun. Everyday there are new version of programs available for download for free. Talented hackers all over the world WANT you to try their software. It is really good stuff too. Not like the cr*p available as "shareware" for windows. There are even versions for Mac's so you guys can finally learn what a true multi-tasking, threaded operating system is like. Just a note of caution, linux is still for the Unix-aware. Wait a few more months till Linux desktop environments are a bit more mature. However I'm working with a beta version of KDE that blows Win 98 and Mac's away for user-friendliness and power simultanously. The competing GNOME desktop promises even more but is less advanced right now. The point is that because the source code for all these projects is open and available for all, the rate of advance is very fast, very visible and converges to bug free status. > That's why Jobs & Woz came up with the Mac. Works fine for me and millions > of others. Baywatch is the world's favorite TV show, Big Mac is the > favorite food, Windows is the favorite OS, hot fusion the favorite hope for > future energy, lawyers the favorite profession, etc. Makes a fellow want to > move out to the boonies in an RV, doesn't it. Why work with dumbed-down OS's if you don't have to? We use it High Energy Physics as the PC operating system of choice. Cheers Martin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 18:43:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA24769; Sun, 24 May 1998 18:42:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 18:42:16 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 18:43:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: Vortex-L Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"S97jt3.0.s26.tnCQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19124 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 24 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Jim - > > > What has to be overcome is Windows' inherent > > balkiness , slowness and crash-prone-ness . > > It's just a lousy Dos shell that hangs up , stops > > , and mouse-locks for various reasons. > > That's why Jobs & Woz came up with the Mac. I don't think so Rick. Jobs and the Woz came up with the Mac way before Windows ever caught on in the early `90s . > Works fine for me and millions > of others. The thing you have to realize is that God in all her wisdom deliberately caused Bill and his Microsofties to make an inherently flawed product that people could swear at , re-boot and try figure out what was going wrong with it all the time. Gives the bored techies something to do while they are out there in the middle of nowhere enjoying all that scenery. Scenery, by the way , gets boring after a while , too. > Baywatch is the world's favorite TV show, I think that's spelled BABE-watch. > Big Mac is the > favorite food, Windows is the favorite OS, hot fusion the favorite hope for > future energy, lawyers the favorite profession, etc. Makes a fellow want to > move out to the boonies in an RV, doesn't it. > Something like that , yes. > So how are those cell phone connections to the net from nowhere? Not bad , you'd be surprized. I was 20 miles from telegraph mountain on the other side from LA though . > Cheap too, > yeah? ;) Welll.... as Einstein's famous equation states... TIME=$ ! How much is it costing you guys in terms of the left side of this equation trying to figure out CF? Jim Ostrowski, The Mojave ,California. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 20:18:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA04134; Sun, 24 May 1998 20:16:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:16:53 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007a01bd878b$3787ea20$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Case run 8 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:13:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"05uOB.0.W01.aAEQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19125 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Given that the thermal conductivity of D2 and Helium are close, and the specific heats (20.786 (J/mole)* K for He and 28.836 (J/mole)* K for D2) it seems that it might be prudent to try a run using Helium in place of D2? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 20:21:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA21521; Sun, 24 May 1998 20:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:11:14 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: Jim Ostrowski cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ZPE - opportunity lost ,etc. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"IQCZZ2.0.BG5.TDEQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19126 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: One comment on Jim's post, regarding air conditioning. If you have water... and I do not mean a river to run hydroelectric, but water in the amount of maybe 50 or 60 gallons a day extra, and you have good sunlight then you can have AC.... and heat. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 20:50:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA09553; Sun, 24 May 1998 20:49:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:49:26 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980524225021.00834100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:50:21 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Kinetic Furnace, Case device non-updates In-Reply-To: <199805241849_MC2-3E01-C7CB compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cGIF51.0.BL2.5fEQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19127 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:47 PM 5/24/98 -0400, Barry wrote: > Little's Calorimetry would trivially verify the excess heat effect in a > matter of days, if not hours, using just the device Case demoed for > Mallove. That is correct...and that is the offer I recently made to Dr. Case. He is welcome anytime to bring his device to EarthTech for an accurate calorimetric measurement. Then Jed sed: >Maybe it would. On the other hand it might cool the cell too rapidly or >unevenly, preventing the reaction. The degree to which my water-flow calorimetry cools the cell is highly adjustable. For example, my present apparatus is so well insulated from the 40C cooling water that only 20 watts are required to maintain the catalyst at 180C. Also, the temperature gradient is quite adjustable. If desired, I could arrange for the entire chamber to be at the same temperature...or for the upper portion to be significantly cooler, as it is now. In other words, I can fix it so my calorimetry does not significantly perturb Case's apparatus. If he does eventually accept my invitation, I fully expect that we will succeed in observing the "Case effect" when his device is in my calorimeter. The real question is, will his "excess temperature" turn out to be excess heat? My calorimeter can answer that question...but so would a successful self-sustainer. In my opinion, Case is doing the right thing now. Let's give him a week or two and see what develops. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 21:15:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA13420; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:14:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:14:33 -0700 Message-ID: <3568F047.103 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 00:15:03 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode References: <3216d5ac.3568b878 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fXL5U2.0.YH3.e0FQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19129 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > The high voltage transformer secondary is grounded > at one end. This means that the high voltage DC cannot have a common > ground and if I am running at say 2kV, each leg of the HV will be 1 kV > above and below ground. This is decidly, not very safe. > I am going to have to disassamble the supply again and see if the > grounded end of the HV secondary can be disconnected and brought > out to a terminal for connection to the full wave bridge rectifier. I didn't study it for long, Vince, but it looks like my old Litton MW xformer is one-end-grounded also. With a quick look it seemed to perhaps connect to the primary winding - but I'm not sure. The Litton looks like it used a half-wave voltage doubler circuit with the cap charging on the turn-off side of the magnetron cycle and then connected in additive series with the xformer on the power stroke. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 21:31:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA00203; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:29:00 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <4ea05b8d.3568f2da aol.com> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 00:26:01 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"ccGXl1.0.23.9EFQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19130 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-24 20:18:43 EDT, I wrote: <> > The high voltage transformer secondary is grounded > at one end. This means that the high voltage DC cannot have a common > ground and if I am running at say 2kV, each leg of the HV will be 1 kV > above and below ground. This is to me, not very safe. <> Success! I was able to isolate the secondary winding from the end grounded condition. Mounted a banana socket to the transformer base and connected the end of the secondary winding to it. All that remains now is to build the rectifier bridge on a insulated base and mount it into the supply housing. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 21:31:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA00243; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:29:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:29:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:27:17 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ZPE - opportunity lost ,etc. Resent-Message-ID: <"84oMT2.0.i3.JEFQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19131 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:20 PM 5/24/98, Jim Ostrowski wrote: [snip] > What I'm saying is that given the right talent and pooling of > effort for an internet - connected programming team working in > their spare time , Bill Gates can be given a run for his money (as > this money represents the huge market share monopoly that Windows > 3.x - 9x has) . [snip] How right you are Jim! There already is such a product. It's called linux. I must confess. What you suggest sounds tempting. Despite my spending every spare dime, and giving away hundreds of ideas, plus thousands of hours doing dinky amateur experiments, for whatever all that was worth, I must confess that having to put a couple kids through college has driven me to hope for economic gain from my next round of experimental efforts, however unrealistic and mercinary that is. Yet, I just can not seem to let my lists of ideas go unaddressed, profit or not. I am totally compelled to move forward, there are already lifetimes of things to investigate. Still hoping for that perfect gem of an idea in a thousand grains of sand ... Horace From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 21:29:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA15725; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:27:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:27:09 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:27:20 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Case's self sustainer Resent-Message-ID: <"0VCJb.0.Yr3.SCFQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19132 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:54 PM 5/24/98, Barry Merriman wrote: >I disagree---***everything*** is almost certainly behaving by the rules, >whether it appears anomalous or not. The odds of finding new "fundamental" >physics in such common regimes are infinitesimal. The only worthwhile >outcome I expect to see from "cold fusion" work is precisely in the post-mortem >work to understand what makes people think they are observing anomalous >heat and element creation. Nonsense! Most of the discoveries being made in physics now is in quantum regimes, which is certainly the domain of fusion and transmutation. The odds can not be infinitesimal. They are already known not to be zero. I say if enough people turn over enough rocks the odds approach 1 for a discovery of a something new. The important thing is diversity, being sure that the same rock is not repeatedly turned over. This is the basis of Murphy's Law. Given n individual events, which occur independently, with probability of "success" p near zero, there is a probabilty of failure q = 1 - p, which is near 1. The probability of n repeated failures without success is then q^n. The probability of at least some success is s = 1 - q^n. The important thing about this is that lim n->infinity 1-q^n = 1, for any 0 Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Self-Cleaning Fuel Rods? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:56:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"GVKf3.0.Lf2.qnEQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19128 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex A thought. If the CF phenomena is showing (albeit small amounts) of formation of Hydrinos-Deutrinos,or Quasi-Neutrons or Quasi-DiNeutrons, or whatever, then possibly reactor fuel rods could be pressurized with H2 or D2 and these would tend to clean the radio-isotopes as they are being formed in the fuel rods? Plenty of high energy stuff there to form these "what-evers". Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 21:38:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA01539; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 20:35:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Resent-Message-ID: <"ygLnS3.0.zN.zLFQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19133 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:49 PM 5/24/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >You miss the point, Jed. A thermal ENERGY RELEASE in a bottle with no heat >capacity to speak except the 5 lbs of iron of Case's O2 >bottle can achieve high temperatures with >very small heat content. [snip] The 5 lbs of iron can not maintain the temperature for days, and that is what case is attempting to do. Days of draining heat at 20 watts will exhaust even a high heat content item. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 21:41:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA19295; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:40:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:40:14 -0700 From: VCockeram Message-ID: <23e91852.3568f600 aol.com> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 00:39:27 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"D9FHj.0.Kj4.jOFQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19134 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-25 00:15:38 EDT, you write: > The Litton looks like it used a half-wave voltage doubler circuit with the cap > charging on the turn-off side of the magnetron cycle and then connected > in additive series with the xformer on the power stroke. > Frank Stenger Yes Frank, thats the way mine was wired also. Threw me a curve at first as I had never seen half wave doubler. I sketched the circut before taking the microwave apart and then sat pondering this for a while before I got it figured out. All better now though. See prev post. BTW, the secondary was completely isolated from the primary. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:16:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA04271; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:14:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:14:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:13:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"VKG9w1.0.b21.4vFQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19135 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 24 May 1998, John Schnurer wrote: > > One comment on Jim's post, regarding air conditioning. > > If you have water... and I do not mean a river to run > hydroelectric, but water in the amount of maybe 50 or 60 gallons a day > extra, and you have good sunlight then you can have AC.... and heat. > > J Hmmmm... 60 gallons, not bad. Tell me more , John ! The heat part I think I get , but how do you do the AC? Jim O. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:20:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA04879; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:18:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00af01bd879b$d3a79da0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:13:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Lw1Dw2.0.6C1.AyFQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19136 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 10:36 PM Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Horace wrote: >At 5:49 PM 5/24/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >[snip] >>You miss the point, Jed. A thermal ENERGY RELEASE in a bottle with no heat >>capacity to speak except the 5 lbs of iron of Case's O2 >>bottle can achieve high temperatures with >>very small heat content. >[snip] > > >The 5 lbs of iron can not maintain the temperature for days, and that is >what case is attempting to do. Days of draining heat at 20 watts will >exhaust even a high heat content item. Do a little thinking, Horace. At 190 C in a Dewar, or wrapped in Min-K or enough layers of cigarette-package paper with enough layers you can cut the heat loss to less than a watt/year. :-) Take a look at some of the "opacified paper" or ceramic foam insulation used in the space program. The O2 bottle, assuming iron at 2.3 Kg can hold: 0.1 * 4,187 * 2.3 Joules/deg C. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:25:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA24762; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:24:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:24:10 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00d201bd879d$0f383900$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Case's self sustainer Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:22:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"9VeE_1.0.q26.w1GQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19137 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 10:28 PM Subject: Re: Case's self sustainer Horace wrote: >At 3:54 PM 5/24/98, Barry Merriman wrote: > >>I disagree---***everything*** is almost certainly behaving by the rules, >>whether it appears anomalous or not. The odds of finding new "fundamental" >>physics in such common regimes are infinitesimal. The only worthwhile >>outcome I expect to see from "cold fusion" work is precisely in the post-mortem >>work to understand what makes people think they are observing anomalous >>heat and element creation. > >Nonsense! Most of the discoveries being made in physics now is in quantum >regimes, which is certainly the domain of fusion and transmutation. The >odds can not be infinitesimal. They are already known not to be zero. I >say if enough people turn over enough rocks the odds approach 1 for a >discovery of a something new. Yes! And if enough monkeys pound on enough pc keyboards long enough, we will have a story that will rival War and Pizza. :-) Regards, Frederick >The important thing is diversity, being sure >that the same rock is not repeatedly turned over. > >This is the basis of Murphy's Law. Given n individual events, which occur >independently, with probability of "success" p near zero, there is a >probabilty of failure q = 1 - p, which is near 1. The probability of n >repeated failures without success is then q^n. The probability of at least >some success is s = 1 - q^n. The important thing about this is that lim >n->infinity 1-q^n = 1, for any 0event is sufficiently large the probability of success s approaches 1. > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:25:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA24904; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:24:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:24:45 -0700 Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 16:22:49 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vVjd11.0.y46.T2GQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19138 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 24 May 1998, Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > Hmmmm... 60 gallons, not bad. Tell me more , John ! > > The heat part I think I get , but how do you do the AC? > As long as you're in a dry climate, evaporative airconditioning will work quite well. Just blow air through a porus collection of wet material. They're widely used in Outback Australia. I don't know of a 12 V device though, maybe search on the WWW. Cheers Martin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:35:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA06449; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:29:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:29:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 19:26:23 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... Resent-Message-ID: <"usVyy3.0.ha1.e6GQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19139 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim - > I don't think so Rick. Jobs and the Woz came up > with the Mac way before Windows ever caught > on in the early `90s . Nut you said: > It's just a lousy Dos shell [...] Which it is. It's been about DOS-hating from the start. So what is has a chimera sitting on it now that's almost "as good as a Mac"? Pbbbbbt. Horace and Martin have a point, what little I know about Linux. The MacX system Apple's bringing together might take the Mac into the territory though - protected memory, threading, and all. The new interim CEO there is a bit of a Unix fan, I hear. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:43:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA08085; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:42:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ef01bd879f$4cbac3e0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:38:03 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"v2N__.0.F-1.tIGQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19140 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 11:25 PM Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? Martin Sevior wrote: >On Sun, 24 May 1998, Jim Ostrowski wrote: >> >> Hmmmm... 60 gallons, not bad. Tell me more , John ! >> >> The heat part I think I get , but how do you do the AC? >> > >As long as you're in a dry climate, evaporative air conditioning will work >quite well. Just blow air through a porous collection of wet material. They're >widely used in Outback Australia. I don't know of a 12 V device though, >maybe search on the WWW. Hey, I just fired up my evaporative cooler, it blows about 8,000 cfm (3/4 hp mtr)on high speed. The water circulator pump draws water from a float-controlled sump and wets a honeycomb structure that the air flows through. Usually a 30-40 deg temp drop except when the humidity gets high. The cooling towers on power plants and commercial building HVAC systems exploit this effect also, but they lose about 20% of the spray water, less in Florida. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Cheers > >Martin > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 22:53:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA30081; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:52:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:52:19 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:53:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: "Frederick J. Sparber" cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, George Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? In-Reply-To: <00ef01bd879f$4cbac3e0$4f8cbfa8 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"wTTmn.0.sL7.ISGQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19141 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 24 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > Hey, I just fired up my evaporative cooler, it > blows about 8,000 cfm (3/4 hp mtr)on high speed. The water circulator pump > draws water from a float-controlled sump and wets a honeycomb structure that > the air flows through. What's the conversion factor hp to watts ? Anybody know off the top of their head? 8000 cfm sounds like a lot for a 12 V motor. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 23:11:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA00310; Sun, 24 May 1998 23:08:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:08:48 -0700 Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:09:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"SnhnF.0.U4.lhGQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19142 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 24 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Jim - > > > I don't think so Rick. Jobs and the Woz came up > > with the Mac way before Windows ever caught > > on in the early `90s . > > Nut you said: Don't call me a "nut" , you Mac geek ! > > > It's just a lousy Dos shell [...] > > Which it is. It's been about DOS-hating from the start. OOOOH I get it now . you were one of those DOS challenged individuals who just hopped on the mac because it was sooo much easier . Never had time to learn assembler , couldn't bother with Basic . Point and click point and click , NOW THAT's a real world skill for ya! So what is has a > chimera sitting on it now that's almost "as good as a Mac"? Pbbbbbt. > Yeah pbbbbt to you ,too! > Horace and Martin have a point, what little I know about Linux. The MacX > system Apple's bringing together might take the Mac into the territory > though - protected memory, threading, and all. The new interim CEO there is > a bit of a Unix fan, I hear. > Yeah well Gates OWNS Apple now so it's so what. > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > (Just kidding Rick .... we gotta keep this DOs/MAC hissy fit happenin , right?) Jim O. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 23:19:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01263; Sun, 24 May 1998 23:18:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:18:33 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <010001bd87a4$93a21060$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Jim Ostrowski" Cc: , "George" Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 00:15:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"axyfz3.0.fJ.uqGQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19143 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jim Ostrowski To: Frederick J. Sparber Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com ; George Date: Sunday, May 24, 1998 11:52 PM Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? Jim Ostrowski wrote: > >On Sun, 24 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >> >> Hey, I just fired up my evaporative cooler, it >> blows about 8,000 cfm (3/4 hp mtr)on high speed. The water circulator pump >> draws water from a float-controlled sump and wets a honeycomb structure that >> the air flows through. > >What's the conversion factor hp to watts ? Anybody know off the top of >their head? 746 watts/hp, Jim. 8000 cfm sounds like a lot for a 12 V motor. I'm running a 120 vac motor so at .75 hp full load .75*746 = 560 watts ~= 4.66 amps. you'd need 46.6 amps at 12 volts. :-) I don't know what John is up too, but the evaporative coolers go through 60 gal of water in a short time at 8,000 cfm if the humidity is low. A quiet pond will lose about 3/4" of water/day by evaporation, at this altitude (4,800 ft). Regards, Frederick > > >Jim O. > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 23:40:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04533; Sun, 24 May 1998 23:39:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:39:11 -0700 Posted-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:32:25 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356911A5.1EE38D77 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:37:25 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: eprint:gr-qc/9805086 An Implication of Ether Drift Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iSutS1.0.g61.F8HQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19144 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, abstract gr-qc/9805086 From: Hong-Yi Zhou Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:46:47 GMT (5kb) An Implication of Ether Drift Author: Hong-Yi Zhou (Tsinghua U.,Beijing) Comments: 6 pages,2 figures available from the author The experimental results of the two-photon absorption(TPA) and M\"{o}ssbauer-rotor(MR) for testing the isotropy of the speed of light are explained in an ether drift model with a drift velocity of $\sim 10^{-3}c$. Further tests of the ether drift assumption are suggested. Availabe from xxx.lanl.gov Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 24 23:58:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA06309; Sun, 24 May 1998 23:56:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:56:59 -0700 Posted-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:50:37 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356915E9.31972BD6 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:55:37 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: House of SuperLuminal Tunneling Reserch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DUHA3.0.UY1.xOHQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19145 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi All, I found these pages focused on SuperLuminal Tunneling, a great resource for whom interested. Winfried Heitmann's scientific homepage http://www.uni-koeln.de/~abb11/ Group of Prof. Dr. G. Nimtz http://www.rrz.uni-koeln.de/math-nat-fak/ph2/n/grni.e.html The below page has also interesting and useful physics links http://info.tuwien.ac.at/cms/wh/ Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 00:32:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA10412; Mon, 25 May 1998 00:28:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 00:28:52 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:29:06 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Resent-Message-ID: <"-laJK1.0.cY2.psHQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19146 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:13 PM 5/24/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] > >At 190 C in a Dewar, or wrapped in Min-K or enough layers of >cigarette-package paper with enough layers you can cut the heat loss to less >than a watt/year. :-) > >Take a look at some of the "opacified paper" >or ceramic foam insulation used in the space program. The O2 bottle, >assuming iron at 2.3 Kg can hold: 0.1 * 4,187 * 2.3 Joules/deg C. Not a chance Fred. Fe has specific heat of 0.44 J/g-K, so 2.3 kg holds 1012 J/C. Using a temperature differential of 180 C that's 20,240 J or about 1000 seconds at 20 watts, assuming a constant output. I think Case is patient enough to wait 20 minutes before declaring victory. He has already established his calorimeter constant of about 0.11 W/K. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 05:24:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA29561; Mon, 25 May 1998 05:22:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 05:22:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <013801bd87d7$34ccd740$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 06:17:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Uz0Ax3.0.nD7.x9MQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19147 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 1:29 AM Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Horace wrote: >At 11:13 PM 5/24/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >[snip] >> >>At 190 C in a Dewar, or wrapped in Min-K or enough layers of >>cigarette-package paper with enough layers you can cut the heat loss to less >>than a watt/year. :-) >> >>Take a look at some of the "opacified paper" >>or ceramic foam insulation used in the space program. The O2 bottle, >>assuming iron at 2.3 Kg can hold: 0.1 * 4,187 * 2.3 Joules/deg C. > >Not a chance Fred. Fe has specific heat of 0.44 J/g-K, so 2.3 kg holds >1012 J/C. Same difference, 1012 J/C against 963 J/C (I used a better alloy). :-) Using a temperature differential of 180 C that's 20,240 J or >about 1000 seconds at 20 watts, assuming a constant output. As I said there are high temperaure insulation materials (like the heat-shield tiles on the Space Shuttle)that are in the range of 0.02 watts/meter*K. >I think Case >is patient enough to wait 20 minutes before declaring victory. He has >already established his calorimeter constant of about 0.11 W/K. I would like nothing better than to see the Case Miracle pan out. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 07:03:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA09842; Mon, 25 May 1998 07:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 07:01:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35697976.4021 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:00:22 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? References: <00af01bd879b$d3a79da0$4f8cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tpfDc3.0.eP2.GdNQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19148 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > Do a little thinking, Horace. > Ha, Fred, this is like telling a woman to get a little pregnant! Frank S. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 07:50:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA19275; Mon, 25 May 1998 07:48:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 07:48:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <014b01bd87eb$98c42e60$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 08:44:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"kH9Ms3.0.2j4.OJOQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19149 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 8:00 AM Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Frank Stenger wrote: >Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >> > >> Do a little thinking, Horace. >> >Ha, Fred, this is like telling a woman to get a little pregnant! LOL! "Ain't that the truth"? Horace gets my vote for the WIZARD'S office. :-) He sure give you a mental workout. Regards, Frederick > >Frank S. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 07:53:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA20177; Mon, 25 May 1998 07:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 07:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:45:20 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805251048_MC2-3E15-462B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Bc3hu.0.Bx4.5MOQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19150 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Frederick J. Sparber wrote: At 190 C in a Dewar, or wrapped in Min-K or enough layers of cigarette-package paper with enough layers you can cut the heat loss to less than a watt/year. :-) I presume this means one joule per year. I do not think any material could be such a good insulator with a 180 deg C difference between the inside and the outside, but in any case, this particular cell is not make from Min-K or cigarette-package paper. It is made with a Dewar flask, and the measured heat loss from it at this temperature is 20 watts, or 6.3E+8 joules per year. I do not understand what the performance of these others materials has to do with this situation. Earlier, Fred talked about copper powder and sulfur. I do not understand what those materials have to do with the price of eggs either, because, as I pointed out, the contents of this cell cannot and do not undergo any significant exothermic chemical reaction. Take a look at some of the "opacified paper" or ceramic foam insulation used in the space program. The O2 bottle, assuming iron at 2.3 Kg can hold: 0.1 * 4,187 * 2.3 Joules/deg C. Again, this cell is not made of "opacified paper" so this discussion is irrelevant. Why are we discussing copper powder, sulphur and opacified paper when these materials are nowhere in sight? There is no uranium oxide either, so conventional fission is ruled out, but why mention that? Everyone knows it. I do not know where the 2.3 kg came from, but the molar heat capacity of metals is ~26 J/mole/degree. 2.3 kg of iron is 41 moles, so that's 1,068 joules per degree (close to Fred's 963 joule estimate, and closer to Horace's 1,012 J/C.) That's umm . . . 192,000 joules with a 180 deg C Delta T. (Horace got 20,240 J for some reason.) The cooling rate will slow down drastically as the cell approaches ambient, but the fall to ~110 deg C with a 20 watt loss would take approximately 4,800 seconds, or 80 minutes. Looking back at tests with boiling water in Thermos flasks, intuitively that sounds about right. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 08:15:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA00866; Mon, 25 May 1998 08:10:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 08:10:58 -0700 Message-ID: <35697DB7.1071 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:18:32 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"N_ZGK.0.wC._dOQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19151 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Martin Sevior wrote: > > > As long as you're in a dry climate, evaporative airconditioning will work > quite well. Just blow air through a porus collection of wet material. They're > widely used in Outback Australia. I don't know of a 12 V device though, > maybe search on the WWW. Yes, it sounds good - but be careful about the bacteria population in the evaporative systems! Legionnaire's disease may lurk in such devices. (put stuff in the water) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 08:48:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA13072; Mon, 25 May 1998 08:46:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 08:46:58 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <015e01bd87f4$15a8dcc0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: , Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:44:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"OBGTX3.0.5C3.n9PQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19152 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 8:50 AM Subject: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Jed wrote: >To: Vortex > >Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > At 190 C in a Dewar, or wrapped in Min-K or enough layers of > cigarette-package paper with enough layers you can cut the heat loss to > less than a watt/year. :-) > >I presume this means one joule per year. I do not think any material could be >such a good insulator with a 180 deg C difference between the inside and the >outside, but in any case, this particular cell is not make from Min-K or >cigarette-package paper. True. >It is made with a Dewar flask, and the measured heat >loss from it at this temperature is 20 watts, or 6.3E+8 joules per year. I do >not understand what the performance of these others materials has to do with >this situation. Nothing really Jed, these discussions bring up ancillary thoughts to explore. Sometimes for nothing more than the exercise. > >Earlier, Fred talked about copper powder and sulfur. I do not >understand what those materials have to do with the price of eggs either, >because, as I pointed out, the contents of this cell cannot and do not undergo >any significant exothermic chemical reaction. The exotherm of CuS or the firing of a flashbulb in a cell such as the Case cell is merely to point out that a heat pulse in H2 or D2 at 50 psi sans catalyst could be used as a thermal blip to check the calorimeter response to transient heat pulses. As Scott pointed out, his calorimeter would need a 3600 joule pulse for an immediate response. > > > Take a look at some of the "opacified paper" or ceramic foam insulation > used in the space program. The O2 bottle, assuming iron at 2.3 Kg can > hold: 0.1 * 4,187 * 2.3 Joules/deg C. > >Again, this cell is not made of "opacified paper" so this discussion is >irrelevant. All discussion until Dr. Case gets his experiment finished is irrelevant. :-) >Why are we discussing copper powder, sulphur and opacified paper >when these materials are nowhere in sight? 150 systolic? :-) >There is no uranium oxide either, >so conventional fission is ruled out, but why mention that? Everyone knows it. >I do not know where the 2.3 kg came from, but the molar heat capacity of >metals is ~26 J/mole/degree. 2.3 kg of iron is 41 moles, so that's 1,068 >joules per degree (close to Fred's 963 joule estimate, and closer to Horace's >1,012 J/C.) That's umm . . . 192,000 joules with a 180 deg C Delta T. (Horace >got 20,240 J for some reason.) The cooling rate will slow down drastically as >the cell approaches ambient, but the fall to ~110 deg C with a 20 watt loss >would take approximately 4,800 seconds, or 80 minutes. Looking back at tests >with boiling water in Thermos flasks, intuitively that sounds about right. Agreed, Let's see what the experiment has to say. Mother Nature like my wife,always has the last word anyhow, doesn't She? :-) Regards, Frederick > >- Jed > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 09:05:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17388; Mon, 25 May 1998 09:02:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:02:53 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <016301bd87f6$4d24bdc0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:00:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"F0HT73.0.NF4.gOPQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19153 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 9:14 AM Subject: Re: 60 Gallon h20 air conditioner? >Martin Sevior wrote: >> >> >> As long as you're in a dry climate, evaporative air-conditioning will work >> quite well. Just blow air through a porus collection of wet material. They're >> widely used in Outback Australia. I don't know of a 12 V device though, >> maybe search on the WWW. > >Yes, it sounds good - but be careful about the bacteria population in >the evaporative systems! Legionnaire's disease may lurk in such >devices. (put stuff in the water) Good point, Frank, but the majority of homes and shops in the Southwest are cooled with evaporative coolers. The makeup sump gets very alkaline and salts up the Aspen shaving or paper "pads" and will corrode something fierce if you don't keep the units cleaned and sealed with asphalt. Some bright guy came up with having a bleed on the recirculator pump that drains into the sewer, this keeps the salts down, but can run up your water bill if you're not on a private well. With the water scarcity in the Southwest I expect these to be outlawed in the future. My "Mastercool" *Swamper* uses a horizontal wet honeycomb configuration about a foot thick,and the 8,000 cfm coming through about 6 ft^2 of this, drops the air temperature to the wetbulb temp in a single pass. Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 09:14:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA19989; Mon, 25 May 1998 09:12:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:12:16 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <017601bd87f7$7df015c0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Fishing Boat Air Conditioning Portable 12-Volt Evaporative Coolers (http://www. Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:09:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD87C5.293FDC40" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"5RJ3J3.0.Au4.VXPQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19154 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD87C5.293FDC40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There are only about 85,000 web sites about evaporative coolers. :-) http://www.swampy.net/fish.html ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD87C5.293FDC40 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Fishing Boat Air Conditioning Portable 12-Volt Evaporative Coolers.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Fishing Boat Air Conditioning Portable 12-Volt Evaporative Coolers.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.swampy.net/fish.html Modified=20135340F787BD0102 ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD87C5.293FDC40-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 10:11:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA09287; Mon, 25 May 1998 10:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 09:04:10 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Resent-Message-ID: <"Rm9t-3.0.1H2.VKQQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19156 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:45 AM 5/25/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: [snip] >That's umm . . . 192,000 joules with a 180 deg C Delta T. (Horace >got 20,240 J for some reason.) Mental lapse at near bedtime! It pays to show your work. I multiplied the 1,012 by 20 twice instead of once and left out the 180. At 8:44 AM 5/25/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >... Horace gets my vote for the WIZARD'S office. No! No! Ignore that fat guy behind the curtain over there! 8^) At 6:17 AM 5/25/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >As I said there are high temperaure insulation >materials (like the heat-shield tiles on the >Space Shuttle)that are in the range of >0.02 watts/meter*K. That's pretty good: 0.02 W/m-K = 20 mW/m-k = 0.2 mW/cm-K, which is about in the range of argon at 0.27 mW/cm-K, and twice as good as fiberglass at 0.4 mW/cm-K. At 180 C that's 72 mW/cm, or 20 W/278 cm, so A/l = 278. A 1 cm thick insulation of space tile ceramic would maintain a 180 C differential for a volume enclosed by 278 cm^2. A 2 cm thick insulation would cover about 550 cm^2, enough to enclose about a liter at the 20 watt output. Happened to notice H2 has conductivity of 2.13 mW/cm-K. Interesting D2 has thermal conductivity of 1.66 mW/cm-K, but at 300 C has conductivity of 2.72 mW/cm-K. Helium has conductivity of 2.26 mW/cm-K. He sure would make a great control run for sorting out some hypotheses, as you have suggested Fred. Argon might be even more interesting, if a bit outlandish. Looking at: Therm. Expected GAS Cond. Case result === ==== =========== He 2.26 underunity H2 2.13 standard D2 1.66 overunity Ar 0.27 way overunity You can see that helium should look "underunity" by Case's temperature based standard. Using argon too sure would separate the wheat from the chaff wouldn't it! Use of helium would have to be in a separate device from one used to establish helium production, of course. Argon, if helium free, could be used as a control for both. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 10:29:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01263; Mon, 25 May 1998 10:27:22 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:27:22 -0700 Message-ID: <3569A804.2672 skylink.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:19:00 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: noetic inetarena.com Subject: Woodward and ZPE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VrqC62.0.eJ.vdQQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19157 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Woodward and ZPE Woodward has prepared a variety of articles which represent a model of gravitation and inertial forces. These are available at: http://www.inetarena.com/~noetic/pls/woodward.html Woodward believes that the reaction force on an accelerating mass is due to the force of back radiation from the advanced gravitational wave generated by all the other masses everywhere in the universe. An accelerating mass generates a retarded gravitational wave, which is eventually received by all other masses. All masses everywhere in the universe, in turn generate an advanced wave (negative time wave) which is received back by the accelerating mass at exactly the same time and in exactly the same amount and direction, as the wave which is generated. The math for this works well, and was originally formulated by Feynman and Wheeler. None the less, this model strikes me as physically unrational -- Mother Nature has got to be much more efficient than this. Also, negative time is an interesting concept, but do we have any physical evidence whatsoever to support this idea? Woodward is especially critical of the ZPE model of the vacuum, and the theories of Haisch, Rueda, and Puthoff (RHP). In short, Woodward believes that ZPE is a complete fiction. I believe ZPE is not a fiction. Separate from the question of the validity of the inertial theories of RHP, there is substantial experimental and theoretical evidence to support the existence of the zero point field -- from SED, Van der Waals forces, and quantum mechanics. A fairly convincing analysis is provided in the book, "The Quantum Vacuum". Woodward freely adopts ideas from the Maxwells equation analogy of Gravitoelectric-Gravitomagnetic waves. But, it seems to me he also neglects parts of this theory which conflict with his ideas. I have much the same problem with the ZPE based inertial and gravitational theories of RHP. The model is essentially static -- gravitoelectric oriented. Spin, and spin energy, is not incorporated in either the parton generator or the receiver. The gravitomagnetic field is the equivalent of spin density -- it is measured in MKS units of Angular Momentum per Cubic-Meter. If this field exists in space, a working theory must incorporate spin. What is it in the aether that is spinning, why is it spinning, and why would it have a quantum spin with a value of 2? It is known that an EM field can act on itself, for example rotation of a vertically polarized via the Faraday effect, or the B3 photon model of Vigier, Evans, et al. It may be possible to incorporate aether spin in the context of a ZPE background field. Another riddle. If you accelerate a charge it radiates energy. For example if you place an electric charge on a rotating platform. It radiates a circularly polarized EM wave, and in the process it looses energy and the platform looses rotation speed. But if you place a variety of equal and opposite charges on a rotating platform (creating in effect an uncharged inertial mass), each individual charge must still be radiating, yet the platform now maintains its angular velocity. EM energy must be somehow reflected back to each individual charge, in the same amount that it is radiated out. In this sense, Woodward must be at least partially correct. But where does the back radiation come from? And why does a rotating mass result in a static (near field) gravitomagnetic dipole moment? It seems much more likely to me that all of the individual charges making up the inertial mass, act to absorb all the radiation of all of the equal and opposite charges, except for the EM energy of the near field of each of the moving charges, which might be used to construct a model of the gravitomagnetic dipole field. More speculation. Equal and opposite electric charges and currents generate equal and opposite EM fields, and if these fields are time-varying, spin 2 scalar waves are propagated. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 10:49:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA15011; Mon, 25 May 1998 10:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 10:47:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3569AE46.4456 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 13:45:42 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: <3569A804.2672 skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cyWZH.0.Og3.WwQQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19158 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > (snip) > More speculation. Equal and opposite electric charges and > currents generate equal and opposite EM fields, and if these > fields are time-varying, spin 2 scalar waves are propagated. >From this, Robert, it sounds like you may understand what a "scalar wave" is. I can understand that temperature and pressures are scalar things but how can any kind of wave exist without some vector properties (velocity, energy flow, etc.) How about a "Popular Science" level explanation? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 13:21:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA29486; Mon, 25 May 1998 13:03:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 13:03:24 -0700 Message-ID: <3569CC98.524C skylink.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 12:55:04 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: <3569A804.2672 skylink.net> <3569AE46.4456@interlaced.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cYiZc3.0.eC7.CwSQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19160 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Francis J. Stenger wrote: > From this, Robert, it sounds like you may understand what a "scalar > wave" is. I can understand that temperature and pressures are scalar > things but how can any kind of wave exist without some vector properties > (velocity, energy flow, etc.) How about a "Popular Science" level > explanation? I wish. It is tough to find much inforation about this. Bearden has put out a lot of stuff (stangely undecipherable), there are Whittaker's articles from the turn of the century (somewhat readable), some other miscellaneous and mainly qualitative articles, and some articles from the field of non-linear optics (mostly over my head). As for your second question -- A wave can just as well be composed of a scalar as well as a vector. The electric scalar potentical is often expressed as a wave function. Sound pressure is a scalar wave. But, how does one derive gravitoelectric and gravitomagnetic field vectors from a scalar EM field? Maybe it doesn't make sense to begin with. I think it is likely that it does. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 13:49:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA07628; Mon, 25 May 1998 13:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 13:46:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: RE: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 20:43:22 +0000 Message-ID: <19980525204318.AAA28330 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"O_Lf03.0.3t1.9YTQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19161 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed and Hank, In this context, the purpose of such filters is in their predictive estimation capacity. At CU in Colorado Springs when I was a student, they were being studied by graduate engineers mostly interested in improved missile guidance for moving targets, like approaching missiles. In a feedback control system, data sampled at different points in the system to be controlled is fed into the model, from which comes the control signals to attempt to bring output to a desired result, to bring the system under control. The model is an imperfect analogue of the system it dynamically emulates, and the more perfectly it does this, the less correction is required. The "goal" of control is to reduce correction factors to nothing. Predictive estimation is a powerful tool to allow effective emulation especially valuable with unstable systems or where error cannot be tolerated. Since I have not read anything on the control systems for isoperibolic calorimeters, I should not comment further, but that has not stopped me in the past. Unless you are looking for really precise measurement of heat fluctuations, the need for such an elaborate system that gives ammunition to skeptics (anything difficult to understand is a de facto source of error) eludes me. No doubt Mitch Swartz has explained the requirement, but Jed's common sense appeal that sacrificing precision to preserve simplicity at this stage of investigation when the greatest need, IMO, is for that watershed experiment that eliminates all doubt for all but the pathological skeptics, makes the most sense. 'Pathological skeptic' is not a perjorative here, for it merely describes the individuals who are psychologically unable to grasp that what is proven contradicts what they thought they knew. As we are often reminded, the history of science gives numerous examples of this. Thanks for the history. Ed >Jed, Ed > I was waiting for someone more expert to expand on Kalman >filters, but no one has yet, so I will try. Basically they are filters >to reduce the effects of noise on servomechanisms, and other feedback >systems. They also have an analogy in communication theory. In some >sense they are a digital equivalence to Norbert Wiener's "Yellow Peril", >his treatise on "Extrapolation, Interpolation and Smoothing in the >presence of Noise" which came out in WW2, to help design Radar systems. >Jed is right, they involve lots of differential equations and Matrix >theory and stuff. The most usefull application of them I know is the >calculation of the exact orbits of satellites, so we know just where >they are at any time, and our estimate of their positions is constantly >getting more accurate over time. > >Hank > >> ---------- >> From: Ed Wall[SMTP:ewall-rsg worldnet.att.net] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Friday, May 15, 1998 2:13 PM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry >> >> Jed wrote: >> >> >You would be surprised how many people become confused about such >> relatively >> >simple issues. Many experts who know the trees down to the last leaf >> have >> >trouble seeing the forest. For example, I expect Elliot Kennel knows >> Kalman >> >filters and differential equations like the back of his hand, but I >> still >> >think his "OCV heat shift" hypothesis was incorrect. >> > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 14:18:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA11015; Mon, 25 May 1998 14:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 14:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980519184925.00c881b4 mail.bahnhof.se> X-Sender: david mail.bahnhof.se X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 17:49:25 +0100 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: David Jonsson Subject: St.-Petersburg Conference Cc: gravitics1 aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id OAA10992 Resent-Message-ID: <"gVCFU.0.0i2.RxTQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19162 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There is a new conference in problems of Physics in St.-Petersburg in June 22-27. Look below. Does anyone know of any non-Russian contributor? I was on a similar conference in 1996 and my impression is that the Russians are not as tied to conventional thinking as we are. David ---- RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES RUSSIAN GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY PETROVSKY ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND ARTS ST.-PETERSBURG's PHYSICAL SOCIETY ST.-PETERSBURG's REPRESENTATION OF «EXICO AB» COMPANY, SWEDEN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF RADIO AND ELECTRONICS PRELIMINARY ANNOUNCEMENT Dear Dr. Jonsson, We have the honor to invite You to take part in the International Scientific Congress «Fundamental Problems of Natural Sciences», which will take place in June 22-27, 1998 in St.-Petersburg, Russia Organizers suggest the following problems to be discussed at the Congress-98: 1. Substance, Electromagnetism, Gravitation 2. Elements, structure and interaction of Earth and Universe systems 3. Mechanics 4. Nontraditional Sources of Energy and Technologies The new research into physics and other spheres of Natural Sciences will be presented at the Congress-98. It is suggested to discuss materials of International Conferences «New ideas in Natural Science», June, 1996 and «Space, Time, Gravitation», September, 1996 at the final session of the Congress-98. If You agree to take part in the Congress-98 Organizers ask You to fill out the Registration form enclosed hereinafter and send it together with the Summary of Your paper (no more than 1/2 page) to the LOC before December, 1997. Please, inform us about the number of problem for presentation of Your report. In January, 1998 LOC will send You the Second Announcement with the detailed information. Now Orguiizing Committees of two International Conferences («New Ideas in Natural science», June 1996 and «Space, Time, Gravitation», September, 1996) have jointed. The chairman of the united LOC is Michael Varin, the Vice-Chairmen are Marina Karpoukhina and Anatoly Smirnov. Address of the LOC: Office: Dr. M.Varin Home: Dr. M.Varin Postal box N 3 65-9-1 Pulkovskoye Rd 193036 St.-Petersburg 196140 St.-Petersburg, Russia Russia Contacts: Fax: (7) (812) 277-12-56 Phone: Tatyuna Dogunonskaya, Secretary Office: (7) (812) 277-00-37 Home: (7) (812) 224-89-76 (please, E-mail: exico mail.nevalink.ru call after 8:00 p.m.local time) Organiers of Congress-98 September 11, 1997 David Jonsson Phone +46-18-24 51 52 Fax +46-18-24 51 56 Uppsala Cellular GSM +46-706-339487 E-mail David Bahnhof.se Sweden Web: http://www.bahnhof.se/~david Postgiro 499 40 54-7 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 14:33:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA13243; Mon, 25 May 1998 14:24:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 14:24:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 11:21:20 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... Resent-Message-ID: <"WMgiF1.0.pE3.y5UQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19164 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim - > Don't call me a "nut" , you Mac geek ! Thank you for so charitably pointing out my typo! > OOOOH I get it now . you were one of those DOS > challenged individuals who just hopped on the > mac because it was sooo much easier . Thank you for so charitably pointing out my ease-of-use impairment! > Yeah well Gates OWNS Apple now so it's so > what. Thank you for so charitably pointing out what cretinous corporate culture running Apple Computer into the ground over recent years has left us with! ;) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI <...He said, while eating a Big Mac, running windows, watching baywatch, drinking a Bud..."now *that's* yer high-tech threaded multitasking!"> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 14:37:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA07064; Mon, 25 May 1998 14:14:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 14:14:19 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3569A804.2672 skylink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 11:13:31 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"jboWe1.0.Hk1.gyTQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19163 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert - ZPE is a favorite on this list, but Woodward has a fairly convincing gizmo that shows transient mass fluctuations pretty much in the manner his theory predicts. That could make a big difference. I also wonder why his scalar gravitational energy constant (Phi) implicated in his inertia theory can't just coexist with ZPE. Are they necessarily mutually exclusive? The transient mass changes he predicts should show up in a lot of places, wherever mass is rapidly gaining or losing energy. For instance, a superconductor spinning in the presence of some driving solenoids on its rim might have supercurrents continuously formed and/or quenched out of these areas which are fixed in the lab frame, showing a continuous mass fluctuation (and associated radiation or shielding?) of one sort or another. Also a stationary SC with a supercurrent running when it warms through its Tc undergoes a sharp specific heat transition which should generate a single (positive?) TMF - just what Schnurer, Fred Rounds, and others have seen. That this seems to be a 'one way' effect - seen on warming but not chilling - appears consistent with the abrupt stopping of supercurrent at Tc as opposed to its more gradual generation on cooling in the presence of a magnetic field. Abruptness counts with Woodward's TMFs. I used a really heavy glass rod target in my experiments which, if such transient effects do indeed radiate something or shield gravity, would have certainly damped it out. Schnurer's suggestion to use lightweight test masses makes sense in this context; they have to be responsive short lived effects. To check for a TMF in a warming SC, a magnet should be swiped across the SC just before placing it in a lightweight quickly sealable container strong enough not to pop as any residual LN2 evaporates as the temperature rises, and with enough thermal mass inside to mitigate internal temperature changes to prevent any substantial air movements outside the container due to thermal gradients. Weighing the container as the SC goes through Tc should reveal the momentary mass anomaly independent of evaporating LN2 mass. This is pretty much what the suggestion has been for improved Rounds/Schnurer-type tests anyway. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 14:43:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA15439; Mon, 25 May 1998 14:39:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 14:39:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3569E49C.6776 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:37:32 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: <3569A804.2672 skylink.net> <3569AE46.4456@interlaced.net> <3569CC98.524C@skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IrBqM2.0.9n3.qJUQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19165 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > (snip) > A wave can just as well be composed of a scalar as well as a vector. > The electric scalar potentical is often expressed as a wave function. > Sound pressure is a scalar wave. > Thanks for the input, Robert. I guess I can see that we could have a "temperature wave" in a substance. Then, by knowing the gradient of the scalar temperature, we could write an expression for the thermal heat flow as a power vector, I guess. Maybe it's the physical reality of potentials that bothers me - not that potentials are not "real" - it's just that if I had a tiny lab at an arbitrary point in space, I could wave a charged particle around and I could measure the B field, and if I measured the static force on the particle, I could find the E field. Now, can I measure the value of the vector potential, A, at a point in space without knowing something about the "landscape" around my little point lab? Maybe I'm drifting off the subject here but this reflects a long-time foggyness on my part as to the fundamental nature of a potential, like A, vs. the intrinsic point functions like B and E which have energy, mass, etc. Just more Stenger babble! BTW, I seem to be comfortable with "derivatives" of potentials - i.e., potential gradients - maybe I have trouble waving my foot around trying to find the reference base to stand on for a potential function in deep space. There I go again - trying to understand electromagnetics! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 15:01:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA13951; Mon, 25 May 1998 14:42:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 14:42:06 -0700 Posted-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 00:35:53 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <3569E566.CD64C89D verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 00:40:54 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Re: Vesselin Petkov paper... and Lockyer model References: <3565248F.6DA45E79@verisoft.com.tr> <3568A266.E39@skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MlWlb1.0.vP3.jMUQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19166 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > > Hamdi Ucar wrote: > > Yes, this is logical, remind me Lockyer's model for elementary particles. > > Lockyer's cubical geometry for elementary particles seems to > me to be intuitively wrong, yet it is remarkable how he can > accurately derive so much data for so many particles. Lockyer > begins with a model of the photon, which seems to make good > sense. > I did not much bothered with the incompatibility of Lockyer vectors with Maxwell equations. I assumed E, B and S would be arbitrary vectors stripped from physical meaning. I considered only he used similar rules of electromagnetism on combining these vect ors to build his 5 topologies. Actually his models are purely topological, as he not profited from electromagnetic properties of these vector in his calculation. If he were able to use them, he could directly calculate basic properties of electron, could answer how the electric charge exist (Although he made the half way, by relating the electrical charge to topology) and answer most important question in physics. Maybe an correct physical meaning to these vectors could be assigned, but my knowledge is no t enough for such a analysis. Beside this, I believe his models to build proton and neutron should be considered correct as they are numerically proved with precessions to satisfy most of the physicists. I did analysed his calculations and not see any tricks/corrections to converge hi s calculations to experimental values of the p and n. Your analysis sound good to me. Note: I recall the "scalar" term used on scalar waves and on other entities comes from the model to describe fields by potentials, not by vectors. I am encountering the "scalar" term also on regular physics papers, so I think it is mathematically founded. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 15:13:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA19309; Mon, 25 May 1998 15:11:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 15:11:26 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01df01bd8829$c973fb60$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Test Your Lightning IQ (http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/light Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 16:08:47 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD87F7.66866EC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"sG8jq1.0.Vj4.DoUQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19167 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD87F7.66866EC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Be Sure to take in the Slide Show. http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/lightning980522.html ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD87F7.66866EC0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Test Your Lightning IQ.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Test Your Lightning IQ.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/lightning980522.html Modified=E0620E892988BD0148 ------=_NextPart_000_0021_01BD87F7.66866EC0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 15:46:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA23099; Mon, 25 May 1998 15:32:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 15:32:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 15:32:35 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Interesting journal Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"YaFwN2.0.re5.56VQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19169 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Here's the ANTI PHYSICS REVIEW, some interesting reading (dissident, not crackpot) http://archive.ifa.ro/cgi-bin/journal?id=atpr ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 May 25 15:53:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA21546; Mon, 25 May 1998 15:23:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 15:23:28 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8801.828A79E0 pm3-146.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Woodward and ZPE Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:21:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8801.8293A1A0" Resent-Message-ID: <"4pKQ81.0.TG5.VzUQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19168 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8801.8293A1A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Robert Stirniman[SMTP:robert skylink.net] Sent: Monday, May 25, 1998 12:19 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: noetic inetarena.com Subject: Woodward and ZPE >An=20 >accelerating mass generates a retarded gravitational wave,=20 >which is eventually received by all other masses. All=20 >masses everywhere in the universe, in turn generate an=20 >advanced wave (negative time wave) which is received=20 >back by the accelerating mass at exactly the same time=20 >and in exactly the same amount and direction, as the=20 >wave which is generated. In other words, the accelerating mass sends out a wave that is recieved = by the rest of the mass in the universe, which in turn sends out a wave = back to the accelerating mass that reaches it as the first wave left, = since the second wave travels backward in time. If this is what he's = speaking of, I find it very hard to believe. Negative time? I find that = VERY hard to believe, in lieu of the exeperiments which seem to show = drift in an absolute reference frame (or ether, if you like). Isn't it = more reasonable that the accelerating mass is merely reacting with a = medium which provides a force to cause the mass fluctuations? A medium = like, say, the ZPF? Then again, who knows? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8801.8293A1A0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IgoWAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABABUAAABSRTogV29v ZHdhcmQgYW5kIFpQRQCaBgEFgAMADgAAAM4HBQAZABEAFQAIAAEAIgEBIIADAA4AAADOBwUAGQAR AA8ACgABAB4BAQmAAQAhAAAANjMwMEY2MzJFOEYzRDExMUE3NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAAAAcBA5AG AOgFAAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAuAAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQCgG11q K4i9AR4AcAABAAAAFQAAAFJFOiBXb29kd2FyZCBhbmQgWlBFAAAAAAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG9iCtq Vd2NEWLz8hHRp17o4ArBAAAAAB4AHgwBAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAfDAEAAAAXAAAAc3RrQHN1 bmhlcmFsZC5pbmZpLm5ldAAAAwAGEIpLbs8DAAcQ7QMAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAC0tLS0tLS0tLS1G Uk9NOlJPQkVSVFNUSVJOSU1BTlNNVFA6Uk9CRVJUQFNLWUxJTktORVRTRU5UOk1PTkRBWSxNQVky NSwxOTk4MTI6MTlQTVRPOlZPUlRFWC1MQEVTS0lNT0MAAAAAAgEJEAEAAABZBAAAVQQAAAMJAABM WkZ1mrgIZP8ACgEPAhUCpAPkBesCgwBQEwNUAgBjaArAc2V07jIGAAbDAoMyA8YHEwKDujMTDX0K gAjPCdk7Ff94MjU1AoAKgQ2xC2Bu8GcxMDMUIAsKFCIMARpjAEAgCoUKi2xpMQQ4MALRaS0xNDTP DfAM0BzDC1kxNgqgA2D2dAWQBUAtHucKhx2bDDD1HmZGA2E6H+4eZgyCB/HGYgSQBUBTdGkEoAdw gQBwW1NNVFA6A2AhI8JAc2t5HCBua/QubhIAXR+PIJ0GYAIwCyHPIttNAiBkYXksGwXQKpAgGDAq sDE5ORI4K0AyOitQIFBNsyY/IJ1Ubyh/Itt2FaGgZXgtbEAHkGsHcDRvLgWgbSwvIJ1DYxMuTyLb bm8SAGljQO8LgBIACsAJ8GExHzIvI/E4dWJqHqEzfyLbV281BHB3CxEgAHA7UFpQZkUa7xvzMzYd Zxo5Pvs9fR5mQQOgNp09/z8PO2DQY2NlbASQYSQgGQB2IADABBFnCfBDwgeRYT4gFgA18Q2wO1AJ wGF2XmkBkCQgAiAHQCA7IHaeZSqwQF9Bbz8ud2g1kGRoIAQAIGVG4AIwdd0HQGwq8BYAQ5BpRuA7 UNZiKvBLMSAegGgEkEQz/QeQLhNwTFFHL0g/Py5M5NlKwnJ5SkAEkGVKkAOg+UyRIHUDAFFBEfAq sFHifwhwA6BEljthTZ9Or0+/YTxkdgBwQ5A7UEbCICh9JfBnQ+FYASQgB4BGsylfSjhLh1Q/VU8/ LmIA0Gt/TAJSEkN/O2AFQDBgANB080tRUhJzYVjxWNNar1u//1ZfO4FR4V/fYKAIYAIwO2P+ZCQw HqFGYSqwRFBSAzxfPz1vYq9JqVfySkdElmQutwqPGg9tIkkDoEyEdwWw/GRzKrBeT0RDEfAqcAQg /whgQ1FX1EyQX6FZ5AiQS9XLUhIWAHMFQG9mUgNEQ59R70pFUwVxv13DdG9wT/9ENHLDFgAA0Eyg dTFDUWdE/xyQEeBrVUOwAYAqsACQV5H/YEQFkTuBcnRF8UOgBCBdwu87I3VSB3FNQEl0okqhSqHX SkBfoUygJ3GRcHqQMND3RBF0kCqwSXuRZGIFQFFC/4CgOzJ4oSPAHCBK0U1AB8ANWGk/gcZyw1ZF Ulm3gr5S04NhdXSGMGBlgRA/BRAHgAIwgEJKYhHwZW3ReJJzaG8H4GQGgXLxdwOgA5EBoHMG8HIg dCJm71GhfNIDUGCiKAWxEgBModtS0XSgeQhghwFrWVB/kfhzbidy8VChBbB0IkRQ/0ZxAmBypXjf dQQEIAeAFgD/S1Nf8UQCA/BMkEUhB4BmgP51iTBKRB5hRhANsEUSAhDGcnzieLBjYXUR8HS4XRjQ dR6wSyBGUnOEoEE/koaNQnyRKpJSEjuwRj/9O+xUTKCKQVhgC4B2Qniw2ms1UHeWQDvsSyWQUcB6 Uk1ATZSgS0AEAB6Qcgts9RUhAJ0gAAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzCgpPqUKoi9AUAACDCg pPqUKoi9AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AABl2Q== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8801.8293A1A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 16:05:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA29189; Mon, 25 May 1998 15:58:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 15:58:46 -0700 From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Frederick J. Sparber'" , "'Vortex Discussion Group'" , "Simon Laidely" Subject: RE: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 09:08:16 +1000 Message-ID: <000001bd8832$2cc51de0$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <003f01bd876e$adea2ec0$4f8cbfa8 default> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"O_cm12.0.w77.aUVQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19170 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick wrote >You miss the point, Jed. A thermal ENERGY RELEASE in a bottle with no heat >capacity to speak except the 5 lbs of iron of Case's O2 bottle can achieve high temperatures with >very small heat content. For instance you can stick your hand in an oven at >400 F with no discomfort. Now stick a pan of water in the oven for a while >then try sticking your hand in. >BURN DISCLAIMER! >Snip the 5th grade physics lesson etc. Oh Frederick! 6th grade physics lesson: Heat capacity and heat transfer rates are two different things. (Pedantic, I know, but it serves as a good introduction to the next story, which I hope you think was worthy of the cheap snipe.) In the early 90's a group of people performed a firewalk. If my memory serves me correctly, over 70 people walked across a pit of burning coals, yet only one person got burned. The lead person had received a sign which, the contents of, made him believed that he would be safe from the potential of burns. With this belief he led the march, despite known temperatures of over 1000 degree Centigrade and a heat capacity to store many kilojoules. The group - a mixture of the Australian and New Zealand Sceptic Societies. The sign - the diffusion equation for heat conduction. (The sign was a placard, in other words, a sign. ;-) ) Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 17:08:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA06535; Mon, 25 May 1998 17:04:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:04:37 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <026b01bd8839$808bc940$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:01:51 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"Y3Kwl3.0.xb1.JSWQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19172 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Brendan Hall To: 'Frederick J. Sparber' ; 'Vortex Discussion Group' ; Simon Laidely Date: Monday, May 25, 1998 4:59 PM Subject: RE: Chemical Self-Sustainers? Brendan wrote: >Frederick wrote > >>You miss the point, Jed. A thermal ENERGY RELEASE in a bottle with no heat >>capacity to speak except the 5 lbs of iron of Case's O2 >bottle can achieve high temperatures with >>very small heat content. For instance you can stick your hand in an oven at >>400 F with no discomfort. Now stick a pan of water in the oven for a while >>then try sticking your hand >in. > >>BURN DISCLAIMER! > >>Snip the 5th grade physics lesson etc. > >Oh Frederick! 6th grade physics lesson: Heat capacity and heat transfer >rates are two different things. Okay,okay,already. 28.0 joule/mole *K for hydrogen and about 42,000 joule/mole for H2O released when it condenses on your hand. :-) This makes a small heat pipe a better heat conductor than a meter diameter bar of copper with a delta t of less than 2 degrees. >(Pedantic, I know, but it serves as a good >introduction to the next story, which I hope you think was worthy of the >cheap snipe.) Snipes don't come cheap in this country. The last time I went Snipe hunting I wore out a candle and four D cells. Not to mention nearly freezing my butt off. > >In the early 90's a group of people performed a firewalk. If my memory >serves me correctly, over 70 people walked across a pit of burning coals, >yet only one person got burned. The lead person had received a sign which, >the contents of, made him believe that he would be safe from the potential >of burns. With this belief he led the march, despite known temperatures of >over 1000 degree Centigrade and a heat capacity to store many kilojoules. >The group - a mixture of the Australian and New Zealand Sceptic Societies. >The sign - the diffusion equation for heat conduction. (The sign was a >placard, in other words, a sign. ;-) ) Ignorance IS bliss, isn't it? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Brendan Hall > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 17:11:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA06474; Mon, 25 May 1998 17:04:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:04:17 -0700 Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:04:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"UZEU53.0.4b1.0SWQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19171 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 25 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Jim - > > > Don't call me a "nut" , you Mac geek ! > > Thank you for so charitably pointing out my typo! Typo ? What does "nut" untypo to? > > > OOOOH I get it now . you were one of those DOS > > challenged individuals who just hopped on the > > mac because it was sooo much easier . > > Thank you for so charitably pointing out my ease-of-use impairment! > Well look on the bright side , you haven't wasted any time (TIME=$) trying to fix something that never worked right in the first place (windows)...Except DOS DID and does work and is actually a workable program.. > > Yeah well Gates OWNS Apple now so it's so > > what. > > Thank you for so charitably pointing out what cretinous corporate culture > running Apple Computer into the ground over recent years has left us with! You are so right ! A big monopoly just like the gov't says. Cretinous Corporate culture unfortunately is what we have to deal with , sooner or later, one way or another .... what are you (we) gonna do about it? What if somehwere down the road with all the mergers that happen we get three major banks running everything? And say 36 Corporations , three for each Federal Reserve District , so you COULDN'T say it was a monopoly . Did you know that we live in the United States of the Centrally Controlled Federal Reserve Districts? Which District is "Hawaii" in? Do you know? > > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > <...He said, while eating a Big Mac, running windows, watching baywatch, > drinking a Bud..."now *that's* yer high-tech threaded multitasking!"> > NOW WAIT JUST A DOGGONE MINUTE! It's called a "WHOPPER" ! Just want to set the record straight ,here. Jim Ostrowski PS- Good comeback ,Rick. Let's call a truce ok ? ... this could escalate ya know ...) > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 17:36:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA11658; Mon, 25 May 1998 17:31:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:31:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:31:23 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: other Marinov motor Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"MHoF01.0.4s2.UrWQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19173 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I had seen mention of an earlier Marinov motor based on ball bearings. There's an article about this on MIKE'S ELECTRIC STUFF http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/bbmotor.html ( on http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/electric.html) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 May 25 18:38:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA16932; Mon, 25 May 1998 18:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:36:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:20:26 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: the other Tampere Experiment! :) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"SoAJV1.0.Q84.PoXQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19174 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tampere U. turbojet-assisted bicycle http://lenkkari.cs.tut.fi/~sk73171/turbo.html ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 May 25 18:48:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA18932; Mon, 25 May 1998 18:45:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:45:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 15:42:04 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... Resent-Message-ID: <"Q7pcf.0.jd4.qwXQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19175 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jim - > Typo ? What does "nut" untypo to? See the key just to the left of "n" on querty baords? I meant to say "But you said.." - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 19:38:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA29995; Mon, 25 May 1998 19:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 19:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:34:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"XYP8W3.0.aK7.4hYQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19176 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:45 PM 5/25/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: [snip] > I can understand that temperature and pressures are scalar >things but how can any kind of wave exist without some vector properties >(velocity, energy flow, etc.) How about a "Popular Science" level >explanation? OK, I'll give it a shot. I don't really know what I am talking about, but can throw some words at the problem and see if some of them stick. I think the notion of scalar fields comes from the idea that electromagnetic fields superimpose, i.e. their vectors sum at each point in the composite field. It is said they can superimpose because the EM field is carried by photons, which are bosons. Two or more bosons may superimpose, and may travel effortlessly through each other. We don't see light that does not travel directly towards our eyes, for example. All the other light travelling in other directions has no lasting effect when crossing the light on its way to our eyes. A vector is a point with both direction and magnitude. A scalar is a point with only magnitude. A vector field is a volume where every point has an associated vector. Given two field generating points, and their instantaneous vector fields (either electric or magnetic), the instantaneous composite field can be calculated by summing the two vector fields. This generates a seeming paradox when the two vectors at a point are in opposite directions, but are of the same magnitude. The vector sum is zero, but the scalar sum is not zero, thus the result might be called a "scalar field" for points where the vector directions are equal but opposed. In fact it creates a paradox at every point where the two field's vectors A and B (not to be confused with A the vector potential or B the magnetic intensity) are not colinear because then |A + B| < |A|+|B|, where |A| means the length of vector A. There should be some amount of scalar field at nearly every point in the two overlapping fields generated by charges not at the same point. If the comprizing fields are both still really there, then they must still have mass and energy. If the mass and energy are really still there, then there is a paradox regarding the conservation of energy, because no energy is required create the overlapping fields if they cancel, or to the degree they cancel. For example, a long wire with current creates a circular magnetic field of intensity 1/r about itself. If we could superimpose two parallel straight wires carrying current in opposite directions, then the two fields would "collapse" due to their vectors summing to zero. They would become a totally scalar field. Of course we could say the net current collapsed also, because no *net* current would flow! A torus coil, or infinitely long linear coil, both create strong external scalar fields. The bifilar coil, comprized of pair(s) of opposed current wires, is a kind of compromise situation, based on the principle that it takes much less energy to increase current in a twisted pair coil than in a simple coil. The bifilar coil is thought to create a scalar field. Now, if there were some way to extract energy from this scalar field which took no energy to create, then this wouldn't be Kansas anymore! If scalar fields, with true physical meaning, can be created, then so can scalar radiation. The unit of scalar radiation could be thought of as two exactly out of phase photons with exactly opposing phases and with exactly the same direction and location at the same time. BOTH B and E vectors would always be zero. The existence of such is a contradiction to Heisenberg? Maybe not, since we really can determine *neither* the location, nor momentum of such a packet. Further, it is thought such waves can exist with non-zero vector potential A and scalar potential phi, and that such waves are longitudinal. The Ahronov-Bohm effect, the interference of the vector potential A on electron interference patterns in the absence of E or B demonstrates that the vector potential A is real. There is thus a basis for assuming the scalar potential is real and that scalar waves exist. Regaining the energy of such a packet requires separating the two photons, but there is no handle for doing such, unless uncertainty provides momentary opportunities. Vacuum fluctuations might be just such handles, created by random phase fluctuations in scalar photons? Maybe the vacuum is filled with great amounts of scalar photons, and their fluctuations at moments of interaction with matter creates the pressure that is expanding the universe? Personally I wounder about the existence of a vector potential A out beyond the quantum waveform of the particle. In other words, can A ever be a macro level effect? I don't see it. The vector potential A has no specific location in EM theory, does it? Questions of highly related interest: what happens when EM radiation of wavelength lambda is sent down a waveguide (with a reflective end) of length (n+1/2)*lambda? When cancellation occurs, what is in the waveguide? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 20:33:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA09041; Mon, 25 May 1998 20:31:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 20:31:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980526032439.20598.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 20:24:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: the other Tampere Experiment! :) To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Wy4oT1.0.BD2.ZUZQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19177 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: LOL -- I think the National Forest Service might give me a ticket with something like that attached to my MTB...... Obvious to me why it's named the Eunuch...look where that damn Turbo-Jet is bolted on! Thanks for the link! ---William Beaty wrote: > > > Tampere U. turbojet-assisted bicycle > > http://lenkkari.cs.tut.fi/~sk73171/turbo.html > Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 21:41:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA01978; Mon, 25 May 1998 21:39:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 21:39:31 -0700 Message-ID: <356A4604.6630 worldnet.att.net> Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:33:08 -1000 From: bill perry Reply-To: wperry3092 worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"_4lJv3.0.lU.2UaQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19178 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 1:45 PM 5/25/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > > [snip] > > I can understand that temperature and pressures are scalar > >things but how can any kind of wave exist without some vector properties > >(velocity, energy flow, etc.) How about a "Popular Science" level > >explanation? > > OK, I'll give it a shot. I don't really know what I am talking about, but > can throw some words at the problem and see if some of them stick. > > I think the notion of scalar fields comes from the idea that > electromagnetic fields superimpose, i.e. their vectors sum at each point in > the composite field. It is said they can superimpose because the EM field > is carried by photons, which are bosons. Two or more bosons may > superimpose, and may travel effortlessly through each other. We don't see > light that does not travel directly towards our eyes, for example. All the > other light travelling in other directions has no lasting effect when > crossing the light on its way to our eyes. > > A vector is a point with both direction and magnitude. A scalar is a point > with only magnitude. A vector field is a volume where every point has an > associated vector. Given two field generating points, and their > instantaneous vector fields (either electric or magnetic), the > instantaneous composite field can be calculated by summing the two vector > fields. This generates a seeming paradox when the two vectors at a point > are in opposite directions, but are of the same magnitude. The vector sum > is zero, but the scalar sum is not zero, thus the result might be called a > "scalar field" for points where the vector directions are equal but > opposed. In fact it creates a paradox at every point where the two field's > vectors A and B (not to be confused with A the vector potential or B the > magnetic intensity) are not colinear because then |A + B| < |A|+|B|, where > |A| means the length of vector A. There should be some amount of scalar > field at nearly every point in the two overlapping fields generated by > charges not at the same point. If the comprizing fields are both still > really there, then they must still have mass and energy. If the mass and > energy are really still there, then there is a paradox regarding the > conservation of energy, because no energy is required create the > overlapping fields if they cancel, or to the degree they cancel. > > For example, a long wire with current creates a circular magnetic field of > intensity 1/r about itself. If we could superimpose two parallel straight > wires carrying current in opposite directions, then the two fields would > "collapse" due to their vectors summing to zero. They would become a > totally scalar field. Of course we could say the net current collapsed > also, because no *net* current would flow! > > A torus coil, or infinitely long linear coil, both create strong external > scalar fields. The bifilar coil, comprized of pair(s) of opposed current > wires, is a kind of compromise situation, based on the principle that it > takes much less energy to increase current in a twisted pair coil than in a > simple coil. The bifilar coil is thought to create a scalar field. Now, > if there were some way to extract energy from this scalar field which took > no energy to create, then this wouldn't be Kansas anymore! > > If scalar fields, with true physical meaning, can be created, then so can > scalar radiation. The unit of scalar radiation could be thought of as two > exactly out of phase photons with exactly opposing phases and with exactly > the same direction and location at the same time. BOTH B and E vectors > would always be zero. The existence of such is a contradiction to > Heisenberg? Maybe not, since we really can determine *neither* the > location, nor momentum of such a packet. Further, it is thought such waves > can exist with non-zero vector potential A and scalar potential phi, and > that such waves are longitudinal. The Ahronov-Bohm effect, the > interference of the vector potential A on electron interference patterns in > the absence of E or B demonstrates that the vector potential A is real. > There is thus a basis for assuming the scalar potential is real and that > scalar waves exist. > > Regaining the energy of such a packet requires separating the two photons, > but there is no handle for doing such, unless uncertainty provides > momentary opportunities. Vacuum fluctuations might be just such handles, > created by random phase fluctuations in scalar photons? Maybe the vacuum > is filled with great amounts of scalar photons, and their fluctuations at > moments of interaction with matter creates the pressure that is expanding > the universe? > > Personally I wounder about the existence of a vector potential A out beyond > the quantum waveform of the particle. In other words, can A ever be a > macro level effect? I don't see it. The vector potential A has no > specific location in EM theory, does it? > > Questions of highly related interest: what happens when EM radiation of > wavelength lambda is sent down a waveguide (with a reflective end) of > length (n+1/2)*lambda? When cancellation occurs, what is in the waveguide? > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner So, it would not be possible to construct a Directional Scalar Transmitter since this would involve the magnitude of the scalar and a durection, so all scalar transmitters must be Omnidirectional? BillP From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 22:49:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA14215; Mon, 25 May 1998 22:48:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 22:48:00 -0700 Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 23:44:15 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Greg Watson update... (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Wi3BN3.0.oT3.FUbQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19179 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 22:08:37 -0600 (MDT) Cc: freenrg-l Subject: Re: Greg Watson update... Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 21:12:22 -0700 Resent-From: freenrg-l eskimo.com On Mon, 25 May 1998, Stefan Hartmann wrote: He writes on his homeapage: "Solid "Rollaway" SMOT design to be released 31 May, 1998" So, do we finally get our ordered SMOT kits ? Regards, Stefan. ---------------------------------- Good News indeed, right on target date too. (stroke of midnight DMEC expiration) 'Hope/May we all Gain from this'. -=se=- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 23:18:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA26479; Mon, 25 May 1998 23:17:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 23:17:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 22:15:23 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"SNLMc1.0.fT6.XvbQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19180 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:33 PM 5/25/98, bill perry wrote: [sni] >So, it would not be possible to construct a Directional Scalar >Transmitter since this would involve the magnitude of the scalar and a >durection, so all scalar transmitters must be Omnidirectional? It is my understanding that the lack of directionality applies to the E and B vectors, because they are always *BOTH zero* for a scalar wave. There is no B or E field, thus there can be no direction to the B or E fields. This does not preclude a direction to the scalar wave, however, nor mandate it, as far as I can see. However, there is a paradoxial situation here. The Poynting vector for an EM wave provides the energy flowing in the wave S as: S = c/(8 Pi) E x B but since E and B are zero vectors, ExB is zero, so there is no EM energy carried by such a wave. This implies such a wave can penetrate matter efficiently. However, it is known that the vector potential can influence electron interference patterns, so there is possibly some energy related link between scalar waves and matter, and almost definitely a means available to use them for communication. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon May 25 23:40:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA23131; Mon, 25 May 1998 23:39:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 23:39:33 -0700 Message-ID: <356A6433.3382ACDB microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:11:55 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Smot Kits Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yJW053.0.Hf5.aEcQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19181 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi All, The DMEC deal still is a mess. It looks like I will not have access to my material for some time. Always remember, "Contracts are only worth the money you have to give to lawyers. When the money runs out, so to do the lawyers and your contract." However, I have developed a sort of reverse SMOT unit which gives solid rollaways. It's still in the SMOT family, sort of. Remember the differential SMOT loss page. Well its all in there. I have also been working on a new effect with Butch LaFonte which we call the LaFonte-Watson Generator. Based on a unique, but simple, effect which causes a ferromagnetic object to be attracted toward a area of decreasing magnetic flux. More details soon. Best Regards to you all, Greg Watson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 00:32:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA06993; Tue, 26 May 1998 00:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 00:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 23:28:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"xL2X4.0.7j1.W-cQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19182 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 5:31 PM 5/25/98, William Beaty wrote: >I had seen mention of an earlier Marinov motor based on ball bearings. >There's an article about this on MIKE'S ELECTRIC STUFF > http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/bbmotor.html [snip] About the "other marinoff motor" I make the following prediction: the device does not work with non-magnetic balls or rollers in the bearings. I suggest that the device works due magnetic hysteresis in the balls. When current initially flows radially inward or outward through the balls a circular magnetic field is introduced in the balls. If the bearings are rotated, then the magnetic fields, due to hysteresis, rotate into the path of the axial current. However, both the top and bottom fields in the ball are then perpendicular to the current and the IxB force adds to the balls torque in the direction of rotation. Note that applies in *either* direction of rotation. This effect also works to a lesser degree with AC provided the balls rotate fast enough. It appears that Mike's analysis is flawed. He writes: "I established that the hall-hearing motor produces the same amount of heat at rest and rotation ..." The power applied all ends up in heat of one kind or the other. No news here. "One can see immediately that the ball-bearing motor has no back tension because there are no magnets, and the magnetic field of the current in the "stator" cannot induce electric tension in the metal of the "rotor"." This is false once the device rotates, due to hyteresis in the bearings themselves. "Thus the firm conclusion is to be drawn that the mechanical energy delivered by the ball-bearing motor is produced from nothing, in a drastic contradiction to the energy conservation law." I don't follow the above statement at all. So call me a skeptic! 8^) "With a direct current supply, the ball- bearing motor can rotate either left or right. Thus it cannot be an electromagnetic motor, since a DC electromagnetic motor rotates only in one direction, with a given direction of the current. The ball-bearing motor rotates with DC as well as with AC. With a greater current it rotates faster." Mike's logic is faulty in that he has missed that at least some portion of the power applied is electromagnetic. Exactly how much could be determined by running with non-ferrous conductive bearings. High current homopolar motors work fine, so there is no reason to think most of the torque is not coming from the electromagnetic force in my opinion. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 01:03:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA11185; Tue, 26 May 1998 01:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 01:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356A7464.737C skylink.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 00:51:00 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"57SfC3.0.hk2.JRdQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19183 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > ZPE is a favorite on this list, but Woodward has a fairly convincing gizmo > that shows transient mass fluctuations pretty much in the manner his theory > predicts. That could make a big difference. I also wonder why his scalar > gravitational energy constant (Phi) implicated in his inertia theory can't > just coexist with ZPE. Are they necessarily mutually exclusive? Hi Rick. Yes, he does apparently have a working device. I was remiss in not mentioning this in the article. There are probably a number of vortex readers who don't know this. His device may work, and still his theory may be wrong -- or it may be right, who knows? It looks wrong to me. As for Phi -- he presents a very large value for the universal potential. Maybe it could be related to the energy potential of the ZPE. Maybe both theories are wrong. It is ironic that one of Woodwards arguments against ZPE is the large value of energy content. Yet he doesn't balk at all about a large value of Phi. I almost get the feeling that Woodward might carry some envy about the recognition and publicity that Haisch/Rueda/Puthoff have gotten over the ZPE thing. Personally, I think Woodward should have spent more time on his website, explaining his experiment, and a little less effort in trying to convince folks that a specific theory is right, and another is not right. He doesn't really know. Neither does anyone else. > I used a really heavy glass rod target in my experiments which, if such > transient effects do indeed radiate something or shield gravity, would have > certainly damped it out. Schnurer's suggestion to use lightweight test > masses makes sense in this context; they have to be responsive short lived > effects. > > To check for a TMF in a warming SC, a magnet should be swiped across the SC > just before placing it in a lightweight quickly sealable container strong > enough not to pop as any residual LN2 evaporates as the temperature rises, > and with enough thermal mass inside to mitigate internal temperature > changes to prevent any substantial air movements outside the container due > to thermal gradients. Weighing the container as the SC goes through Tc > should reveal the momentary mass anomaly independent of evaporating LN2 > mass. This is pretty much what the suggestion has been for improved > Rounds/Schnurer-type tests anyway. Maybe there is a transient mass effect. Did you get a chance to look at the article I put up last week about the Wallace inventions and the Tampere experiment? I've gone full circle with this thing and now think again that it is probably a shielding effect. How about that antigrav list, it suddenly just died, eh? Any idea what happened? It wasn't a great group in any case, but it could have gotten better. Regards, Robert From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 03:14:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA20574; Tue, 26 May 1998 03:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 03:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356A95D7.4945C332 microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:43:43 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: (Off Topic) Aging, Baby Boomers & Growth Hormone Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"0Ci422.0.D15.9NfQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19184 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI All, While this subject is not OU, its is still very close to all of our hearts. Read about my personal research, testing & some of the solid science behind how to grab the hands of time & turn them back about 20 years. Its safe, real, low cost & it works. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 03:57:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA16792; Tue, 26 May 1998 03:55:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 03:55:58 -0700 Message-ID: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 20:28:58 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Rollaway SMOT testing Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2xGbQ2.0.H64.z-fQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19185 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI All, I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. Once I have their verifications, I will ship to all the other purchasers. Full plans will be posted to my web site on the 31st May, 1998. I WILL post an advise when they are up. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 04:34:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA21655; Tue, 26 May 1998 04:32:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 04:32:49 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980526073147.007f7100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:31:47 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: RE: Fleischmann & Pons calorimetry In-Reply-To: <19980525204318.AAA28330 Default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"srB_D1.0.HI5.WXgQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19186 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:43 PM 5/25/98 +0000, Ed Wall wrote: >In this context, the purpose of such filters is in their predictive >estimation capacity. At CU in Colorado Springs when I was a student, they >were being studied by graduate engineers mostly interested in improved >missile guidance for moving targets, like approaching missiles. In a >feedback control system, data sampled at different points in the system to >be controlled is fed into the model, from which comes the control signals to >attempt to bring output to a desired result, to bring the system under >control. The model is an imperfect analogue of the system it dynamically >emulates, and the more perfectly it does this, the less correction is >required. The "goal" of control is to reduce correction factors to nothing. >Predictive estimation is a powerful tool to allow effective emulation >especially valuable with unstable systems or where error cannot be tolerated. Good summary. Our own Dr. Robert Bass is the designer of some of these systems, if memory serves. >Since I have not read anything on the control systems for isoperibolic >calorimeters, I should not comment further, but that has not stopped me in >the past. Unless you are looking for really precise measurement of heat >fluctuations, the need for such an elaborate system that gives ammunition to >skeptics (anything difficult to understand is a de facto source of error) >eludes me. Jed, Hank and Ed discuss many important points. However, one salient reason for precision (in addition to accuracy) can be seen in Figure 3 of the paper "Optimal Operating Point Characteristics of Nickel Light Water Experiments" [Proc. of ICCF-7, July 1998]. This figure (& section), relevant to ongoing discussions in vortex-l, is entitled 'RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE EARTHTECH "KS"-BEAD EXPERIMENT' and is located at http://world.std.com/~mica/littleks.html for vortexians. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 05:19:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA26120; Tue, 26 May 1998 05:12:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 05:12:57 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980526071356.008426e0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:13:56 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing In-Reply-To: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"cYVVv.0.2O6.87hQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19187 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:28 PM 5/26/98 +0930, Greg Watson wrote: >I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. >Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like >each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : > > 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. > 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. Speaking for Hal (who's traveling), we accept these conditions. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 05:32:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA29367; Tue, 26 May 1998 05:30:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 05:30:31 -0700 Posted-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:23:49 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356AB586.4AC4665 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:28:54 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing References: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"isJ_d.0.hA7.cNhQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19188 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greg Watson wrote: > > HI All, > > I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. > Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like > each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : > > 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. > 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. > > Once I have their verifications, I will ship to all the other > purchasers. > Yes, I accept your offer gratefully. In Turkey we have sometimes encountering Customs problems, I hope there will not be in this case. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 05:41:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA03273; Tue, 26 May 1998 05:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 05:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356AB83A.8F0B14CE microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 22:10:26 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing References: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> <356AB586.4AC4665@verisoft.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nAMV-.0.3p.IWhQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19189 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hamdi Ucar wrote: > > Greg Watson wrote: > > > > HI All, > > > > I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. > > Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like > > each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : > > > > 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. > > 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. > > > > Once I have their verifications, I will ship to all the other > > purchasers. > > > > Yes, I accept your offer gratefully. In Turkey we have sometimes encountering Customs problems, I hope there will not be in this case. > > Regards, > > hamdi ucar Hi Hamdi, Thanks, will be in touch. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 05:40:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA31045; Tue, 26 May 1998 05:38:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 05:38:23 -0700 Message-ID: <356AB86A.EC059D22 microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 22:11:14 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing References: <3.0.5.32.19980526071356.008426e0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sX-U_.0._a7.-UhQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19190 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Little wrote: > > At 08:28 PM 5/26/98 +0930, Greg Watson wrote: > > >I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. > >Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like > >each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : > > > > 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. > > 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. > > Speaking for Hal (who's traveling), we accept these conditions. Hi Scott / Hal, Thanks, will be in touch. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 06:00:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA05370; Tue, 26 May 1998 05:56:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 05:56:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005d01bd88a5$167e4fc0$308cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Case and Carbide Catalysts Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 06:52:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"SB9Fi2.0.qJ1.vlhQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19191 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Palladium on Activated Carbon MAY be forming a Palladium Carbide compound that becomes unstable at 250 C. Thus along with the large surface area of the Activated Carbon the PdCx formed is doing the work. About any metal can form a carbide so the range of choice for try-and-see is enormous. The easiest off-the-shelf Carbide to obtain is Calcium Carbide CaC2, but keep it dry because with water: CaC2 + 2 H2O ---> Ca(OH)2 + C2H2 (acetylene gas). Next easy to obtain is Iron Carbide Fe3C. You can buy it from Frank Stenger's Blacksmithing and Farrier Shoppe, if his forge is up and running. :-) The powders should do okay for experiments. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 06:30:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA09764; Tue, 26 May 1998 06:18:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 06:18:01 -0700 Posted-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:10:44 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356ABFFA.52A8692F verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:13:30 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Ostrowski , vortex Subject: Re: eprint:gr-qc/9805086 An Implication of Ether Drift Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9F1eR2.0.OO2.84iQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19192 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Jim and All, Don't think I am replaying to my own post :-), the paper was updated and two figures was added, One can figure out how is interesting this paper, by just looking to figures displaying experimental results. I think this paper would be the most solid argument for ether lovers. :3) Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 06:48:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA11201; Tue, 26 May 1998 06:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 06:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Posted-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:26:02 +0400 (MEDT) Message-ID: <356AC41B.3EF6B9DD verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:31:07 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: AquaFuel (eprint: physics/9805031) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KoJvO.0.nk2.9KiQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19193 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Physics, abstract physics/9805031 From: Institute for Basic Research Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 12:28:54 GMT (16kb) AquaFuel: An example of the emerging new energies and the new methods for their scientific study Author: Ruggero Maria Santilli Comments: 22 pages, Texture Report-no: TTL-98-004 Subj-class: General Physics Journal-ref: Hadronic Journal Supplement, Vol. 13, pp. 1-22, 1998 I am just reading it. Found a link in the paper as http://www.toupstech.com/html/toups_-_aqua_fuel.html which containg additional information. Paper is published today on xxx.lanl.gov Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 07:28:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA31266; Tue, 26 May 1998 07:24:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:24:52 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:24:47 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: other Marinov motor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"keHtr3.0.Me7.p2jQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19194 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 25 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > At 5:31 PM 5/25/98, William Beaty wrote: > >I had seen mention of an earlier Marinov motor based on ball bearings. > >There's an article about this on MIKE'S ELECTRIC STUFF > > http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/bbmotor.html > [snip] > > About the "other marinoff motor" I make the following prediction: the > device does not work with non-magnetic balls or rollers in the bearings. > > I suggest that the device works due magnetic hysteresis in the balls. About Mike's thermal hypothesis, because of the high speed my instincts say no. Would a thermal motor run at 1000 RPM, could the surface of the ball bearing expand and contract hundreds of times per second? It would be interesting to immerse the whole thing in liquid low-temp solder, to give good contact to the balls and eliminate the contact arcing and hotspot. (or perhaps even remove the balls and use liquid metal in place of the bearings, see if this 'motor' generates a vortex in a conductive fluid.) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 26 07:51:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA03714; Tue, 26 May 1998 07:47:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:47:40 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:47:38 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: Greg Watson cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: SMOT shipment, DMEC deal In-Reply-To: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"pQLHV1.0.nv.AOjQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19195 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 May 1998, Greg Watson wrote: > I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. > Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like > each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : > > 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. > 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. Hi Greg! I accept, I can do this. Hope they're sturdy enough to withstand international shipping without de-calibration. When all this is over, I hope you'll write up a history of the business doings of DMEC. The technology issues can stay secret or not, but if the business side stays secret, then the next future inventor will probably repeat the same mistakes. The trouble with the "Sweet VTA" and other similar inventions was that the inside history of the business side was never made public, so we could never learn from their failure, learn what to avoid, learn what to do differently. I suspect that if we knew the business history of many previous O/U discoveries, we would find a repeating pattern which future inventors could recognize and avoid. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 26 08:26:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA27177; Tue, 26 May 1998 08:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 08:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 07:17:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"y71922.0.Xe6.0sjQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19196 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 7:24 AM 5/26/98, William Beaty wrote: >It would be interesting to immerse the whole thing in liquid low-temp >solder, to give good contact to the balls and eliminate the contact arcing >and hotspot. (or perhaps even remove the balls and use liquid metal in >place of the bearings, see if this 'motor' generates a vortex in a >conductive fluid.) I would recommend using roller bearings instead of ball bearings as a line gives much more contact than a point. A graphite lubricant, or some of that fancy silver compound for brushes, might greatly improve electrical contact. With no ferrous balls there should be no significant vortex created due to all current from the outer bearing sleve to the inner bearing sleve being radial, and there being no longitudinal magnetic field. If the balls are submersed in liquid solder then the electrical path through the balls is shunted and efficiency is shot. The hyteresis effect only works due to the axial point to point electrical contact in the balls, and the rotation of the B field into a position where it is longitudinal with repect to the radial current, thus torque is produced from the Lorentz force. Fortunately, the direction of the B field on the bottom of the bearing is reversed with respect to the B field on the top of the ball, so provides positive torque. "Radial" and "axial" above are with respect to the shaft, not the balls themselves. By Lenz's Law you would expect the B field to rotate into a position to oppose the forward motion of the ball, that the Lorentz force generated would oppose the motion of the ball, but this does not happen and Lenz does not seem to apply. If Lenz does not apply there is no back e.m.f. and the motor appears potentially ou, as there is nothing to stop its acceleration. However, the speed of remagnetization, the hysteresis itself, limits the speed of the motor. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 08:33:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA28354; Tue, 26 May 1998 08:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 08:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356ADDF6.5C2E interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 11:21:26 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"u9vdR.0.xw6.JwjQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19197 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > OK, I'll give it a shot. I don't really know what I am talking about, but > can throw some words at the problem and see if some of them stick. As "they" would say, Horace, "Welcome to vortex-l"! > > I think the notion of scalar fields comes from the idea that > electromagnetic fields superimpose, i.e. their vectors sum at each point in > the composite field. It is said they can superimpose because the EM field > is carried by photons, which are bosons. Two or more bosons may > superimpose, and may travel effortlessly through each other. We don't see > light that does not travel directly towards our eyes, for example. All the > other light travelling in other directions has no lasting effect when > crossing the light on its way to our eyes. Yes, I would think that this reflects the "constant" nature of the permeability and the permitivity of space. My assumption is that the clasical Maxwell equations would indicate this sort of behavior. (Let's forget the special non-linear effects at high energy density that have been mentioned on this list and which I don't understand.) > > A vector is a point with both direction and magnitude. A scalar is a point > with only magnitude. A vector field is a volume where every point has an > associated vector. OK, routine vector algebra so far. Given two field generating points, and their > instantaneous vector fields (either electric or magnetic), the > instantaneous composite field can be calculated by summing the two vector > fields. Here things get sticky. I would say the idea of a "composite" field is a mathematical fiction - there is just "a field" - how we humans calculate it's value, Nature could care less! The two field-generating points exist at the same time (I'm avoiding dynamics here and assume static conditions) and their field vector has only one value at the point in question. The idea of adding two vector components to get a resultant is an invention of human logic and a reflection of our vector algebra and our computational method - Nature says the field at this point is "this" caused by "those" and she does this in "parallel". If we humans insist on treating the problem in "serial" fashion, she says, "OK, go ahead, if that works for you, fine." This generates a seeming paradox when the two vectors at a point > are in opposite directions, but are of the same magnitude. The vector sum > is zero, but the scalar sum is not zero, thus the result might be called a > "scalar field" for points where the vector directions are equal but > opposed. Here again, Horace, the above seems like a semantic game to me. If a quantity is a vector quantity - then that's what it is! It is not part vector and part scalar. The separation is again all in our minds. The "resultant" is the real thing - the components are fiction. To calculate the energy and mass density we use the resultant - not the fictious components. In fact it creates a paradox at every point where the two field's > vectors A and B (not to be confused with A the vector potential or B the > magnetic intensity) are not colinear because then |A + B| < |A|+|B|, where > |A| means the length of vector A. There should be some amount of scalar > field at nearly every point in the two overlapping fields generated by > charges not at the same point. If the comprizing fields are both still > really there, then they must still have mass and energy. The comprizing fields never existed, Horace, - their energy exists only in the minds of some humans - as do angels! I know of no vector algebra rule that imparts any particular meaning to the sum of the scalar magnitudes of the COMPONENTS of vectors. Any vector can be divided into a multitude of components - and it works if we stick to our mind-game rules of vector algebra. To assign reality to vector components invites chaos to rule the universe. If the mass and > energy are really still there, Ah, but they never were there! then there is a paradox regarding the > conservation of energy, because no energy is required create the > overlapping fields if they cancel, or to the degree they cancel. > For example, a long wire with current creates a circular magnetic field of > intensity 1/r about itself. If we could superimpose two parallel straight > wires carrying current in opposite directions, then the two fields would > "collapse" due to their vectors summing to zero. They would become a > totally scalar field. Of course we could say the net current collapsed > also, because no *net* current would flow! > > A torus coil, or infinitely long linear coil, both create strong external > scalar fields. The bifilar coil, comprized of pair(s) of opposed current > wires, is a kind of compromise situation, based on the principle that it > takes much less energy to increase current in a twisted pair coil than in a > simple coil. The bifilar coil is thought to create a scalar field. I won't repeat my above component argument - but this bililar coil idea seems ridiculous. The ultimate bifilar coil is just a rotating ring or disk of any solid. In the ring or disk we have HUGE counter flowing currents caused by the motion of charged particles in the material. Calculate the electron current component of the circular current flowing around the Earth's axis due to it's rotation. We have the same "current" flowing in the opposite direction from all the + charges in the Earth's structure. Compute the "scalar" field resultant of these currents and we can see how puny will be the action of any bifilar coil we could manage to wind in our labs. Now, come up with an experiment to study this "scalar field" created by the Earth's rotation. Let's let Fred Sparber do the experiment! Now, > if there were some way to extract energy from this scalar field which took > no energy to create, then this wouldn't be Kansas anymore! > > If scalar fields, with true physical meaning, can be created, then so can > scalar radiation. The unit of scalar radiation could be thought of as two > exactly out of phase photons with exactly opposing phases and with exactly > the same direction and location at the same time. BOTH B and E vectors > would always be zero. The existence of such is a contradiction to > Heisenberg? Maybe not, since we really can determine *neither* the > location, nor momentum of such a packet. Further, it is thought such waves > can exist with non-zero vector potential A and scalar potential phi, and > that such waves are longitudinal. The Ahronov-Bohm effect, the > interference of the vector potential A on electron interference patterns in > the absence of E or B demonstrates that the vector potential A is real. I must admit, I do not understand this AB effect and I know very little of QM, so, anything on this level is way over my head. > There is thus a basis for assuming the scalar potential is real and that > scalar waves exist. > > Regaining the energy of such a packet requires separating the two photons, > but there is no handle for doing such, unless uncertainty provides > momentary opportunities. Vacuum fluctuations might be just such handles, > created by random phase fluctuations in scalar photons? Maybe the vacuum > is filled with great amounts of scalar photons, and their fluctuations at > moments of interaction with matter creates the pressure that is expanding > the universe? > > Personally I wounder about the existence of a vector potential A out beyond > the quantum waveform of the particle. In other words, can A ever be a > macro level effect? I don't see it. The vector potential A has no > specific location in EM theory, does it? This is my problem, Horace - I thought any potential function had to have a reference point from which to measure the value at a given space point. I can see that the electric potential is a "real" thing - but I see it as a "system" property - not an intrinsic property of a space point. If I wish to compute the electric energy at a point, I use the intensity, E, and not the potential, V. Since the gradient of V IS E, I must admit that the "derivative" of V is real. But, is V any more real than the multitude of components of vectors in my arguments above? I know V is useful, and a real system property, but can I turn screw threads on it? > > Questions of highly related interest: what happens when EM radiation of > wavelength lambda is sent down a waveguide (with a reflective end) of > length (n+1/2)*lambda? When cancellation occurs, what is in the waveguide? > I know, Horace - ya da, ya da, ya da. ||||||| / \ O| O O |O | O | \ \_/ / \___/ Stenger in the distant past ----^ when he thought he understood electromagnetics! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 09:17:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA07003; Tue, 26 May 1998 09:10:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 09:10:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 08:09:00 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"NIfpC1.0.Kj1.6ckQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19198 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In the "other Marinov motor", by Lenz's Law you would expect the B field to rotate into a position to oppose the forward motion of the ball, that the Lorentz force generated would oppose the motion of the ball, but this does not happen and Lenz does not seem to apply. If Lenz does not apply there is no back e.m.f. and the motor appears potentially ou, as there is nothing to stop its acceleration. However, the speed of remagnetization, the hysteresis itself, limits the speed of the motor. However, it would be possible to build a similar motor that does not need hysteresis to operate, that uses permanent magnetic fields. Suppose we have a conductive disk armature as shown in Fig. 1: (+) | | i | V X X c X X c X X X X X c Ftop ---> X X X X X c X X X X X c c c ### ### c c c O O O O O c O O O O O c O O O O O c O O c O O | | <--- Fbottom | V (-) C - periphery of disk armature ### - disk bearing X X - magnetic field into page O O - magnetic field out of mage Fig. 1 - Lenz Free Motor? The magnetic field as shown could be provided by two opposing C magnets with gaps for the wheel. Note the Ftop is opposed to Fbottom, as in the bearings of the ball bearing motor, thus providing torque. It would be best if nearly all the bottom half of the wheel had "O O" magnetic force and all the top had the "X X" magnetic field. So, with sufficient speed, could this motor be ou? Is it really Lentz free as it appears? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 09:41:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA05855; Tue, 26 May 1998 09:36:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 09:36:51 -0700 Message-ID: <356AEDA4.2EB skylink.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 09:28:20 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Transverse EM Solution - Invalid? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"B_lHP2.0.KR1.X-kQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19199 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The Transverse Solution of the EM Wave Equation -- Invalid? Five arguments are presented here to suggest that a travelling EM wave has longitudinal field components as well as transverse components. 1. Non-physicality of the infinite planar wave. 2. Specious reasoning in the existing transverse solution of the wave equation. 3. Invalidity of the existing solution in the reference frame of the photon. 4. Radiation of a charge undergoing simple harmonic motion. 5. General solutions of the wave equation by Whittaker in 1903. Some of these arguments are made for a vertically polarized EM wave propagting in the x direction -- having Ey > 0, and Bz >0, with all field components equal to zero in all other directions. The arguments apply equally well for any wave solution composed soley of transverse components. 1. Non-Physicality of the Infinite Planar Wave. In a transverse planar wave, Maxwells first and third equations are violated unless the wave extends in infinite spacial dimensions. In free space: divE = dEy/dy + dEz/dz + dEx/dx = 0 divB = dBy/dy + dBz/dz + dBx/dx = 0 Unless the plane wave has a constant spacial value extending to infinity, there must exist a point in space where Ey and Bz exhibit a spacial variation, i.e. dEy/dy and dBz/dz are not equal to zero. A wave extending to infinity is a non-physical entity. In order to satisfy Maxwells divergence equations, there must exist some point in space where there is a longitudinal field component, having a longitudinal spacial variation. If a solution exists to the wave equation which admits longitudinal components anywhere in space, the solution is also valid at all points in space. 2. Specious Reasoning in the Existing Solution to the Wave Equation. It is conventional to simplify the solution of the wave equation by first attempting to elimate longitudinal field components. For example see Feynam Lectures II pages 20-4 and 20-5. Feynman starts with considering the existence of field components in the longitudinal direction, in order to eliminate them from the solution. He demonstrates that fields can not exist SOLEY in the longitudinal direction, but he fails to prove that they can not exist at all in the longitudinal direction. His argument is valid for what it is, but the same argument could be applied equally to the y or z direction. The argument merely proves that the travelling wave can not be composed of fields which exist in only one direction. It does not prove, as claimed, that there can exist no components in the x direction. 3. Invalidity of the Existing Solution in the Reference Frame of the Photon. All four Maxwells equations are valid in the existing transverse solution in the reference frame of the laboratory -- assuming as discussed above that one is not troubled by the non-physicality of an infinite planar wave. However, in the reference frame of the photon, Maxwells second and fourth equations, relating to magnetic and electric induction, are violated. The existing transverse solution is not valid in the reference frame of the photon. Nor can it be Lorentz transformed in a fashion which makes it valid. The problem is the E and B components of the transverse wave solution are always in-phase. In a reference frame moving with the photon, longitudinal components are required along with transverse components. 4. Radiation of a Charge Undergoing Simple Harmonic Motion It is simple enough to graphically plot the E and B fields of an electric charge undergoing vertical oscillation. At all points in space which are not instantaneously aligned with the vertical position of the moving charge, there exists a time varying electric field (coulomb field) in the longitudinal direction. And if you accept Ampere's original magnetic force law, rather than the conventionally accepted Grassman law, there is also a time-varying longitudinal magnetic field. 5. General Solution of the Wave Equation by Whittaker in 1903. Whittaker's paper, "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical Physics", published in 1903, might be better titled, Solutions of the Laplace Potential equation and the Differential Equation for Wave Motion. The paper consists of 28 pages of laborious mathematics. The general solution of the wave equation contains components in all three spacial dimensions, transverse as well as longitudinal. Maybe we should consider a more accurate model of the photon? Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 10:12:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA15891; Tue, 26 May 1998 10:08:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:08:24 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD889E.C1C27980 209-113-17-90.insync.net> From: Tractebel Energy Marketing To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: RE: Cold Fusion Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:39:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"waODd.0.6u3.7SlQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19200 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Can someone explain in VERY general terms what "vertical flow calorimetry" is. -----Original Message----- From: Mitchell Swartz [SMTP:mica world.std.com] Sent: Friday, May 22, 1998 6:32 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Cold Fusion At 10:16 PM 5/21/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell, in response to Martin Sevior, wrote: >Martin Sevior writes: > When Scott and I tried to independently verify the CETI device soon > after the POWERGEN demo, we were refused twice. I'm now sure that the > reason we were refused the second time was that Dennis Cravens tried > to produce the thing on a small scale and only got a very small effect > if any at all. (zip) > Given this it is my current view that CF is a mistake. In many cases the > mistakes are honestly (if naively made). But the fact is nothing has > stood up to open, honest, review or has scaled up to a full sized demo. > >That's absurd. Claytor's work has stood up year after year to harsh internal >reviews at Los Alamos. McKubre's work has been put through the wringer by >EPRI, SRI and the peer-reviewed journals. There is a *world* of difference >between their work and the preliminary, half-secret stuff that CETI has >revealed. The top, mainstream CF papers are as good as the best scientific >papers in any field of science, and the S/N ratio is astronomically high. The >fact that an effect cannot be scaled up (or down) has never been held as a >reason to disbelieve it in other fields. We cannot scale up or commercialize >high temperature superconductors despite hundreds of millions of dollars of >investment. We cannot scale down thermonuclear bombs, despite billions >invested in Tokamak reactors. That is no reason to question their existence. > >I challenge Martin to show me ANY significant potential errors in papers by >Claytor, McKubre, Fleischmann, Bockris, Will, Huggins, Miles or Storms. Jed has some good points, and so does Martin (except for his point of lumping and dismissing all the cf phenomena). Vertical flow calorimetry can lead to the amplification of the small cf effect. This amplification effect, and driving below the noise level, produce inaccuracy, but can also give rise to large expectations from an effect which is smaller in magnitude, and generally difficult to achieve. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 10:21:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA16679; Tue, 26 May 1998 10:10:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:10:58 -0700 X-ROUTED: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:06:32 -0500 X-TCP-IDENTITY: Paula Message-ID: <356AF770.C9015D09 southconn.com> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:10:08 -0400 From: paula X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: William Beaty CC: Greg Watson , "vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: SMOT shipment, DMEC deal References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2VDee2.0.K44.WUlQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19201 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill - great idea, I second the motion, if Greg writes it up, should be posted on every free energy page on the web.... steve opelc William Beaty wrote: > > On Tue, 26 May 1998, Greg Watson wrote: > > > I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. > > Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like > > each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : > > > > 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. > > 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. > > Hi Greg! I accept, I can do this. Hope they're sturdy enough to > withstand international shipping without de-calibration. > > When all this is over, I hope you'll write up a history of the business > doings of DMEC. The technology issues can stay secret or not, but if the > business side stays secret, then the next future inventor will probably > repeat the same mistakes. > > The trouble with the "Sweet VTA" and other similar inventions was that the > inside history of the business side was never made public, so we could > never learn from their failure, learn what to avoid, learn what to do > differently. I suspect that if we knew the business history of many > previous O/U discoveries, we would find a repeating pattern which future > inventors could recognize and avoid. > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 26 10:31:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20851; Tue, 26 May 1998 10:23:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:23:06 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:16:29 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BVbHW3.0.Q55.uflQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19202 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Vo., What are the accepted NRC 'safe' levels of radiation from: Mineral samples Scrap metals other, if any .. I need to get a ball park on this as quickly as I can. Peirsonally I feel anything over background is probably not very good, but I would like to know the 'accepted' regs in the US. Thanks, J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 10:34:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA21148; Tue, 26 May 1998 10:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980526132606.007c4100 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:26:06 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: RE: Cold Fusion Cc: Tractebel Energy Marketing In-Reply-To: <01BD889E.C1C27980 209-113-17-90.insync.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gZtPf.0.JA5.kllQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19203 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:39 AM 5/26/98 -0500, someone at Tractebel Energy Marketing wrote: >Can someone explain in VERY general terms what "vertical flow calorimetry" is. Sure. Flow calorimetry uses a moving lower temperature fluid to remove heat from a calorimeter, thereby "clamping" to some degree the temperature therein the calorimeter if there is a heat source therein. The fluid flow dumps the heat to a sink elsewhere. The heat transfer rate is estimated from the input and output temperatures (based upon the simplified linear equation). However, the flow might be horizontal, or vertical. In the latter case IF there is a different density of the fluid over the temperature range therein, then Bernard instability can contribute to the heat flow (in addition to the applied flow). It can be avoided by horizontal flow in the calorimeter, and if not, can produce an artifact as discussed in http://world.std.com/~mica/posvar.html Semiquantitative corrections were discussed in two papers thereafter. Swartz, M., 1996, "Improved Calculations Involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 1, 3, 219-221. Swartz, M, 1996, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130. I suggest calibration of these systems including thermal waveform reconstruction, but not everyone agrees. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 10:59:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA27892; Tue, 26 May 1998 10:54:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:54:17 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:54:03 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: William Beaty Subject: Re: other Marinov motor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"MR1cU1.0.fp6.87mQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19204 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > With no ferrous balls there should be no significant vortex created due to > all current from the outer bearing sleve to the inner bearing sleve being > radial, and there being no longitudinal magnetic field. If the balls are > submersed in liquid solder then the electrical path through the balls is > shunted and efficiency is shot. Exactly, it would help verfiy the mechanism behind the effect, since what would we say if the liquid metal did not wreck the effect, or even made it run better? I'm speculating that the effect might have something to do with Graneau's Amperian forces. Of course it might be quicker to test it with Stainless Steel (or brass?) bearings. Perhaps some nonferrous balls can be put into a standard race if nonferrous bearing assemblies are too hard to find. http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/bbmotor.html Idea: vortices can go either CW or CCW, maybe this is the electromagnetic analog of a fluid vortex. Or maybe I should sit down and think about it, rather than speculating off the top of my head. :) Is anyone from Graneau's project still listening in? If radial current flows in a pool of mercury to a central electrode, does the pool "want" to rotate one way or another? Or if something should initiate a rotary motion, in the liquid metal, will the radial (spiral?) current cause that motion to continue? Another idea: If a disk-type homopolar motor has no magnets, and if a huge current is applied, will an *AXIAL* (dipole) magnetic field appear if the rotor is spun by hand? After all, the manual spinning causes the charge path to move in a spiral motion like a coil. If axial fields appear, then it would form a virtual "field-coil", and we would have a self-excited homopolar motor. After all, there ARE the self-excited homopolar generators which have spiral slots cut in their rotors. Maybe the spiral slots aren't needed. And maybe a slotless, self-exciting HPG will act as a self-exciting homopolar motor when a huge current is applied and the shaft is given a twist to get things going. (note that 'self-exciting' doesn't mean 'overunity', it just means that the current causes stator fields as well as the fields associated with the rotor, which eliminates any need for permanent magnets or DC-powered field coils.) Oooo! Oooo! Yet another idea: does ball-bearing geometry make a good homopolar generator? Maybe. There is rotation, but there is no high-speed sliding contact! Perhaps the ultimate HPG would take the form of a giant copper needle-bearing, with copper disks taking the place of the "needles". Hmmm. Didn't I just re-invent Searl's device? Why don't homopolar generators have needle rollers along the rotor rim, to eliminate the sliding friction? Too small a contact area? ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 26 11:36:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA01827; Tue, 26 May 1998 11:28:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 11:28:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 10:27:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, William Beaty From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"gI_mk1.0.TS.cdmQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19205 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:54 AM 5/26/98, William Beaty wrote: > >Exactly, it would help verfiy the mechanism behind the effect, since what >would we say if the liquid metal did not wreck the effect, or even made it >run better? I'd say it was miraculous. > I'm speculating that the effect might have something to do >with Graneau's Amperian forces. Ordinary lorentz forces explain the thing just fine. >Of course it might be quicker to test it with Stainless Steel (or brass?) >bearings. Perhaps some nonferrous balls can be put into a standard race >if nonferrous bearing assemblies are too hard to find. Roller bearings would be much easier to replace with brass rod. > >http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~wwl/bbmotor.html > >Idea: vortices can go either CW or CCW, maybe this is the electromagnetic >analog of a fluid vortex. Or maybe I should sit down and think about it, >rather than speculating off the top of my head. :) Why look for the arcane when the obvious is at hand? [snip] Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 12:14:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA07010; Tue, 26 May 1998 12:02:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:02:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <356A7464.737C skylink.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 08:59:46 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"5iQTg1.0.Rj1.D7nQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19206 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert - > It is ironic that one of Woodwards arguments > against ZPE is the large value of energy > content. Yet he doesn't balk at all about a large > value of Phi. That does seem strange. And I wonder why all the experiments in high energy physics where fast particle beams captured by various targets don't seem to reveal a shortage of impact energy due to the transient negative mass excursion that a decelerating mass would produce according to Woodward's theory. Neverthless, there's his gizmo, looking at least like a good proof of the principle that a rapidly changing electric charge has some sort of effect on mass or gravity. Whatever gets you to the mall, you know? > Did you get a chance to look at the article I put > up last week about the Wallace inventions and > the Tampere experiment? Yes. There sure seems to be something going on in and among these things. People need to be exposed to these ideas enough to foster some replication attempts. Look at all the people who built VTA's, Meyer water crackers, and such. This stuff appears to have a much better pedigree, and at least in the case of the Woodward device, it isn't very complicated. > How about that antigrav list, it suddenly just > died, eh? Any idea what happened? Woolman ran out of money to run it. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 12:16:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA14610; Tue, 26 May 1998 12:00:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:00:53 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 11:01:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"ajLSh1.0.Ca3.a5nQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19207 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:21 AM 5/26/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: [snip] >> Questions of highly related interest: what happens when EM radiation of >> wavelength lambda is sent down a waveguide (with a reflective end) of >> length (n+1/2)*lambda? When cancellation occurs, what is in the waveguide? >> > >I know, Horace - ya da, ya da, ya da. "Ya, da, ya, da, ya, da," sounds like a romance between a Russian and a German! 8^) I am genuinely curious as to how cancellation is maintained over many wavelengths in a wavegiude. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 12:42:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22268; Tue, 26 May 1998 12:28:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:28:14 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 11:28:15 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"wPSVS3.0.mR5.DVnQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19208 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I suggested a conductive disk armature as shown in Fig. 1: (+) | | i | V X X c X X c X X X X X c Ftop ---> X X X X X c X X X X X c c c ### ### c c c O O O O O c O O O O O c O O O O O c O O c O O | | <--- Fbottom | V (-) C - periphery of disk armature ### - disk bearing X X - magnetic field into page O O - magnetic field out of mage Fig. 1 - Lenz Free Motor? The magnetic field as shown could be provided by two opposing C magnets with gaps for the wheel. Note the Ftop is opposed to Fbottom, as in the bearings of the ball bearing motor, thus providing torque. It would be best if nearly all the bottom half of the wheel had "O O" magnetic force and all the top had the "X X" magnetic field. Radial slits are required to prevent eddy currents from braking the armature. It appears that the emf generated subtracts from the motor emf: (1) With the current top to bottom as shown, the armature rotates clockwise. (2) If the armature rotates clockwise, the wheel acts as a generator with polarity as shown, + at top, - at bottom. (3) Both effects work simultneously, so the generated emf opposes the motor emf, and the motor is not ou. Lenz prevails. The same applies to the ball bearing motor, in addition to the problems of hystersis limitations. No free lunch here. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 12:53:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA11917; Tue, 26 May 1998 12:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356B1A0F.D63 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:37:51 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: other Marinov motor References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"S_bzK3.0.7w2.vfnQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19209 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > However, it would be possible to build a similar motor that does not need > hysteresis to operate, that uses permanent magnetic fields. Suppose we > have a conductive disk armature as shown in Fig. 1: > > (+) > | > | i > | > V > X X c X X > c X X X X X c Ftop ---> > X X X X X > c X X X X X c > > c c > ### > ### > c c > > c O O O O O c > O O O O O > c O O O O O c > O O c O O > | > | > <--- Fbottom | > V > (-) > > C - periphery of disk armature > ### - disk bearing > X X - magnetic field into page > O O - magnetic field out of mage > > Fig. 1 - Lenz Free Motor? > > The magnetic field as shown could be provided by two opposing C magnets > with gaps for the wheel. Note the Ftop is opposed to Fbottom, as in the > bearings of the ball bearing motor, thus providing torque. It would be > best if nearly all the bottom half of the wheel had "O O" magnetic force > and all the top had the "X X" magnetic field. > > So, with sufficient speed, could this motor be ou? Is it really Lentz free > as it appears? > Horace, this is very close to a "pancake" servo motor I have in my treasure box. I'm sure if you cut radial slots in the disk, you would have a very good conventional motor, back EMF and all. The solid disk makes the eddy current picture a bit foggy, but I think it would still hold to "conventional" rules. In the pancake motor (I haven't looked inside for some time.) I think they have several loops of current flowing across each pole of a multi-pole magnet setup. I think the commutator is "printed" on one side of the disk and the brushes push in axially to contact the disk. It's a neat little motor and without iron in the rotor, it has very low moment of inertia, yet good torque - which is great for many servo functions. In your motor above, it looks like the counter EMF at each pole is upward in opposition to the current source - does this check? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 13:06:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA30456; Tue, 26 May 1998 13:01:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:01:03 -0700 Message-ID: <356B1F7D.7AD8 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:01:01 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: other Marinov motor References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5UvrI1.0.ZR7.zznQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19210 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > > Hmmm. Didn't I just re-invent Searl's device? Why don't homopolar > generators have needle rollers along the rotor rim, to eliminate the > sliding friction? Too small a contact area? Bill, I would guess that it has more to do with the self-cleaning nature of a sliding brush. A rolling contact might be prone to a build-up of oxide "scale" on the rolling contact surface. A sliding brush, on the other hand, keeps itself quite clean under normal operation - at the expense of more friction - maybe. By the time you "cage" the rollers to keep them organized, and deal with surface build-up, maybe they would have pretty high friction also? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 13:49:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA19556; Tue, 26 May 1998 13:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:30:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 12:18:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"JmtX72.0.Tn4.JPoQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19211 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:37 PM 5/26/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Horace, this is very close to a "pancake" servo motor I have in my >treasure box. I'm sure if you cut radial slots in the disk, you would >have a very good conventional motor, back EMF and all. The solid disk >makes the eddy current picture a bit foggy, but I think it would still >hold to "conventional" rules. Yes, I came to that conclusion also. See post. [snip] > >In your motor above, it looks like the counter EMF at each pole is >upward in opposition to the current source - does this check? Now I'm getting confused again. 8^) Looking at Fig. 1, when the armature is turning clockwise, an emf is generated that tends to push electrons out the (-) electrode. To run as a mototr clockwise electrons are supplied at the (-) electrode. Thus the generator emf opposes the motor emf, right? The current generated is in the wrong direction, even though the marked polarity matches. (+) | | i | V X X c X X c X X X X X c Ftop ---> X X X X X c X X X X X c c c ### ### c c c O O O O O c O O O O O c O O O O O c O O c O O | | <--- Fbottom | V (-) C - periphery of disk armature ### - disk bearing X X - magnetic field into page O O - magnetic field out of mage Fig. 1 - Lenz Free Motor? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 13:57:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA22179; Tue, 26 May 1998 13:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356B2963.90D interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:43:15 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yMzXR2.0.SQ5.xcoQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19212 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > >> Questions of highly related interest: what happens when EM radiation of > >> wavelength lambda is sent down a waveguide (with a reflective end) of > >> length (n+1/2)*lambda? When cancellation occurs, what is in the waveguide? > > I am genuinely curious as to how cancellation is maintained over many > wavelengths in a wavegiude. > Well, if you're going to get serious, Horace, I guess I'll have to try to figure it out. :-) This is a quote from my Radio Amateur's Handbook in relation to waveguides: "The tube is not considered as carrying a current in the same sense that the wires of a two-conductor line do, but rather as a BOUNDARY which confines the waves to the enclosed space. Skin effect prevents any electromagnetic effects from being evident outside the guide... ...Analysis of waveguide operation is based on the assumption that the guide material is a perfect conductor of electricity." (end of quote) Hey, I just realized that I don't know diddily about this subject so I think I'll stop while I'm behind, Horace. It's all tied up with boundary conditions, modes, cutoff frequency, etc., etc. Shutting up just in time,...... Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 13:59:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA12071; Tue, 26 May 1998 13:52:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:52:07 -0700 Message-ID: <356B2B7F.769C interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:52:15 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: other Marinov motor References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"20f1d1.0.Xy2.rjoQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19213 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > At 3:37 PM 5/26/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > > >Horace, this is very close to a "pancake" servo motor I have in my > >treasure box. I'm sure if you cut radial slots in the disk, you would > >have a very good conventional motor, back EMF and all. The solid disk > >makes the eddy current picture a bit foggy, but I think it would still > >hold to "conventional" rules. > > Yes, I came to that conclusion also. See post. > > [snip] > > > >In your motor above, it looks like the counter EMF at each pole is > >upward in opposition to the current source - does this check? > > Now I'm getting confused again. 8^) > > Looking at Fig. 1, when the armature is turning clockwise, an emf is > generated that tends to push electrons out the (-) electrode. To run as a > mototr clockwise electrons are supplied at the (-) electrode. Thus the > generator emf opposes the motor emf, right? The current generated is in > the wrong direction, even though the marked polarity matches. > > (+) > | > | i > | > V > X X c X X > c X X X X X c Ftop ---> > X X X X X > c X X X X X c > > c c > ### > ### > c c > > c O O O O O c > O O O O O > c O O O O O c > O O c O O > | > | > <--- Fbottom | > V > (-) > > C - periphery of disk armature > ### - disk bearing > X X - magnetic field into page > O O - magnetic field out of mage > > Fig. 1 - Lenz Free Motor? > I think that's right, Horace. In a fixed-field machine like this, with a fixed direction of rotation, the machine can be a generator or a motor while maintaining the same polarity. As a motor, the applied EMF overwhelms the counter EMF and current flows against the CEMF. As a generator, the current reverses and flows with the CEMF. Does this make sense? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 14:28:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00791; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0932 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:21:56 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"NwlMh3.0.DC.FCpQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19215 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince The simplest solution would be to run a half wave rectifier, instead of a bridge rectifier. You will get about three times the ripple voltage, but your capacitors may be large enough for you to live with this. Put the diode in series with the ungrounded end of the transformer, and then put the caps to ground. Hank > ---------- > From: VCockeram[SMTP:VCockeram aol.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, May 24, 1998 5:16 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode > > All, > I finished up mounting the capacitors in the power supply and tested > power up 1/2 wave using the old diode. The caps hold a nasty charge. > I had built a crowbar circut with a heavy duty relay and a 100 ohm 10 > W > resistor. When power is turned off the relay drops shorting the caps > thru > the resistor. This worked fine when the caps were under 2 kV. When I > tried it at full voltage (~3kV) , the resistor exploded. No fragments > were released in my direction. (a lot inside the PS though!) > Solved that problem by using a 100 W 300 ohm resistor. Works fine > now with multiple (10 per minute) power up/crowbar cycles at full > voltage > and the resistor just gets slightly warm. The caps drain to zero v in > about > 1/2 second. > > Wanting things neat, I drew up a schamatic of the supply and now see > another problem; The high voltage transformer secondary is grounded > at one end. This means that the high voltage DC cannot have a common > ground and if I am running at say 2kV, each leg of the HV will be 1 kV > above and below ground. This is decidly, not very safe. > I am going to have to disassamble the supply again and see if the > grounded end of the HV secondary can be disconnected and brought > out to a terminal for connection to the full wave bridge rectifier. > If it can't be done I will have to go looking for a transformer with > around > a 2 kV secondary or 4 kV center tapped. I have contacts at Young > Electric Sign Co. here in town and if needed, will get one from them. > > Regards, > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 14:28:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23484; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:21:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:21:54 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:14:38 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: "vertical flow calorimetry" Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805261716_MC2-3E38-2869 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"TlHhn1.0.dk5.k9pQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19214 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Tractebel Energy Marketing >INTERNET:guest tractebelusa.com Tractebel Energy Marketing asked what is "vertical flow calorimetry." Mitch Swartz pointed him (her, it, them?) to his web site http://world.std.com/~mica/posvar.html, and explained "it can be avoided by horizontal flow in the calorimeter, and if not, can produce an artifact." I do not want to get into an argument with Swartz, but I'd like to point out three things: 1. To the best of my knowledge this artifact has never been observed during calibration or null runs in cold fusion or in any other experiment. 2. There is no mention of this artifact in standard textbooks on calorimetry. (Or if there is, I missed it.) 3. Every expert in calorimetry that I have asked says the problem is not significant. They say it is too small to be measured with conventional equipment, and it may not exist at all. During ICCF7 Swartz told me that McKubre agreed with him, but when I talked to McKubre I got the opposite impression. He said he did not think the effect exists because the calibrations and null runs show a precise balance of input and output, to within a few milliwatts, but he added that he has never tested horizontal flow so he cannot comment in detail. Swartz and I had a nasty argument about this subject here. I do not want to repeat it, but I would like Tractebel to hear both sides of the story. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 14:29:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA25360; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:26:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:26:08 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980526162626.00c2f93c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:26:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"d_3qU2.0.9C6.lDpQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19217 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 13:16 5/26/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote: > What are the accepted NRC 'safe' levels of radiation from: NRC regs allow 1.25 rem/calendar quarter for "radiation workers". Pregnant women and persons under 18 are limited to 1/10th of that or 125 mrem/qtr. Background levels vary enormously but average around 25 mrem/qtr. Flying in airplanes increases your cosmic ray exposure noticeably. I have measured 0.25 mrem/hr on a typical flight. Most minerals are totally harmless. Concentrated uranium minerals are not. I have a piece of bright yellow tyuyamunite that reads about 30 mrem/hr up close! Hands, fingers, and arms are allowed 15 times more exposure than the most sensitive parts of the body: eyes and gonads. To find out whether you're in trouble or not, you'll need a dosimeter. 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 May 26 14:39:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA01345; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:27:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:27:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356B3145.1283 skylink.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:16:53 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"u9lFJ1.0.xK.tEpQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19216 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > I am genuinely curious as to how cancellation is maintained > over many wavelengths in a waveguide. Horace. A waveguide may not be the best way to look at the scalar field problem. I don't think there is "cancellation" in a waveguide. You can cancel either the B field or the H field, but not both at the same time. The energy content of the wave is equally distributed in the B and H fields of each wave, and in overlapping the waves, energy is conserved -- either the E or H field doubles in size to make up the difference. Linear momentum is also conserved. To see the anomaly of scalar waves it is might be better to look at superpositon of waves which have angular momentum. For example, take a circularly polarized photon wave, and superpose it with the identical photon wave travelling in the same direction except rotated 180 degrees. All of the transverse B and E fields cancel. The angular momentum does not cancel. You now have a wave with a total spin 2. One might argue that this can not be a physical thing. But you know such a wave can be easily generated in space with a suitable antenna array. The conventional model of the photon, consisting only of transverse field elements is incorrect. Please see discussion I put up here this morning. A photon is not an infinite planar wave. A photon must have field components in the longitudinal direction. The action of the longitudinal field components on the transverse components is what causes rotation -- angular momentum in the EM fields. You can find linear momentum in the EM fields of a photon consisting only of transverse fields, but you can not find any angular momentum in the fields by using only the transverse components. Also, you can see that there is no spin, angular torque in the fields, for a vertically polarized wave (spin 0), but there is spin for a circularly polarized photon (spin 1), and twice as much spin for the scalar wave photon (graviton?) described above. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 14:41:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA29122; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:36:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:36:44 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0934 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:36:10 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"c15Yg2.0.p67.hNpQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19218 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Jim > Are you talking about the Telegraph mountain at Death Valley? > Where are you located? Are you completely independent of Southern Cal > Edison or whatever? I live in Canoga Park and have looked into > generating power from my roof, but found the costs outrageous. > > Hank > > On Sun, 24 May 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > > to > > move out to the boonies in an RV, doesn't it. > > > > Something like that , yes. > > > So how are those cell phone connections to the net from nowhere? > > Not bad , you'd be surprized. I was 20 miles from telegraph mountain > on > the other side from LA though . > > > Cheap too, > > yeah? ;) > > Welll.... as Einstein's famous equation states... TIME=$ ! How much is > it > costing you guys in terms of the left side of this equation trying to > figure out CF? > > Jim Ostrowski, > > The Mojave ,California. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 14:58:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06383; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:52:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:52:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:50:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: [OFF TOPIC} was: ZPE - opportunity lost... In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0934 xch-cpc-02> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"NAlEV1.0.fZ1.FcpQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19219 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 May 1998, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > Jim > > Are you talking about the Telegraph mountain at Death Valley? No, there's one in the San Bernardino mtn chain north of LA. I am actually not sure if that was really the closest location of a cell site , just the most visible from that location. With a name like "Telegraph" I assumed there would be a site up there somewhere. > > Where are you located? Near Barstow , presently. At the time I was 20 mi north of the S.Bernardino's in the desert. Are you completely independent of Southern Cal > > Edison or whatever? Not now , At the time time , yes , until it got too hot as I said and I bailed. I live in Canoga Park and have looked into > > generating power from my roof, but found the costs outrageous. > > You have to shop around to find good deals on solar panels , and I don't know what your power requirements are/were . An rv's are fairly modest if as I said you don't need AC all the time. Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 15:00:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00643; Tue, 26 May 1998 14:50:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 14:50:16 -0700 Message-ID: <356B2B4E.17A9 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:51:26 -0500 From: Rich Murray Reply-To: rmforall earthlink.net Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NSCP (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Blue: many critical comments on CF, Puthoff 05/26/98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FOLNX3.0.z9.NapQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19220 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: May 26, 1998 Rich Murray: I'm posting many good critical essays from Dick Blue in the last 18 days, for those interested in his views, based on his years of practical experience: Subject: Re: Heffner: Vetrano: Kamada beam heats Al 05/09/98 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:10:59 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > Here is some old background on a couple of the Kamada et al experiments, > which I posted on sci.physics.fusion in April and May 1996, in response > to > a request from Adu Pilt for an unusual or unconventional (nuclear) > reaction > he and Dick Blue could take to the lab. In return for the trouble I got > into a quibbling debate with Dick Blue about it. I still have much of > text > of that debate handy. Below follow the more informative posts of mine > regarding Kamada, sans debate: So the bringing up of significant issues in response to the posting of some new CF claim is just "quibbling" is it? I don't recall what specifically I had to say at the time, but I believe I mentioned the fact that deuteron bombardment and proton bombardment as described do not, as here noted, result in equivalent loadings. Thus we don't have a good, clean "control" versus "effect" situation, and any further differences observed between the two cases may have a variety of explanations that have nothing to do with cold fusion. I also likely had a "quibble" about the use of plastic track detectors in this context. One problem is that there is no time correlation information between when the bombardments occur and when the tracks are formed in the plastic, so you have to rule out a host of possibilities for alternative explanations (not cold fusion). For example, the deuteron bombardment results in the production of neutrons from "hot fusion". Those neutrons, in turn, have a potential for inducing an assortment of other nuclear reactions in all the materials surrounding these track detectors. The fact that the detectors record tracks when deuterons are involved but not for protons is hardly surprising. Just what is supposed to be significant about these experiments anyway? Dick Blue Subject: Re: Britz: Mengoli: boiling D2O/Pd cell 05/08/98 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 11:36:59 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net I continue to be puzzled by these claims for "heat after death" in the cold fusion business. It's pretty clear that chemistry can continue to generate some heat after the electrolytic power is turn off, but what is it that would keep on generating "excess heat"? Indeed, how does one define "excess heat" in this context? The logic employed by CF advocates does, it seems to me, sort of fall apart at times. The claim is that electrolysis must lead to a suitably high loading of the cathode in order to establish the needed conditions. One very obvious fact seen by anyone who has done the experiments is that when you turn off the current the cathode "unloads" to some extent. That is to say the high loading said to be essential for cold fusion certainly is not maintained once the current is turned off. My quesiton is how can you have "heat after death" is the high loading is a requirement? One obvious answer is that the unloading itself provides another heat source that is purely chemical. I don't see how, without elborate accounting for the hydrogen or other potential reactants one can say that any of the heat is "excess." Calorimetrically speaking, its just some of what was put into the cell during the electrolysis, and if you haven't done the energy balance properly, you have no way to determine what it should be. Thus, if there is "excess heat" from cold fusion, you can't determine whether any of the heat generated after shutdown is from that same source. Meanwhile back to the hypothesis for a continuing nuclear reaction process. Unless you have a way for detecting that process that is not calorimetry, it's pretty hard to establish whether it continues or stops when the power cut off. If it does continue after the loading drops, then can't we say that the loading isn't really so important after all? That blows away a large body of the CF orthodoxy. This is just another indication that something is wrong with this claim Dick Blue Subject: Re: Murray: Rothwell: artifacts, CETI, Forsley, ESP 05/12/98 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 10:37:16 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > May 12, 1998 > > [Murray} > McKubre has not proved to him [Blue] that his rare heat excursions are > compelling evidence for CF, a position expressed to me by other fairly > objective players, which I also hold, because who knows what artifacts > might rarely happen in a complex calorimeter. > > [Rothwell] > The calorimeter is fundamentally simple, the heat excursions are not > rare, and there are no artifacts. You and Blue cannot say what imaginary > artifacts might be. You cannot give a single technical reason to support > your claims, so these claims are empty. Waving your hand talking about > "who knows what" artifact doesn't count. The instrument is fundamentally > simple, and the added complexity only serves to increase credibility and > boost the S/N ratio. Nothing will convince you or Blue. Not even six out > of six positive runs at Mitsubishi, or 13 out of 14 at the French AEC. > You will be convinced when the establishment endorses CF. > [Blue] McKubre on this forum said that he had logged 100,000 hours of calorimetry that yield no net excess heat. Since this data is not published I can't say with certainty that those runs include the "heat excursions" to which Jed Rothwell makes reference. However, on the basis of other results I have seen I believe that they do. That is to say the existance of "heat excursions" is not the issue here. The question is whether the integral heat output over some suitable time interval demonstrates an "excess". We all know you can have excursions that do not result in any excess as I have described it. One easy way to generate an "excess" that is pure artifact is simply to miscalibrate the calorimeter. Hence Jed's assertion that there are no artifacts, or that the suggestion of possible artifacts can be ignored is a silly statement to make. > > You believe ESP results are robust and replicated. And you apparently > believe the you found a problem in spectroscopy performed at U. Illinois > by Miley et al. You are *not* convinced by McKubre's 90 sigma > calorimetry, but you *are* convinced by ESP experiments. Very > interesting! I think your scientific judgement is flawed, and I am glad > you do not endorse cold fusion. I cannot judge your critiques of Miley's > spectroscopy, but experts who can have told me you are completely wrong. > I can judge your earlier claims about calorimetry and I know that you do > not have a clue about that subject. > [Blue] To meaningfully attach the label "90 sigma" to any experimental result you must have unattainable information about the distribution of results from which your data is but a sample. We could, possibly, learn more about the distribution of McKubre results, if he were to publish all of the 100,000 hours he admits to having accumulated. That has not happened. Jed has no information relating to anything that can be called "90 sigma. To assume that a data set conforms to a normal distribution out to 90 sigma is an absurdity typical of Jed's writing on this subject. As for Miley's spectroscopy, I don't know whom Jed digs up as his "experts", but I do know that the Miley data published in "Infinite Energy" was full of errors that did not require much special knowledge to recognize. It seems that neither Miley nor Rothwell have recognized those obvious errors and acknowledged them. Calling on some expert who is also oblivious to the errors spotted by Rich Murray and me does nothing to shore up the Miley claims. It is simply a fact that there is an interference at mass 50 in the Miley SIMS spectra between 50Ti and 50Cr. No expert worth his salt will deny that. It is a fact that a signal resulting from the accumulation of 10 counts has a sigma of at least 3. No expert will deny that. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Tessein: Blue: McKubre claims rare CF heat 05/08/98 Date: Mon, 11 May 1998 13:06:22 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Isn't kind of strange, Ross, the extext to which cold fusion gets defined in such a way that no one can possibly supply any evidence suggesting that it isn't real? If I can't replicate the McKubre results it's all my fault, at least according to you. Of course there have been some equally skilled experimenters who have attempted to check the McKubre claims and not succeeded. McKubre says he can't or won't attempt to supply the expertise to help someone else replicate his work. In fact even he can't replicate his own work, so where does that leave us? Dick Blue Subject: Re: Kennel: ICCF-7 critique Part 2/2 05/08/98 Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 11:46:15 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net The Kasagi data is difficult to interpret because it involves multistep, knock-on type reaction events that involve more than one energetic collision in the target. By the very nature of the experiment, any step after the first is not subject to fine control, but must be averaged over the entire range of possible outcomes from the first event. As a result one can only compare the data to a calculated result, based on some modelling of the process. I think all that can be said about the Kasagi result is that his model does not fit his data. It's a long step from that to any assertion that some particular revision in our thinking about the underlying nuclear processes is required. There are too many alternatives to be considered. It is even a further leap to suggest that some observed coupling between nuclear and lattice state justifies CF claims. Such couplings do exist, and investigations of them has been an active area of research for many years. It's just that cold fusion advocates ignore all that research. Dick Blue from Dick Blue May 19, 1998, re Mizuno, Ohmori, & Enyo incandescent W cell claims: When someone puts foward a claim that they have a cold fusion process that results in a neutron count rate of 60,000 counts per second, that gets my attention. I think there are only two possibilities to be considered regarding such claims. Either these people are really on to something, or they are incredibly stupid and/or dishonest. Such claims leave no middle ground. This is not the sort of result that allows vague and indefinite interpretations. One problem comes to mind when I read this, however, and that is whether the 60,000 counts per second in a neutron detector can, with confidence, be taken to mean they are actually detecting neutrons. Somehow the way this report is presented introduces in my mind just a hint of doubt. If I were involved in such an experiment and could reproducibly obtain such a result, I would take extraordinary pains to verify by multiple methods that it actually a high flux of neutrons that is triggering this response in the detector. We again return to the old maxim that if a CF researcher stands around looking at his reaction cell and does not develop acute radiation sickness, he probably has not induced cold fusion as claimed. I know that I would not, by choice, just stand around a neutron detector that was clicking away at 60,000 cps. That brings us to another point. 60,000 cps is well up in the count rate hat most detection systems can handle gracefully, so one has to know something about the type of detector and the electronics used to process the signals. So if it is not neutrons just what is it that could make a neutron detector count its little heart out? Well, I think there is an important clue hidden in the information about the power input - 100 kW? That, along with talk of "glows" and "100 volts and climbing" let us know this detector is in an environment that is, shall we say, electrically active. Neutron detectors are rather sensitive to electrical noise, and I am tending toward the notion that these people are not actually detecting neutrons. Unfortunately, an assertion that they are not detecting neutrons has implications regarding their general competence as experimentalists. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Sevior: doubts re CETI 05/21/98 Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 09:54:55 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Martin Sevior is right on the money when he suggests that self-deception is a part of the cold fusion saga. At each point where the evidence should have become clearer, things have always gotten more murky -- for virtually everyone of the various techniques that are employed. Rather than to step back and take note of discouranging results in an objective manner, the community of cold fusion advocates has simply incorporated into their belief system the notion that the "effect" is difficult to initiate and difficult to observe. That is to say, the phenomenon itself is given features that justify the experimental failures to confirm. It becomes impossible to design and conduct an experiment that yields a definitive result in such a climate. Of course it is not really possible to sustain claims for a non-existant effect, provided the scientific community operates as it should to make objective evaluations of every claim. Non-reproducibility should never be allowed to become the hallmark of any significant experimental observation just by default. No one should be allowed to declare existing data invalid without justification. Prof. George Miley, for example, should not be allowed to deny that natural chromium has a mass-50 isotope, and no one should be allowed to deny that deuteron fusion results in neutron emission. If you do not permit gross distortions of the body of established experimental fact, all these cold fusion claims would have died many years ago. It is only the failure to maintain reasonable, objective standards for judging such claims that CF has continued as a topic for discussion. No one should be permitted to suggest that nickel can be transmuted into silver or gold into iron via an electrochemical process. The people making such claims should be called upon to justify their assertions within the context of a reasonable understanding of nuclear reaction processes. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Murray: Puthoff: biography & reports 05/22/98 Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 11:31:53 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > May 22, 1998 > > [Comments by Rich Murray] Today I found in Skeptical Inquirer, > May-June, 1998, pages 13-15 and 60, "Zero-Point Energy and Harold > Puthoff", by Marin Gardner, now 83, the eminent skeptical writer, whom I > have long enjoyed and respected for his erudition, clarity, and > decency. I am saddened to find that his usually fully justified > skepticism has caused him to portray Hal Puthoff [puthoff aol.com] in an > unfairly biased fashion. This in turn reflects on the credibility of > Skeptical Inquirer and CSICOP. I have perused every issue of SI, and as > a psychic and mystic, value and appreciate their commitment to fair and > rigorous, albeit lively, skepticism. > I don't believe that you can logically conclude that Martin Gardner's comments on Harold Puthoff are "unfairly biased." Surely you don't wish to suggest that Puthoff is, somehow, above criticism or that he is incapable of uttering incorrect or unjustified assertions about the nature of zero point fluctuations and the significance of them. The ultimate test is to compare what Puthoff has to say on the subject with what can be experimentally verified. So far I am not aware of there being any points upon which Puthoff's position is clearly correct and Gardner is clearly wrong. So what is it that might account for your being "saddened", and what reflects on the credibility of the Skeptical Inquirer and CSICOP? Is it just possible that you have an unjustified bias in favor of Harold Puthoff? Dick Blue Subject: Re: Murray: Puthoff: biography & reports 05/22/98 Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:42:06 -0500 From: Rich Murray Organization: Room For All To: Richard A Blue References: 1 May 25, 1998 Hello Dick, Yes, I'm biased in favor of Hal Puthoff. I meant that Gardner would have been more fair to include the fact that Puthoff's models about the possible role of zero point fluctuations in maintaining the stability of ground state electron orbits, on creating mass and inertia, on generating gravitational interaction were legitimate theoretical physics, published in Physics Review, so Puthoff can not be dismissed as only a crank. I loved the quote from Gardner, since it raises the fundamental question of the source of things. For instance, what scientist, studying the universe at the moment right after the end of our cosmic inflation, before even quarks had formed, would have been able to deduce the ensuing evolution of stars, planets, life, intelligence, the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, and Travolta playing Clinton in "Primary Colors"? How do you and I explain the mystery, that, to some degree, we are communicating? I personally experience modest success at remote viewing, so I give his years of research at SRI quite a lot of credance, and notice that the extensive debate about that research is not concluded or conclusive, as far as proving the negative. See the many papers, pro and con, on Prof. Jessica Utts' web site: http://www-stat.ucdavis.edu/users/utts/ . Dr. John Cramer of U. Washington has put a long paper about his Transactional Interpretation of quantum mechanics, which I printed and read. It supports nonlocality, but maintains strict time sequentiality and causality: http://mist.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html It's an easier read than most papers on QM. I'm still looking for an open-minded statistician to help me evaluate the daily summary data from John Walker's RetroPsychoKinesis Project: http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/summary/ . Did you ever read Carl Sagan's novel "Contact", from which a wonderful movie was made last year? He played with the idea that the source of our universe concealed specific coded messages within the endless random sequence of the digits of pi and e, ect. Fondly, Rich Murray From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 15:38:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA12364; Tue, 26 May 1998 15:34:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:34:59 -0700 Message-ID: <356B42A1.8DED2654 ariel.com> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:30:57 -0400 From: Terren Suydam Organization: Netmonkey Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: OFF-TOPIC question for yous References: <3569A804.2672 skylink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"urKzP1.0.613.HEqQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19221 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Please pardon the off-topic post. But if anyone can shed light on my question, it's you folks. Imagine you have an incredibly long metal pipe, lets say 93,000,000 miles long. <-- 93,000,000 miles --> ___________________________________ Each end of the pipe is connected to a relay which records the time when it is opened. Assuming the clocks have been synchronized at either end (speed of light interval accounted for), the experiment is designed to measure the time it takes for a displacement of the pipe to propogate from one end to the other. The experimenter moves one end of the pipe (which would involve a large but finite amount of work), which opens the relay on his end, recording the time. Some amount of time later, the opposite end of the pipe moves, breaking the relay on its own end. Now let's substitute the metal pipe with whatever the hardest substance in the world is (diamond?) A 93,000,000 mile long diamond rod. Hey, nobody said this would be a cheap thought-experiment ;] Here's my question: Wouldn't the concept of the space-time continuum sort of limit the propagation speed of the displacement of the pipe (seen as a wave) to something less than the speed of light? If not, wouldn't it be possible to send information faster than the speed of light? If so, where in the equations that would describe this experiment would the constant 'c' show up? Terren, fully ignorant of those equations From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 15:47:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA14351; Tue, 26 May 1998 15:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:38:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980526183523.007c2e10 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:35:23 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: "vertical flow calorimetry" In-Reply-To: <199805261716_MC2-3E38-2869 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"DgTF52.0.7W3.vHqQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19222 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:14 PM 5/26/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex; Tractebel Energy Marketing >INTERNET:guest tractebelusa.com > >Tractebel Energy Marketing asked what is "vertical flow calorimetry." Mitch >Swartz pointed him (her, it, them?) to his web site >http://world.std.com/~mica/posvar.html, and explained "it can be avoided by >horizontal flow in the calorimeter, and if not, can produce an artifact." I do >not want to get into an argument with Swartz, but I'd like to point out three >things: > >1. To the best of my knowledge this artifact has never been observed during >calibration or null runs in cold fusion or in any other experiment. > Wrong. It is responsible for the pseudo-"kilowatts" reported by Jed. >2. There is no mention of this artifact in standard textbooks on calorimetry. >(Or if there is, I missed it.) > It is reported in my publications. The "kilowatts" disappeared shortly thereafter consistent with this artifact. >3. Every expert in calorimetry that I have asked says the problem is not >significant. T This is NOT true. Any physicist or engineer knows of Bernard instability, and if they do not, they should restudy continuum electromechanics. It can be significant in low flow systems. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 15:52:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA16505; Tue, 26 May 1998 15:47:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:47:48 -0700 From: "Paul Brown" To: Subject: Re: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:53:48 -0600 Message-ID: <01bd88f9$24e280a0$50b8adce isonix> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"yKz8T.0.p14.KQqQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19223 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ALARA; As Low As Reasonably Aceivable. Specifically, the regs speak in regard to specific isotopes rather than mineral samples. Paul -----Original Message----- From: John Schnurer To: vortex Date: Tuesday, May 26, 1998 11:23 AM Subject: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please > > Dear Vo., > > What are the accepted NRC 'safe' levels of radiation from: > > Mineral samples > Scrap metals > other, if any .. > I need to get a ball park on this as quickly as I can. > > Peirsonally I feel anything over background is probably not very >good, but I would like to know the 'accepted' regs in the US. > > > > > Thanks, > > J > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 16:02:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18543; Tue, 26 May 1998 15:56:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 15:56:48 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:52:55 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: List FreeNrg Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing In-Reply-To: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zYc_D3.0.ZX4.jYqQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19224 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 26 May 1998, Greg Watson wrote: HI All, I plan to sent a sample SMOT "Rollaway" unit to Dr. Barry Merriman, Dr. Hal Puthoff, Bill Beaty, Jean-Louis Naudin & Hamdi Ucar. I would like each of the above to post their acceptance of the following : 1) Post a notice upon the units arrival. 2) Post their initial testing results with-in 24 hours of arrival. Once I have their verifications, I will ship to all the other purchasers. Full plans will be posted to my web site on the 31st May, 1998. I WILL post an advise when they are up. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson -------------------------- YES! "IT'S HERE!" (hope/hope:) Guilty of being a perpetual optimist, "I sense Great Feelings again that the Entire World is going to recieve 'LIGHT', THANKS TO GREG!" *IF's* abound, but WHEN is in a count-down now. (again).. Personally, I'm excited for 'ALL' (You too Jed:) , 5 days till Christmas! 5 days till the Wright Bros. launch!, 5 days till man on the moon! etc.. Yes YES Y_E_S!, I'm giddy for the first recipents, And I'm not even ON the LIST! (BUT, my own hands have felt IT, and mine own eyes have seen IT!) As with the latest technology of digitized commericals on TV.. I suspect "WE" won't believe our eyes at first. Please REPORT(s) IN!! --------------- Eyes Open, Thinking Caps ON --------------- -=se=- Guilty Optimist, and COUNTING 5,4,3,2,1! Now, GROUP(s) LET'S JUST DO IT!!! ekwall2 diac.com steve (lerking [self-appointed? whatever..] vortexian cheerleader:) ekwall Ahem, DR(s)/Sirs:/Gentle(&wo)man, "GO..GO..G_O!!" YES! Talent is what you possess, genius is what possess YOU ! :) - Malcolm Cowley - American Author & critic (1898-1989) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 16:12:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA19694; Tue, 26 May 1998 16:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980526190354.00806920 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:03:54 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Vertical (low-) flow calorimetry may have hurt the field of cold fusion In-Reply-To: <199805261716_MC2-3E38-2869 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9Y_Ya3.0.Sp4.XiqQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19225 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 05:14 PM 5/26/98 -0400, Jed wrote: >To: Vortex; Tractebel Energy Marketing >INTERNET:guest tractebelusa.com > >Tractebel Energy Marketing asked what is "vertical flow calorimetry." Mitch >Swartz pointed him (her, it, them?) to his web site >http://world.std.com/~mica/posvar.html, and explained "it can be avoided by >horizontal flow in the calorimeter, and if not, can produce an artifact." I do >not want to get into an argument with Swartz, but I'd like to point out three >things: > >1. To the best of my knowledge this artifact has never been observed during >calibration or null runs in cold fusion or in any other experiment. BTW IMHO this is an important subject, and although Mr Rothwell and I disagree on this subject, it is critical. This artifact has damaged this field for several reasons. The false amplification of the excess heat (if any, in that system) and the driving of such systems below the noise level, both have led to false positive indications, and thereafter may have contributed to as many increased expectations as Drs. Pons and Fleischmann's announcement in '89 leading people to think that these systems were easy to achieve. The other problems with flow calorimetry in cf are beyond the scope of this post. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 16:26:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA20836; Tue, 26 May 1998 16:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356B4C84.4F26ADE2 microtronics.com.au> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 08:43:08 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Caution on SMOT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Kk8Hw3.0.O55.NnqQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19226 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI All, Just a note about caution. While I have been able to make devices which seem to be OU, they might NOT be. The power I can extract is VERY small. I haven't been able to get much more than weak operation. I am starting to suspect that the effect I have uncovered may be some sort of a thermal to magnetic effect as some on these lists have suggested. But I could be wrong. Thats why I am sending units to several professional Physicists. I am just a amateur in reality. Anyway ............. One small cautious step at a time .............. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 16:26:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28687; Tue, 26 May 1998 16:20:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:20:55 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:19:52 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: other Marinov motor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"l4-242.0.307.KvqQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19227 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > Why look for the arcane when the obvious is at hand? To verify that there's no arcane involved, to test by experiment rather than assuming that the obvious explanation is real, to let experiment be the judge. I assume that somebody is going to make a new basic discovery in very simple physics. Once this has occurred, everyone else will say "Oh, I saw that phenomena in such-and-such a system, but there was a simple conventional explanation, therefor I never took the time to do an experiment to verify that the conventional explanation was correct." Since so many people have looked for simple but anomalous phenomena, chances are that any remaining anomalies must be hiding behind obvious (but incorrect) conventional explanation. Checking out the "ball bearing motor" is a waste of time if indeed it stops working when the rollers are made nonferrous. But if it doesn't stop working, then a miracle is uncovered. Too bad we can't ask Stefan M. if he already tested it with other materials. Perhaps he was pushing this device because he knew that the conventional explanations didn't hold up. Or perhaps he was afraid of discovering that his unconventional theory fails, and so he avoided performing any tests which would reveal this fact. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 26 17:08:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA10949; Tue, 26 May 1998 17:01:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:01:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:00:21 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: OFF-TOPIC question for yous In-Reply-To: <356B42A1.8DED2654 ariel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rU0ov1.0.Sf2.nUrQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19228 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 26 May 1998, Terren Suydam wrote: > Here's my question: Wouldn't the concept of the space-time continuum > sort of limit the propagation speed of the displacement of the pipe > (seen as a wave) to something less than the speed of light? Simple answer: speed of sound, not speed of light. "Mechanical energy" can be imagined to be low frequency (DC) sound. Whenever we try to move any object, a sound wave communicates the forces to other parts of the object. Push on a long rod, and the other end moves after a small delay caused by the speed of sound. Yank on a long rope, same thing. For air, it's obvious: push upon a diaphragm that's covering one end of a very long pipe, and a pressure-wave travels at around 1,100 ft/sec through the air in the pipe. But push on a diamond rod, and the same thing happens, except the speed of sound in diamond is larger than the speed of sound in air. Check this one out: ACOUSTIMAGNETOELECTRICISM RANT http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/miscon/a-rant.txt ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Tue May 26 17:11:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA11364; Tue, 26 May 1998 17:01:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:01:49 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 16:26:52 -0700 Message-Id: <199805262326.QAA30267 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: Re: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please Resent-Message-ID: <"JorK72.0.qm2.dVrQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19229 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> What are the accepted NRC 'safe' levels of radiation from: >> >> Mineral samples >> Scrap metals >> other, if any .. >> I need to get a ball park on this as quickly as I can. >> >> Peirsonally I feel anything over background is probably not very >>good, but I would like to know the 'accepted' regs in the US. Lot's of things are over "background". Either you need to go look up the minerals in a CRC to get specific hazard information, or you need to list the elements you are interested in if you need help. The question you pose is wide open and would require books to respond to it. If you are interested in specific types of radiation, such as alpha, beta, etc., then you also need to specify which type of radiation and the energy of the radiation. If you know isotopes you expect, this will do as the CRC lists the probably reaction paths. Alternately, contact any material supply house for elemental hazard data sheets, ie, Aldrich. And for radioactive stuff you can get info from the nuclear regulatory commission I would suspect. I have some texts that give ball park values for various kinds of radiations at various energy levels. This is a reactor shielding text book, so you could look in a nuclear reactor shielding text book or hand book for that sort of info if you must keep it confidential. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 17:33:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA20990; Tue, 26 May 1998 17:29:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:29:06 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980526202750.007c05a0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 20:27:50 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980526162626.00c2f93c mail.eden.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"P2hIx3.0.t75.HvrQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19230 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:26 PM 5/26/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 13:16 5/26/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote: > >> What are the accepted NRC 'safe' levels of radiation from: > .... >Background levels vary enormously but average around 25 mrem/qtr. Flying >in airplanes increases your cosmic ray exposure noticeably. I have >measured 0.25 mrem/hr on a typical flight. Accuracy would help here. Please get this straight. Radiation calorimetry is even more important the thermal calorimetry. Units: Exposure - roentgens Dose delivered - rads (now Grays = 100 rads) Equivalent radiobiological dose (rem) = Dose absorbed (rads) * QF * DF [ DF is equivalent to n (Damage factor, distribution factor) QF quality factor = 1.0 xrays; neturon up to 10 MeV = 10 ] BTW the background dose delivered to the gonads is ~95 millirads/year >Most minerals are totally harmless. Concentrated uranium minerals are not. >I have a piece of bright yellow tyuyamunite that reads about 30 mrem/hr up >close! > See comments above. Also, dose delivered must be specified at what distance it is made (as opposed to "up close"). Hope that clarifies. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 17:44:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA23417; Tue, 26 May 1998 17:35:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:35:32 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:35:18 -0700 Message-Id: <199805270035.RAA06931 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: Re: OFF-TOPIC question for yous Resent-Message-ID: <"rJ5cI.0.jj5.J_rQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19231 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Tue, 26 May 1998, Terren Suydam wrote: > >> Here's my question: Wouldn't the concept of the space-time continuum >> sort of limit the propagation speed of the displacement of the pipe >> (seen as a wave) to something less than the speed of light? > Yes. If you treat sub atomic particles as resonances in aether, (or if you accept GR), then the maximum velocity is c, the speed of light. The maximum velocity one end of the rod can accelerate relative to the other end, is the speed of sound. If you try to accelerate the rod too quickly, you crush the atoms at the rear (which you are pushing) into all of the atoms ahead just as effectively as though you had smashed it in a tensile (compression) tester. However, if you treat sub atomic matter as wave resonances in an ocean of aether, then it is true that the rod cannot remain coupled to our spacetime topology while at the same time moving faster than c. This is because spacetime (IMO) can be thought of as a structure of acoustic standing waves. What you can do, however, is to set up a vortex in that ocean, and the vortex can move through the remaining universe at faster than c, and the rod can move within the vortex. Effectively exceeding c, but it doesn't know it. All measurements made by a scientist riding on the rod will show that all velocities of light are as expected, c. In other words, a crude example might be to say that an observer on the ground measures the velocity of sound in the direction of the highway to be c_o, while a different observer makes a measurement inside a bus travelling down the highway and finds that the velocity is well, c_b. Both observers agree that c_o and c_b are the same value when they measure relative to their local fixed environment, but an objective observer can see there is a problem. If each observer is restricted to measuring the experiment of the other, from their relatively moving platforms, neither will discover an error! They cannot observe that there is a local displacment of the medium itself from their positions, and they thus attribute the error to the relative motion alone. Doppler shifts in the frequency allow them to explain this without attributing the stretching to a relative motion of the medium in which the sound travels. This gets really wierd with light, but you can still do the same thing for the most part. But basically if you consider distant galaxies, their spacetime is moving relative to our local spacetime, and that is why distant galaxies are shifted in frequency due to the Hubble flow of the galaxies of the universe. It is not obvious, but it is reasonable, that a space craft would do the same locally, and thus account for Doppler shifting of EM energy. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 18:05:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA01694; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:02:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:02:08 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <009b01bd890a$bfc85f20$5c8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Calcium Carbide, Porous Catalyst? Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:59:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"ZrZgR1.0.HQ.FOsQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19232 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex With a strong similarity to Potassium: Shells K L M N Potassium 2 8 8 1 Calcium 2 8 8 2 Calcium Carbide should form a porous matrix: -C***C-Ca-C***C-Ca-C***C-Ca-C***C-Ca- with proper heat treatment "cross-linking" should also be possible, making it function in a manner similar to Potassium. As stated in an earlier post Palladium II may form a similar arrangement in the "Activated Carbon": -C***C-Pd-C***C-Pd-C***C-Pd-C***C-Pd- If this is unstable at 250 C it may be why the Case Catalyst "deactivates". Calcium Carbide is "stable from 25 to 447 C". I understand that CaC2 is available from sporting goods stores as well as welding supply stores. Might be worth a try with Pressurized D2 and heat. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 18:11:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA04365; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:08:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:08:39 -0700 Message-ID: <356B91DA.68F3 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:08:58 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: ?? "Safe" radiation levels.. need to know fast, please References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pxO1R.0.y31.KUsQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19233 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Schnurer wrote: > > Dear Vo., > > What are the accepted NRC 'safe' levels of radiation from: > > Mineral samples > Scrap metals > other, if any .. > I need to get a ball park on this as quickly as I can. > > Peirsonally I feel anything over background is probably not very > good, but I would like to know the 'accepted' regs in the US. > > > > Thanks, > > J From: http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/CFR/PART020/part020-1201.html <><><><><><><><> Subpart C -- Occupational Dose Limits Source: 56 FR 23396, May 21, 1991, unless otherwise noted. §20.1201 Occupational dose limits for adults. (a) The licensee shall control the occupational dose to individual adults, except for planned special exposures under §20.1206, to the following dose limits. (1) An annual limit, which is the more limiting of -- (i) The total effective dose equivalent being equal to 5 rems (0.05 Sv); or (ii) The sum of the deep-dose equivalent and the committed dose equivalent to any individual organ or tissue other than the lens of the eye being equal to 50 rems (0.5 Sv). (2) The annual limits to the lens of the eye, to the skin, and to the extremities, which are: (i) An eye dose equivalent of 15 rems (0.15 Sv), and (ii) A shallow-dose equivalent of 50 rems (0.50 Sv) to the skin or to any extremity. (b) Doses received in excess of the annual limits, including doses received during accidents, emergencies, and planned special exposures, must be subtracted from the limits for planned special exposures that the individual may receive during the current year (see §20.1206(e)(1)) and during the individual's lifetime (see §20.1206(e)(2)). (c) The assigned deep-dose equivalent and shallow-dose equivalent must be for the part of the body receiving the highest exposure. The deep-dose equivalent, eye dose equivalent and shallow-dose equivalent may be assessed from surveys or other radiation measurements for the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the occupational dose limits, if the individual monitoring device was not in the region of highest potential exposure, or the results of individual monitoring are unavailable. (d) Derived air concentration (DAC) and annual limit on intake (ALI) values are presented in table 1 of appendix B to part 20 and may be used to determine the individual's dose (see §20.2106) and to demonstrate compliance with the occupational dose limits. (e) In addition to the annual dose limits, the licensee shall limit the soluble uranium intake by an individual to 10 milligrams in a week in consideration of chemical toxicity (see footnote 3 of appendix B to part 20). (f) The licensee shall reduce the dose that an individual may be allowed to receive in the current year by the amount of occupational dose received while employed by any other person (see §20.2104(e)). [56 FR 23396, May 21, 1991, as amended at 60 FR 20185, Apr. 25, 1995] <><><><><><><><> This is 10 CFR Part 20 - Standards for Protection Against Radiation. You really should learn to surf, John. Right, Rick? Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 18:18:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA15140; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:13:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Discontinuity of existence Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"HPb6o3.0.Mi3.wasQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19234 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear vo, What if "reality" or "existence" (as we know it) isn't continuous? For example , we experience the flow of time as a smooth , uninterrupted sequence of events and experiences that take place one after another with no "gaps" between cause and effect. A ball is thrown , it flies smoothly through the air , bounces on the ground or is caught by someone and we move about after that with no impression of this process being anything other than what it appears to be , that is, a continuum of events and cause-effect occurrences. But this might all be an illusion . Watching a movie for example we "experience" the movie in much the same way as we experience other (normal) reality . But actually the movie is just a series of still frames which are presented to our field of vision in a rapid enough sequence so that we do not "see" any discontinuity of motion. But the discontinuity is there all the same whether we know it or not. If (our) reality isn't continuous , but is more or less like a "3-D" movie as it were, this might explain the "integration" of separate objects that appear after a tornado. There is a quote from one of the "Philadelphia Experiment" websites that is worth reviewing: "The tornado passes and we are left with straw embedded in unshattered glass, a 2 x 4 piece of pine penetrating 5/8 inch steel, a 15 inch tire circling the base of a tree whose branches exceed 15 feet, and metal pipe UNDER the earth is left twisted in the wake of such funnels. Clearly something other than physical force AS WE KNOW IT manifests itself when CONDITIONS are met. I quote from 'Reality Revealed':" This would also explain what might have happened to the men aboard the DE-173 (ship of the "alleged" Philadelphia Experiment) during AND AFTER the supposed "incident". If a powerful enough (vortex) field is set in motion it might have the ability to shift the phase of an object's (or a man's) "existence time slices" to something diferent than that of his surroundings , which are "normally" synchronized so that two things cannot occupy the same space at the same time. If , after such an experiment , these existence time slices become unsyschronized , even if only slightly , the effect would be as reported by "Carlos Allende" i.e. men disappearing through walls or vanishing altogether from plain sight in full view of spectators as they go out of sync. This just means that in the tornado , the time slices wherein an object exists become out of step with the time slices wherein another object exists but they are both occupying THE SAME SPACE (but at "different" times , due to the phase displacement of their respective "existence time slices"). So if a "transporter" is ever going to work properly at all it would probably require a lot of experiment and "R&D" with inanimate objects in order to fine tune the synchronization so that everything comes through "in phase" . At this point I don't have a clue as to what factors in the generation of the field would control this . And we must remember that the Gov't has a 55 year plus head start in that direction which would make claims that they have been sending men to Mars and elswhere in spacetime all the more plausible , as "wacky" as that might sound. If anyone is interested in talking about this please reply off line because I am slightly paranoid about this subject. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 18:35:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA18637; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:31:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:25:18 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Atlanta Air Show Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805262129_MC2-3E3E-298B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"SSz9c2.0.6Z4.DqsQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19235 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex People near Atlanta Georgia who like aviation might want to attend the Friendly Neighbor Day at the Peachtree DeKalb Airport on June 6. It is sorta fun. They have antique airplanes, an air show and they give rides for $5 on small airplanes or a helicopter. You couldn't pay me to go on the helicopter but the airplane rides are fun. It'll be hot so wear a baseball cap. This is the second busiest airport in Georgia. My office happens to be located in it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 18:37:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA03484; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:34:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:34:19 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19960101133218.00857a00 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 1996 13:32:18 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: eprint:gr-qc/9805086 An Implication of Ether Drift In-Reply-To: <356ABFFA.52A8692F verisoft.com.tr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"A9Y8F.0.Js.QssQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19236 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Hamdi, Just to let you know that I for one really appreciate your occasional pointing out of interesting new papers in the LANL archives. I usually take a look and a printout if I have time, although I try not to get into discussions these days as I am too busy. You wrote: >... by just looking to figures displaying experimental results. Unfortunately they are not experimental results - just analytical. One would have to look up the two-photon absorption paper to see how closely the experimental results matched with these analytical results. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 18:41:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA04897; Tue, 26 May 1998 18:37:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 18:37:56 -0700 Message-ID: <356B9859.28C6 bellsouth.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:36:41 -0700 From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"aCGck1.0.RC1.pvsQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19237 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] > I am genuinely curious as to how cancellation is maintained over many > wavelengths in a wavegiude. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner Obviously, you can't get total cancellation with real materials. There are propagation losses associated with the waveguide on both passes and the reflection isn't 100%. You might not want to pursue this line of thought much further least you become labeled a Beardenite and find yourself in a catatonic pondering of quaternions and mumbling about phase conjugate mirrors. I trust you have read the good colonel's many writings on the subject? If not, I think the Keeleynet website has much of it. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 19:27:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA27151; Tue, 26 May 1998 19:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 17:25:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE Resent-Message-ID: <"KheRb1.0.8e6.2atQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19238 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:16 PM 5/26/98, Robert Stirniman wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> I am genuinely curious as to how cancellation is maintained >> over many wavelengths in a waveguide. > >Horace. A waveguide may not be the best way to look at the >scalar field problem. It has the advantage of being macro level plus highly directional, Interesting that the reflector at the end of the waveguide is tranparent to scalar waves. Leads one to think a long waveguide might be a good way to generate highly directional scalar waves. >I don't think there is "cancellation" in >a waveguide. You can cancel either the B field or the H field, >but not both at the same time. If the EM wave is relected then *everything* must be 180 deg. out of phase in a (N+1/2)*lambda reflecting waveguide. >The energy content of the wave >is equally distributed in the B and H fields of each wave, and >in overlapping the waves, energy is conserved -- either the E >or H field doubles in size to make up the difference. Linear >momentum is also conserved. [snip bunch of interesting stuff] Energy and momentum should be preserved. If so, what's inside a continually "empty" portion of the waveguide when opposing direction waveforms cancel? Is an oscillation forced? What happens if an EM signal of short duration goes down the reflecting waveguide? Does a signal which chas been "cancelled" by a reflected signlnal ever reach the end of the waveguide to reflect? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 19:54:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA01386; Tue, 26 May 1998 19:51:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:51:19 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD88F0.1680A4A0 pm3-141.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: eprint:gr-qc/9805086 An Implication of Ether Drift Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:48:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD88F0.168845C0" Resent-Message-ID: <"w61Me1.0.SL.b-tQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19239 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD88F0.168845C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: John Winterflood[SMTP:jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au] Sent: Monday, January 01, 1996 12:32 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: eprint:gr-qc/9805086 An Implication of Ether Drift >Hi Hamdi, >Just to let you know that I for one really appreciate your occasional >pointing out of interesting new papers in the LANL archives. Yes, I appreciate this too. Many thanks for keeping an eye out on LANL for us, Hamdi! Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD88F0.168845C0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjoCAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABADcAAABSRTogZXBy aW50OmdyLXFjLzk4MDUwODYgQW4gSW1wbGljYXRpb24gb2YgRXRoZXIgRHJpZnQAyBEBBYADAA4A AADOBwUAGgAVADAAOQACAHQBASCAAwAOAAAAzgcFABoAFQAwAAUAAgBAAQEJgAEAIQAAAEUwNUE2 MzdENzFGNEQxMTFBNzVFRThFMDBBQzEwMDAwABEHAQOQBgAsBAAAFAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAA AAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAAAAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAYLBr/hmJvQEeAHAAAQAAADcAAABSRTogZXBy aW50OmdyLXFjLzk4MDUwODYgQW4gSW1wbGljYXRpb24gb2YgRXRoZXIgRHJpZnQAAAIBcQABAAAA FgAAAAG9iRn+a4S8sYL04hHRp17o4ArBAAAAAB4AHgwBAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAfDAEAAAAX AAAAc3RrQHN1bmhlcmFsZC5pbmZpLm5ldAAAAwAGEEhs+roDAAcQbQEAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAC0t LS0tLS0tLS1GUk9NOkpPSE5XSU5URVJGTE9PRFNNVFA6SldJTlRFUkBDWUxMRU5FVVdBRURVQVVT RU5UOk1PTkRBWSxKQU5VQVJZMDEsMTk5NjEyOjMyQU1UTzpWT1JURVgAAAAAAgEJEAEAAACAAgAA fAIAANYEAABMWkZ1ShOFPf8ACgEPAhUCpAPkBesCgwBQEwNUAgBjaArAc2V07jIGAAbDAoMyA8YH EwKDujMTDX0KgAjPCdk7Ff94MjU1AoAKgQ2xC2Bu8GcxMDMUIAsKFCIMARpjAEAgCoUKi2xpMQQ4 MALRaS0xNDTPDfAM0BzDC1kxNgqgA2D2dAWQBUAtHucKhx2bDDB1HmZGA2E6H+4eZgyCIGhKb2gD oFcLgB6QcgUY0G8EcFtTTVRQDDpqA/AkEkBjeWwCbAnwZS51d2EuwQmAdS5hdV0fjyCdLwZgAjAh zyLbTQIgZGEseSwjkABwdQrAeSCEMDErMDE5OTYsAMgyOjMSIEFNJr8gnSxUbyj/Itt2FaFleCgt bEAHkGsHcG8ujQWgbSzvJ851YmoeodMvDyLbUmU0gGUeYCQBgjoJwC1xYy85HFAoNTA4LEBBA6BJ bUELUGljYXRpAiAgQG9mIEV0aASQIJpEBoF0Gu8b8zM2HWdNGjk+O10eZkhpPfBh8G1kaSw5zjt/ PI8edYhKdXMFQHRvICWwhQVAeQhgIGtubwfgdzkgOIA4ECACEAXAAiBlliAWAAdAbCuwYXAeYN8F kAcwHpBC0kQBYzhwAJCfAiAHQD8PQB89DnBvJAH1C4BnONB1BUA44SQDB5DvSdMl0AfgCrBwBJAE IAuAQ0NhREBMQU5MRMBy6RGwaXYHkC4bTEb/Gtb+WQeQKzBDwETZOSAEAEJhnzHABdAAcCuwQ3Fu awQgNUPiawngcEniA5Flef9EQEojA6BMc0PiQjArMD4z2iE5zEslkERAUlFhOHD/JaAEACQhOj8d ZxLyPVlNZQUVIQBaUAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABAAAcwwGuc3xmJvQFAAAgwwGuc3xmJvQEeAD0A AQAAAAUAAABSRTogAAAAAAMADTT9NwAATyU= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD88F0.168845C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 19:59:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA03163; Tue, 26 May 1998 19:57:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 19:57:06 -0700 Message-ID: <000801bd891a$6e5ee630$414bddcf craig> Reply-To: "Craig Haynie" From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:52:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"2puP61.0.Ln.04uQr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19240 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello Greg! Did you get multiple roll-around with SMOT? Craig Haynie (Houston) -----Original Message----- From: Greg Watson To: List FreeNrg Date: Tuesday, May 26, 1998 6:24 PM Subject: Caution on SMOT >HI All, > >Just a note about caution. > >While I have been able to make devices which seem to be OU, they might >NOT be. > >The power I can extract is VERY small. I haven't been able to get much >more than weak operation. I am starting to suspect that the effect I >have uncovered may be some sort of a thermal to magnetic effect as some >on these lists have suggested. But I could be wrong. Thats why I am >sending units to several professional Physicists. I am just a amateur >in reality. > >Anyway ............. One small cautious step at a time .............. > >-- >Best Regards, > Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 21:11:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA14581; Tue, 26 May 1998 21:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356B8E86.6DE7 skylink.net> Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 20:54:46 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Woodward and ZPE References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wXERQ3.0.jZ3.u3vQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19241 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > If the EM wave is relected then *everything* must be 180 deg. out of phase > in a (N+1/2)*lambda reflecting waveguide. Yes. Everything is 180 out of phase, both the voltage and the current. But the wave is travelling in the opposite direction which puts either one or the other, the B or E field, back in the same polarity. You could look at it this way. Send a short pulse down a waveguide, let it reflect back, while it is travelling back, send another short pulse. As the pulses pass each other, the H fields are cancelled but the E fields are doubled. Or try it this way. Send a short pulse from one end, and an opposite voltage short pulse from the other end. As they pass the E fields are cancelled, but the H fields are additive. I think a scalar EM wave must always have angular momentum quantized in units of spin 2. A wave constructed of equal and opposite vectors will always look like itself if spacially rotated 180 degrees. This is a characteristic of a spin 2 wave. To construct it maybe you need spin 1 waves to begin with. To create a scalar EM wave in a waveguide, start with two waveguides of which one is a half wave longer than the other. Split a circularly polarized wave, and send half the wave down each of your two guides. Combine them at the end into another guide, and you should have it. If you match impedances carefully, i.e. no energy reflected back, you might wonder where the energy has gone in the combined wave which has its transverse E and B fields cancelled by superposition. Maybe you will find it in the longitudinal components of the travelling scalar wave. What will it do? How will you measure it? How do you terminate it? Is it dangerous? I don't know. Theoretically you should find phase free (DC) longitudinal B and E fields travelling down the length of your pipe. Remarkably not a dipole B field. Since theoretically this is a spin 2 wave, as a gravity wave is also predicted to be, it might make sense to also look for effects on inertial mass. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 21:41:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA21134; Tue, 26 May 1998 21:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980527004350.0074aeb0 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 00:43:54 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Cancellation Experiment: was Woodward and ZPE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Pgfut3.0.4A5.RavQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19242 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:54 PM 5/26/98 -0700, you wrote: >To create a scalar EM wave in a waveguide, start with two waveguides >of which one is a half wave longer than the other. Split a circularly >polarized wave, and send half the wave down each of your two guides. >Combine them at the end into another guide, and you should have it. >If you match impedances carefully, i.e. no energy reflected back, you >might wonder where the energy has gone in the combined wave which has >its transverse E and B fields cancelled by superposition. Maybe you >will find it in the longitudinal components of the travelling scalar >wave. Back from vacation... I've done this sort of experiment. Consider the following. 50ohm==============================50ohm A B = = = = The transmission line (indicated by equal signs) is terminated at both ends. Points A and B are 50ohm lines capacitively coupled to the terminated line. The distance between A and B is exactly one half a wavelength. In the steady state, the following is measured. Probing the area between A and B with a voltage probe shows a standing wave, double the amplitude of the wave generated when just one source is operational. However, no voltage or current is measured at the terminating resistors. This amazed me at first ( where's the power going? ) but then I measured volage and current at the drivers. Pretty much complete reflection of power back to the source. The steady state took about 10-15 cycles to establish itself, this due to the weak coupling to the terminated line. Bottom line is, nature will prefer conservation of energy when pushed into a corner like this. I still think it's kind of weird that I could see a big signal between the drivers and yet see zero signal coming out of a physically continuous piece of transmission line. I don't think it is possible to cause a cancellation of energy without the result being all the energy reflecting back to the source. At least, I couldn't create a circuit to make it happen. Any !good! suggestions? Robert's right, by the way, ordinary resonance is !not! cancellation by any means. K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue May 26 23:42:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA02519; Tue, 26 May 1998 23:40:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 23:40:37 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram Message-ID: <4aa99ec3.356bb4bc aol.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 02:37:46 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: Verdian aol.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"4UaYh.0.Hd.ZLxQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19243 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, I finished up building the power supply tonight (tuesday), full wave rectification, 24 mfd of filter capacitors and a heavy duty crowbar relay and the small 24 volt power supply that powers the relay. The relay is a double contact normally closed type that shorts the high voltage through a 300 ohm 100 watt resistor. It works fine but I will still use the manual crowbar as well. (relays can fail). I connected the sixteen 7.5 watt ballast lamps across the supply as a load so I could scope for AC ripple. I measured 0.8 volts p-p ripple at 1000 volts. This seems ok to me. I have to get some decent meters to measure the high voltage amperage and voltage. Will also have to build a suitable voltage divider for the high voltage meter, about 500 :1 would be nice. Anyone out there know how to rig up a divider like this? Do I need special resistors? Hope not. A 10 ohm resistor in series with the load will do for the current measurment. As soon as I get all this done I will be ready for some decent power measurments. Going slow but steady. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 00:39:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA08153; Wed, 27 May 1998 00:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 00:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980527073506.2322.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.17] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 00:35:06 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"aTeLQ.0.H_1.5ByQr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19244 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi everyone, The original SMOT kits to be sent out were the roll-around variety. Greg what has happened to those? If you can get a roll-around to work for several days without loss of magnetic field on the magnets then you have something pretty amazing. I think the frinctional forces faced by the ball on completeing a single roll-around would amount to more than could be explained by external thermal interactions. The next few days should get real interesting on this group. Good luck with your roll-aways everyone. (those lucky people who have tickets to Willy Wonkers chocolate factory). Rob King :) > >While I have been able to make devices which seem to be OU, they might >NOT be. > >The power I can extract is VERY small. I haven't been able to get much >more than weak operation. I am starting to suspect that the effect I >have uncovered may be some sort of a thermal to magnetic effect as some >on these lists have suggested. But I could be wrong. Thats why I am >sending units to several professional Physicists. I am just a amateur >in reality. > >Anyway ............. One small cautious step at a time .............. > >-- >Best Regards, > Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 04:16:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA09360; Wed, 27 May 1998 04:15:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 04:15:01 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004301bd8960$53f3e340$388cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hot Fusion in a Resonant Cavity? Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 05:11:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"YaJ7n.0.AI2.qM_Qr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19245 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex While Vince Cockeram is fine tuning his glow discharge tube, and Frank Stenger is busily making Lightning Balls, perhaps a bit of thought on using something between in the way of a super-power resonant cavity filled with D2 would be in order. A resonant cavity operating in the TE(x,y,z) mode, filled with D2 (and perhaps some K or Li) would serve as a Hot Fusion Tube? I wouldn't know about scalar waves coming off the gammas produced. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 08:09:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA15251; Wed, 27 May 1998 08:02:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 08:02:37 -0700 Message-ID: <356C2B2C.792C interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:03:08 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode References: <4aa99ec3.356bb4bc aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7zcN51.0.Dk3.Ci2Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19246 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram wrote: > Will also have to build a suitable voltage divider for the > high voltage meter, about 500 :1 would be nice. Anyone out there know > how to rig up a divider like this? Do I need special resistors? Hope not. I've had good luck with ordinary resistors strung out on a blank perf board, Vince. What would be nice would be precision resistors - but you don't need them - just calibrate the divider when it's done with a known voltage in (at a level you can measure with good instruments on hand) and measure the voltage out. This will give you a true divider ratio to tweek your meters with. Since E^2 for you is about 1,000,000 volts^2, you would need a 1,000,000 ohm total divider resistance to have 1 watt of heat in the divider. For a 500 to 1 ratio, just add a 1,000,000/500 = 2000 ohm resistor in series with the 1 meg resistor. If a 1 watt 1 meg resistor is hard to come by, use 4, 250,000 , 1/4 watt resistors in series. The total resistance of the divider is then 1,002,000 ohms - too close to 1 meg to worry about. A tap at the 2 K resistor will give a 1,002,000/2000 = 501 divider ratio. When you select your meter, it should have an internal resistance much higher than 2000 ohms so as not to upset the ratio too much. If you want to do a bit of algebra, you could match the meter to the divider, since the meter is in parallel with the "2000" ohm resistor. Just be careful that you don't lose the path to ground for the divider or 1000 volts could show up on the ungrounded end of the divider - a 1000 volt source with a 1 meg resistance. For precision work, the best way is to calibrate the divider-meter combination with a known voltage in the range of your best instruments. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 08:43:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA26608; Wed, 27 May 1998 08:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 08:39:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980527103602.00c10f2c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:36:02 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <356C2B2C.792C interlaced.net> References: <4aa99ec3.356bb4bc aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"AaHe53.0.SV6.EE3Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19248 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:03 5/27/98 -0400, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >For precision work, the best way is to calibrate the divider-meter >combination with a known voltage in the range of your best instruments. Good suggestions, Frank. I'd like to add one bit of hard-earned advice to this. After calibrating your divider with your best meters, don't use your best meters to actually monitor the experiment! Even when there is no obvious ground fault I have lost meters to high voltage transients. Also, some meters tolerate high voltage environments better than others. For example, the Fluke 87's display backlight often flashes erratically when it is involved in a high-voltage spark relaxation oscillator experiment. 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 May 27 08:47:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA26718; Wed, 27 May 1998 08:39:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 08:39:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004f01bd8984$c685fc80$388cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hot Fusion Cavity Resonator Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 09:33:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"dKKCv.0.LX6.lE3Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19249 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex If a Lithium Blanket is required,a pipe partially filled with Lithium-Lithium Deuteride at 680 C (25 Torr)can be spun so as to make a tune-able cavity. Two birds with one stone? :-) Sure you want to throw out that Litton, Frank? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 09:49:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA20214; Wed, 27 May 1998 08:30:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 08:30:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 08:30:28 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Yull Brown news (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"RdITO3.0.mx4.J63Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19247 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Forwarded from FREENRG-L NOT verified yet!! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 13:03:08 -0700 From: trknute earthlink.net Reply-To: freenrg-l eskimo.com To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Yull Brown Resent-Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 22:45:00 -0700 Resent-From: freenrg-l eskimo.com Professor Yull Brown passed away Friday May 22nd, 1998, at 21:20 local time, at the Westmead Hospital in Auburn (near Sydney) Australia. He died with his loved ones and closest friends by his bedside. Did you have a successful trip to the UK. I am going to Germany in July. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 10:28:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26903; Wed, 27 May 1998 10:22:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:22:44 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F093C xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:22:36 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"1LJ-U3.0.Fa6.Zl4Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19250 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince It is always a good idea to put a zener diode across a voltage divider's output to limit the maximum voltage that can appear on whatever instrument you connect. Use a diode with a rating a bit above the expected maximum voltage of your instrument. Hank > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 8:03 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode > > VCockeram wrote: > > > Will also have to build a suitable voltage divider for the > > high voltage meter, about 500 :1 would be nice. Anyone out there > know > > how to rig up a divider like this? Do I need special resistors? > Hope not. > > I've had good luck with ordinary resistors strung out on a blank perf > board, Vince. What would be nice would be precision resistors - but > you > don't need them - just calibrate the divider when it's done with a > known > voltage in (at a level you can measure with good instruments on hand) > and measure the voltage out. This will give you a true divider ratio > to tweek your meters with. Since E^2 for you is about 1,000,000 > volts^2, you would need a 1,000,000 ohm total divider resistance to > have > 1 watt of heat in the divider. For a 500 to 1 ratio, just add a > 1,000,000/500 = 2000 ohm resistor in series with the 1 meg resistor. > If a 1 watt 1 meg resistor is hard to come by, use 4, 250,000 , 1/4 > watt > resistors in series. The total resistance of the divider is then > 1,002,000 ohms - too close to 1 meg to worry about. A tap at the 2 K > resistor will give a 1,002,000/2000 = 501 divider ratio. > When you select your meter, it should have an internal resistance much > higher than 2000 ohms so as not to upset the ratio too much. > If you want to do a bit of algebra, you could match the meter to the > divider, since the meter is in parallel with the "2000" ohm resistor. > Just be careful that you don't lose the path to ground for the divider > or 1000 volts could show up on the ungrounded end of the divider - a > 1000 volt source with a 1 meg resistance. > For precision work, the best way is to calibrate the divider-meter > combination with a known voltage in the range of your best > instruments. > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 10:36:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA31548; Wed, 27 May 1998 10:31:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:31:13 -0700 Message-ID: <356C4DF7.1715 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 13:31:35 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hot Fusion Cavity Resonator References: <004f01bd8984$c685fc80$388cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1cUi42.0.Vi7.Ut4Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19251 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > > Sure you want to throw out that Litton, Frank? > Absolutely not, Fred! In fact, I was just getting ready to make a cup of instant coffee in the MW using a cup of heavy water. Three birds with one stone? Actually, I like the resonant cavity idea, Fred. A 10 meter dia. spherical re-entry cavity with diametral stubs along an axis - maybe a one meter gap with the stub ends coated with a lithium-filled metal honeycomb. Resonate with a ham transmitter? (turkey transmitter?) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 10:44:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20148; Wed, 27 May 1998 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356C4FAF.2C89 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 13:38:55 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode References: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F093C xch-cpc-02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TLLua3.0.gw4.905Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19252 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > Vince > It is always a good idea to put a zener diode across a voltage > divider's output to limit the maximum voltage that can appear on > whatever instrument you connect. Great tip, Hank! I should use this myself. I have a divider on a 1000 volt source feeding a 5 volt signal to an A/D on my Gateway 2000. If I lost my ground, I wonder how fast Win95 would run then? :-) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 10:54:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05983; Wed, 27 May 1998 10:49:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:49:57 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980527125026.00c3861c mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:50:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F093C xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"CTnPk1.0.BT1.495Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19253 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:22 5/27/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: >Vince > It is always a good idea to put a zener diode across a voltage >divider's output to limit the maximum voltage that can appear on >whatever instrument you connect. Use a diode with a rating a bit above >the expected maximum voltage of your instrument. Hank, do zener's have any significant leakage when they're nominally not conducting? 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 May 27 11:15:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA10969; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:10:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:10:23 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F093D xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:09:47 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id LAA10930 Resent-Message-ID: <"B8zR22.0.Eh2.ES5Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19254 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott Zener's are just regular diodes more or less, operated above their avalanche breakdown voltage. So when operating them a few volts below breakdown, they are have ordinary reverse characteristics. For example, a 1N5236B 7.5 v diode at 25°C has a MAX rating of 3 uA at 6.0v Hank > ---------- > From: Scott Little[SMTP:little eden.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 10:50 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode > > At 10:22 5/27/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > >Vince > > It is always a good idea to put a zener diode across a voltage > >divider's output to limit the maximum voltage that can appear on > >whatever instrument you connect. Use a diode with a rating a bit > above > >the expected maximum voltage of your instrument. > > Hank, do zener's have any significant leakage when they're nominally > not > conducting? > > > > > 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 May 27 11:34:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15524; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:29:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:29:49 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F093E xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:29:41 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"IbX0q1.0.Uo3.Sk5Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19256 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott, Vince, Frank, etal You all know, of course, that the Zener voltage is a REVERSE breakdown voltage. The voltage across one in the forward direction is about 0.7v to 1.1v, the same as any diode. The 1N5236B is rated at 500mW power dissipation, 1.1v at 200mA forward current, 67mA at 7.5v when zenering. Usually you consider these sacrificial when using them for protection. Hank > ---------- > From: Scott Little[SMTP:little eden.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 10:50 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode > > At 10:22 5/27/98 -0700, Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > >Vince > > It is always a good idea to put a zener diode across a voltage > >divider's output to limit the maximum voltage that can appear on > >whatever instrument you connect. Use a diode with a rating a bit > above > >the expected maximum voltage of your instrument. > > Hank, do zener's have any significant leakage when they're nominally > not > conducting? > > > > > 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 May 27 11:38:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA28832; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:29:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:29:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001801bd899c$cdc9cd60$4e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Hot Fusion Cavity Resonator Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:25:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"KTDDQ2.0.P27.Lk5Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19255 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Francis J. Stenger To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 11:32 AM Subject: Re: Hot Fusion Cavity Resonator Frank Stenger wrote: >Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >> >> Sure you want to throw out that Litton, Frank? >> >Absolutely not, Fred! In fact, I was just getting ready to make a >cup of instant coffee in the MW using a cup of heavy water. >Three birds with one stone? > >Actually, I like the resonant cavity idea, Fred. A 10 meter dia. >spherical re-entry cavity with diametrical stubs along an axis - maybe >a one meter gap with the stub ends coated with a lithium-filled metal >honeycomb. Resonate with a ham transmitter? (turkey transmitter?) Dang,Frank, you just went from 12 cm (2.45 Ghz) down/up to the 10 meter Ham Band. Heavy commercial Fusion Power stuff. Art Fraas at Oak Ridge proposed a spinning Lithium-filled cavity for inertial confinement fusion years ago. I'm just partial to a microwave pumped plasma in this configuration so that high Z material poisoning of the plasma isn't a problem. Maybe in this case it wouldn't matter. If your Litton microwave has a dielectric window in the Maggie waveguide, all you need to do is add the Lithium-Deuteride-Tritide Vortex Cavity Resonator (VCR) :-), spin it up at the melting point and see what you get. Stay Tuned. Regards, Frederick > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 11:41:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA17351; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:35:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:35:00 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:35:17 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Case: effect of D2 vs H2 thermal conductivities Resent-Message-ID: <"3vVvf.0.xE4.Ip5Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19257 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Looking at thermal conductivities in mW/cm-K: Therm. Expected GAS Cond. Case result === ==== =========== He 2.26 underunity H2 2.13 standard D2 1.66 overunity Ar 0.27 way overunity This brings up the question of just how overunity D2 should normally look by Case's method. Let's try a calculation. It would be good to know *measured* thermal conductivity by temperature for H2 and D2. I don't have a reference for such. Here are some gas conductivity values from various references: Temp. Therm. Gas Deg. K Cond. === ====== ====== H2 300 1.815 H2 322 1.971 H2 373 2.13 D2 373 1.66 D2 573 2.72 He 322 1.574 He 300 1.52 It looks reasonable to use for temperature T in deg. K: H2 thermal conductivity = 1.815 + 0.004315*(T-273) mW/cm-K D2 thermal conductivity = 1.66 + 0.003533(T-273) mW/cm-K At T = 200 C = 473 K we have: H2 thermal conductivity = 2.678 mW/cm-K D2 thermal conductivity = 2.366 mW/cm-K Fe thermal conductivity = 802 mW/cm-K To simplify the calculation assume a square steel chamber with 1/16" (0.159 cm) walls and of vol 1.6 liters. This gives 11.7 cm to a side. Ignore catalyst volume. The thermal conductivity Sw of the walls top to bottom is: Sw = 4(0.159 cm)(11.7 cm)/(11.7 cm)(802 mW/cm-K) = 510 mW/K The thermal conductivity of the H2 gas Sd is: Sh = (11.7cm)(11.7 cm)/(11.7 cm)(2.678 mW/cm-K) = 31.3 mW/K The thermal conductivity of the D2 gas Sd is: Sd = (11.7cm)(11.7 cm)/(11.7 cm)(2.366 mW/cm-K) = 27.7 mW/K Looking at H2 we would expect 510 mW/K + 31.3 mW/K = 541.4 mW/K conductivity. Assuming a power input of 90 W that means we would expect the temperature difference to the top of the cell, delta T, to be: delta Th = (90 W)/(541.4 mW/K) = 166.2 K For D2 we have delta Td given as: delta Td = (90 W)/(537.7 mW/K) = 167.4 K Which is about a 1.2 deg. K difference in results. If the walls of the pressure vessel are 1/8" think we get about 1020 mW/K for the walls and the delta T drops well below 0.6 K. The conclusion from this calculation is that the observation of a 5 deg. C difference in temperature, Case's explicit standard for a positive signal, can not be accounted for by only the differences in D2 vs H2 gas thermal conductivity. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 11:49:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA20616; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:44:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:44:45 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:44:11 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"7B-o73.0.l15.Ry5Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19258 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I have a question. As posted earlier my power / tube / ballast configuration is as follows: POWER (+)--------[//////////]-------[BALLAST]------/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] (ground) Where POWER is a full wave high voltage power supply, And [///////] is the reactor tube, And [BALLAST] is sixteen 7.6 watt lamps, And /\/\/\/\/\ is a 100 ohm 10 watt resistor. My question is: When I measure voltage across the 100 ohm resistor am I not also measuring power delivered to the sixteen ballast lamps? If this is so, how do I measure power delivered to ONLY the reactor tube? For instance, this morning (wedensday) I was reading 5.0 volts across the 100 ohm resistor which (I think) works out to 50 mA. Now it seems to me that that power is being delivered to both the ballast lamps (which were glowing at about half brightness) and the reactor tube. The tube was at 330.0 C, H2 no K. So how much of that 50 mA was going to the reactor tube? Thanks in advance, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 12:25:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA00725; Wed, 27 May 1998 12:19:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:19:46 -0700 From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199805271919.OAA26814 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: from "VCockeram@aol.com" at "May 27, 98 02:44:11 pm" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:19:42 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cszWe2.0.DB.GT6Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19259 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince Cockeram wrote: > I have a question. As posted earlier my power / tube / ballast configuration > is as follows: > > POWER (+)--------[//////////]-------[BALLAST]------/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] > (ground) > > Where POWER is a full wave high voltage power supply, > And [///////] is the reactor tube, > And [BALLAST] is sixteen 7.6 watt lamps, > And /\/\/\/\/\ is a 100 ohm 10 watt resistor. > > My question is: When I measure voltage across the 100 ohm resistor > am I not also measuring power delivered to the sixteen ballast lamps? > > If this is so, how do I measure power delivered to ONLY the reactor tube? > > For instance, this morning (wedensday) I was reading 5.0 volts across > the 100 ohm resistor which (I think) works out to 50 mA. Now it seems > to me that that power is being delivered to both the ballast lamps (which > were glowing at about half brightness) and the reactor tube. The tube > was at 330.0 C, H2 no K. So how much of that 50 mA was going to > the reactor tube? You do know the current in the series circuit as well as the power at the resistor, but not the power at each of the other components, since there could be reactive components (inductive or capacitive) that might shift voltage and current out of phase in an AC system. If you put one trace of a dual trace o-scope on the resistor, you have the phase of the current in the circuit (which for systems much less than RF frequences is essentially everywhere the same phase.) On the second trace of the o-scope, you can move it from point to point and see if the voltage phases vary. If the voltage phase at the component is the same as at the resistor, then that also is a non-reactive component (a pure resistor.) Your lightbulb string should be essentially non-reactive at low freq AC. True power will always be less than 100% when the V and I are out of phase. Your power at the resistor is, of coures, P=I^2*R = .05*.05*100 = 0.25 watts. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-8928 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 12:27:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01763; Wed, 27 May 1998 12:21:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:21:56 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:22:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"K1iVG.0.QR.JV6Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19260 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some ideas about voltage deviders: (1) You should never exceed 1/2 the rated peak wattage for resistors in normal use. In other words, twice the normal required wattage is the right size for a resistor. The rated wattage is for peaks, not average current. (2) It is not a good idea to exceed 500 V on any (typical 1/4 watt carbon) resistor, even if the wattage rating permits it. When the devider separates ground from a whopping capacitor, as in your case 200 V per resistor gives even more safety margin. (3) The low voltage end of the ladder should be permanently grounded, with the meter (if used) on a shunt to ground. One reason for this is some (digital) meters have automatic shut-offs that cause the meter to get fried if high voltage is in use, especially if you have them in current measuring mode. Another is, if ground is lost, the full potential is there. It is not unusual to change meters or to insert other devices at the measuring point. (4) A calibration pot should be inserted in the shunt to the meter, *not in the mainline to gound*. Brushes fail. Some pots have an off position as well. (5) The shunt should have a *bidirectional* transient voltage suppressor to ground. You never know what kind of static charge you might carry to the device. If you eventually use an analog I*V circuit you have to watch out for static charge. I found a bidirectional 600 watt surge protector, DIGI-KEY part P6KE12CAGICT-ND (11.4-12.6 breakdown voltage) $0.84 qty one, $7.56 qty 10, catalog page 218. (Phone 1-800-344-4539) You can select from a range of 5 to 220 volts for breakdown voltage. The 11.4 V breakdown is very handy because most stuff can handle 12.6 V and 12.6 is the lowest voltage that has 5 microamps reverse leakage in the surge suppressor at the rated voltage. Oddly, the *lower* cutoff voltage devices have much *more* leakage. The 5 V cutoff device has 1000 microamp leakage, for example. (6) A small capacitor to ground can help take a lot of small fast surges and doesn't hurt at all unless you are doing really fast a/d. (7) Calibrate when the resistors are warmed up. (8) Add extra resistors to the ladder incase you later want to use it with a higher voltage range. Here is a diagram: o---Rn-- ... --R3----R2--o-R1--G | |--C2-G | |--S1-G | P1 | R4 | M1 | -----G Ri - resistors C1 - small capacitor to dump momentary surges P1 - potentiometer (variable resistor for calibraiton) R4 - fixed resistor to augment P1 if necessary S1 - Transient voltage suppressor G - ground Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 12:33:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA03977; Wed, 27 May 1998 12:28:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:28:19 -0700 Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:28:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805271928.MAA12529 pop4.ucdavis.edu> X-Sender: szdanq peseta.ucdavis.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Dan Quickert Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"nNyS22.0.yz.Ib6Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19261 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince Cockeram wrote: >My question is: When I measure voltage across the 100 ohm resistor >am I not also measuring power delivered to the sixteen ballast lamps? > >If this is so, how do I measure power delivered to ONLY the reactor tube? > > So how much of that 50 mA was going to the reactor tube? All of it. But for *power* you also need the voltage across the tube, which is what that earlier voltage-divider discussion was for, no? Also, is it possible that the characteristics of the discharge in the tube are fluctuating, perhaps rapidly? If so, wouldn't the voltage across it also fluctuate? And if that happens, might you see more information if you were tracking that voltage with a scope? regards, Dan Quickert From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 12:41:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06397; Wed, 27 May 1998 12:34:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:34:25 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:34:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"iqnZQ3.0.oZ1.0h6Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19262 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:44 PM 5/27/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: >I have a question. As posted earlier my power / tube / ballast configuration >is as follows: > >POWER (+)--------[//////////]-------[BALLAST]------/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] Vince, it should look like this: POWER (+)--------[BALLAST]-o--[//////////]------o--/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] | | Measure tube voltage here Current sense voltage here The volatge drop on your current resistor should be nominal -it won't affect V*I esitmate of power into the tube. You can always subtract it if necesary, or use 10 ohms. >(ground) > >Where POWER is a full wave high voltage power supply, >And [///////] is the reactor tube, >And [BALLAST] is sixteen 7.6 watt lamps, >And /\/\/\/\/\ is a 100 ohm 10 watt resistor. > >My question is: When I measure voltage across the 100 ohm resistor >am I not also measuring power delivered to the sixteen ballast lamps? > >If this is so, how do I measure power delivered to ONLY the reactor tube? > >For instance, this morning (wedensday) I was reading 5.0 volts across >the 100 ohm resistor which (I think) works out to 50 mA. Now it seems >to me that that power is being delivered to both the ballast lamps (which >were glowing at about half brightness) and the reactor tube. The tube >was at 330.0 C, H2 no K. So how much of that 50 mA was going to >the reactor tube? > >Thanks in advance, >Vince Cockeram >Las Vegas Nevada Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 13:02:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA15540; Wed, 27 May 1998 12:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 12:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 15:47:54 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Announcement from Russia Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805271550_MC2-3E56-C809 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"cyzFQ3.0.jo3.By6Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19263 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCE RUSSIAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY NUCLEAR SOCIETY OF RUSSIA MENDELEEV RUSSIAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY LOMONOSOV MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY RUSSIAN PEOPLE'S FRIENDSHIP UNIVERSITY MOSCOW STATE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY (MADI) Phone: (095) 464-78-81, (095) 946-15-51 P.O.Box 169, "Erzion" Center, Fax: (095) 151-89-65 105077 Moscow, Russia E-mail: prfnart hotmail.com _____________________________________________________________________________ ______ First announcement Dear colleague, At present we are concerned with organizing of the Sixth Russian Conference on Cold Nuclear Transmutation (RCCNT-6), which is going to take place in hotel Olimpiyskiy in Dagomys near Sochi (one of the best Russian rest-home on the shore of the Black Sea) during September 28 - October 5 period. The programme of the Conference includes the following subjects: 1. Experimental researches of Cold Fusion and Nuclear Transmutation; 2. Cold Fusion and Nuclear Transmutation theoretical models; 3. Cold Fusion applied technologies and devices. I am pleased to invite you to participate at this conference and to make a report on any subject preferred by you. Announce me the title of your report please, if it will be presented. The languages of the Conference will be Russian and English. If you want to take part in our Conference you should inform me by E-mail or fax until June 30 for I will be able to organize your providing with visa and hotel reservation. Please inform us your e-mail address. The registration fee of $900 for participants covers: - conference proceedings and program; - a transportation from Sochi airport to hotel and back; - a hotel stay in Sochi; - the daily meal (breakfast, dinner and supper) during September 25 - October 8 period; - the organizing fee. If you pay before June 30, your fee may be reduced up to $800. In this case I inform you about our account number. We will be ready to meet you in Sochi airport on September 28 if you would give us the information about flight number. The projected date of reversed flight from Sochi airport is October 5. Sincerely, Yury N. Bazhutov Co-chairman of the RCCNT-6 Organizing Committee From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 13:27:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA20065; Wed, 27 May 1998 13:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 13:16:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "George Holz" To: Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:20:12 -0400 Message-ID: <01bd89ac$da285b20$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Resent-Message-ID: <"9uZGL2.0.Qv4.aI7Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19264 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vince wrote: >I have a question. As posted earlier my power / tube / ballast configuration >is as follows: > >POWER (+)--------[//////////]-------[BALLAST]------/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] >(ground) > >Where POWER is a full wave high voltage power supply, >And [///////] is the reactor tube, >And [BALLAST] is sixteen 7.6 watt lamps, >And /\/\/\/\/\ is a 100 ohm 10 watt resistor. > >My question is: When I measure voltage across the 100 ohm resistor >am I not also measuring power delivered to the sixteen ballast lamps? - And Horace replied: >Vince, it should look like this: >POWER (+)--------[BALLAST]-o--[//////////]------o--/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] > | | > Measure tube voltage here Current sense voltage here >The voltage drop on your current resistor should be nominal -it won't >affect V*I estimate of power into the tube. You can always subtract it if >necessary, or use 10 ohms. - Hi Vince, Horace has suggested a reasonable configuration, but I am somewhat concerned with a possible confusion of which end of this line is ground. With Horace's configuration the meter grounds should be at the power supply [(-)]. This is a series circuit, the current is the same in all of the components, therefore the current sampling resistor can be placed at any convenient place. Horace has placed it to allow the (-) supply terminal to share a ground connection with both meters. - Now that you have a reasonable DC source, the voltage across the tube (V) times the common current (I) should give a good value for tube power input (V*I). Oscillations should not be a significant problem, but can be easily checked for with a scope. - Looking forward to hearing your V & I numbers with and without K. - George Holz george varisys.com Varitronics Systems From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 14:31:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06185; Wed, 27 May 1998 14:26:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:26:04 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005401bd89b5$c5b807e0$4e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hot Fusion in a Resonant Cavity? Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 15:23:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"vSGsO.0.ZW1.hJ8Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19265 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex FWIW. U.S. Patent #4,000,036 (1976) employed a resonant cavity, but used cryo-cooled superconducting walls. You need the spinning Molten Lithium-Lithium-Deuteride-Tritide cavity for tuning,tritium generation, and heat extraction. You can always spin it in a NaK pool,too. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 14:47:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03884; Wed, 27 May 1998 14:41:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:41:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:49:44 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Vince Voltage divider Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"PNJhg1.0.Vy.RY8Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19266 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: a] use CLEAN glass or acrylic b] make sure the resistors are on elevating stand offs of glass or acrylic. c] carbon is OK.... but matal film are usually better. d] put the 'to ground' resistor AT GROUND potential... e] a string of resistors is fine... leave the leads as long as you can. f] no sharp edges or points to leak corona g] OK to use ... judiciously ... good HV varnish [dope] h] OK to use good HV wire.... 20 KV or better... 1,000 to 1 is very good range. Each individual resistor can be measure to help to calibrate and come to a scale. Do not trust anything..... J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 14:48:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03996; Wed, 27 May 1998 14:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:52:37 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, Verdian@aol.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <4aa99ec3.356bb4bc aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"kN2hD3.0.I-.tY8Rr" mx2> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19267 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Use toroid core for current transformer ... works OK for AC, split core with magnetic sensor OK for DC. You can buy magnetic calibrated 'hook to you DVM' clamp on sensors ... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 15:49:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA12734; Wed, 27 May 1998 15:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 15:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356C97D1.D3B010CC microtronics.com.au> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:16:41 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT References: <4920bb0a.356c6f1f aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bPdng3.0.r63.FU9Rr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19268 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Keasy aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 5/26/98 4:25:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > gwatson microtronics.com.au writes: > > << > While I have been able to make devices which seem to be OU, they might > NOT be. > > The power I can extract is VERY small. I haven't been able to get much > more than weak operation. >> > I thought? (my memory may be a little weak on this) about a year ago you > posted results of a RMOT that ran for three or four hours; and connected SMOTs > that ran for over 3 days, both without any external energy input whatever. > That to me would clearly be OU. What am I missing here? > Ken Keasy aol.com HI Ken, What are you missing? Only that I have NOT been able to produce ANY amount of energy much above break-even. When a slight load was placed on the very early RMOD, it stopped. It could be readjusted for that slight load, but if the load was removed, it stopped. I discussed this with several Vortex members. Take a SMOT and use a ramp to roll the ball into the entry fast. When it hits the entrance, it SLOWS DOWN and climbs the ramp at about the same speed as a ball released with ZERO KE does. The SMOT effect seems to self regulate itself. Anyone who has played with a SMOT has seen this happen. My caution is not that I can get a "Rollaway", but that the SMOT may not be a very good new energy source. Also remember that I asked the question "Where could the energy come from" many times in those early days. I think it was Rick (Vortex) who suggested the thermal-magnetic link as a possible energy source. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 16:33:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA11340; Wed, 27 May 1998 16:27:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:27:42 -0700 Message-ID: <356C9F6D.380D skylink.net> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:19:09 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Cancellation Experiment: was Woodward and ZPE References: <3.0.32.19980527004350.0074aeb0 cnct.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7dnlJ1.0.2n2.i5ARr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19269 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Keith Nagel writes: > I've done this sort of experiment. Consider the following. > 50 ohm==============================50 ohm A B = = = = > The transmission line (indicated by equal signs) is terminated > at both ends. Points A and B are 50ohm lines capacitively > coupled to the terminated line. The distance between A and > B is exactly one half a wavelength. Keith. Back from vacation. Hope you got your batteries charged? There seems to be an anomaly in your experiment. Your experiment is very similar to the experiment discussed here yesterday for possible generation of a steady state scalar EM wave. In your experiment, let's say you have perfect splitters at the junctions, and inversely also perfect combiners. From your result, a standing wave in the mid section, it appears that the B wave travels through the mid section and back up the source of the A wave -- appearing to be, from the perspective of the A wave transmitter a perfect reflection. The A wave does the same thing. Or, you could also argue that the B wave is completely reflected at the junction and only provides enough energy to the mid-section to keep the standing wave going. But reflection at a matched impedance junction does not fit well with transmission line theory. The standing wave in the center section consists only of an E field. The H fields, and the currents, of the two waves cancel in the mid-section. In whatever way it happens, the anomaly is: How does the B wave, and the A wave, "know" that propagation is not allowed along the outside parts of the main wave-guide, and why is a travelling wave also not permitted in the mid-section? The short answer is that it is the only way in which energy can be conserved. True. And when your B wave hits the junction, it somehow knows this? Maybe the wave acquires this kind of universal topological information from those pesky angels that someone has suggested are also involved in hiding the energy of the scalar wave. A more prosaic explanation of where the energy goes in a scalar wave, is into the longitudinal field components, which double in size when two circular EM photons with 180 degree spacial phasing are superposed -- resulting in a scalar wave with a quantum spin of 2. Something else must happen if you try to superpose two circular EM photons which are spacially in-phase, because a circularly polarized photon always has a quantum spin equal to 1. You can not construct an EM photon with spin 2. Speaking of angels. Whatever has been acting to hide existence of the longitudinal field from human knowledge for more than a century, I doubt it is angelic. Maybe just plain human foolishness. The longitudinal field of the EM travelling wave might very nicely provide the missing link between EM and gravitation. It is strange that even though Ampere got this right from the beginning, this bit of possibly very useful information has been discarded for such a long time. Still we've done pretty well without it. My computer seems to work most of the time, and I'v got my lights and washing machine running right now. Maybe sometime soon we will also sort out how to use EM fields to build a space drive. Sorry for the silly digression. Back to the experiment. Another possible answer to the anomaly is that establishment of the standing wave in the mid-section somehow forces a complete reflection at each of the junctions. Maybe true for some phase relationships, but not true in general. Also it is contrary to transmission line theory. If the impedance is matched, the incoming wave should flow right through, regardless of what any other waves might be doing. From the point of view of formulation of propagating EM waves, all of this still begs the question of how and why your experiment does what it does. I will suggest in the following paragraphs, that the reason for the anomaly is that there is no mode of propagation along the mid-section or the outside paths of the main waveguide. The following discussion makes no sense, and neither I think does the result of your experiment, unless you accept that an EM wave can not propagate without longitudinal field components along with transverse components. In the abscence of longitudinal field components there is no mode of propagation. In a vertically polarized EM wave, the longitudinal components are not phase-free. The longitudinal component is a time-varying AC field -- hence, also no rotation in the vertically polarized wave (spin 0). At the point of your junctions, if you use vertically polarized waves, and because of the half-wave mid-section, the longitudinal components of the A and B waves cancel each other. Note that they cancel along all paths. Which is why you end up with no travelling waves anywhere, only pure standing waves (complete reflection and no energy flow), and no wave at all along the ends of the main wave-guide. I believe you can not construct a spin 2 scalar EM wave, unless you start with two spin 1 EM waves of which one is spacially rotated by 180 degrees. In a circlulary polarized EM wave, there exist phase-free longitudinal components (non-time varying, DC) in the direction of propagation, hence also a constant value of angular momentum in the EM fields of the wave (spin 1). If your experiment is set-up using circularly polarized waves, you may see a stranger anomaly than the one you have now. If circulary polarized waves are used, the longitudinal components no longer cancel along the ends of the main waveguide, but they do cancel if you superpose each of the waves along each of the return paths, and they also cancel in the mid-section of the main guide. There is no longer any mode of propagation for the A wave back along the source guide of the B wave, and similary for the B wave back along the source of the A wave. Hence, no reflection should appear to the generators. In the mid-section of the main wave guide, you have superposition of two circulary polarized waves travelling in opposite directions (opposite spins). This should result in an unusual double-frequency standing wave in the mid-section having complete cancellation at each junction, and complete cancellation in the exact middle of the mid-section. Unfortunately, once the standing wave becomes established in the mid-section, there will no longer be any mode of propagation through this section. You may get only a single cycle of scalar wave out of each end of the main wave guide. In the steady state, if you use circularly polarized waves, the experiment may give oddly different resuls than the original experiment. The circularly polarized waves should now choose to flow out the ends of main guide, without establishment of a continous scalar EM wave, but with establishment of an unusual standing wave in the mid-section. The standing wave in the mid-section of the main wave guide would be composed of equal and opposite travelling circularly polarized waves (opposite spin). Superposing these two waves results in a double frequency full cycle standing wave, consisting both of E and H transverse fields, which are in-phase. A standing wave with in-phase E and H fields is inconsistent with Maxwells 2nd and 4th equations. Although the phase-free (DC) components of the two circular waves cancel, the AC parts of the longitudinal fields may not cancel. Sorry, don't ask me what the AC components exactly look like. Best guess is they are part of some kind of rectified sine wave. Superposing the AC components, must produce a longitudinal standing wave in the mid-section. It would also have to be a double frequency wave, but with E and H fields in parallel, peaking in value at each of the ends and at the exact-middle of the mid-section. With the addition of this longitudinal standing wave, Maxwells equations are satisfied. Yes it sounds contrived. Maybe so. Perhaps an experiment could provide insight. If you redo your experiment with circularly polarized waves, it would likely fail to establish a steady state scalar EM wave, but it could serve to prove the existence of the longitudinal field components. In my opinion, your first experiment also demonstrates this, but maybe not convincingly. The generation of a double frequency standing wave would be especially telling -- and so would the appearance of a longitudinal standing wave. The double frequency would have to come from a non-linearity somewhere in the system. The wave guide is clearly a linear thing. The only other thing is the wave itself. The apparent non-symmetry in the wave is its velocity, and the fixed direction of the axis of rotation always in line with the velocity vector. Also the phase-free longitudinal components exhibit spacial asymmetry -- always having a polarity pointing in the direction of motion. In order to establish a steady state scalar EM wave, it might be best to avoid sections of wave guide in which travelling scalar EM waves can not propagate. This might be better accomplished in the experiment which was suggested here yesterday. Also, I would like to note that it is possible to generate a circularly polarized wave from a vertically polarized wave. Split the vertical wave, spacially shift half of the original wave by 90 degrees via a permanent magnet or by passing it through long solenoid (Faraday effect), and combine the new horizontal wave with the original vertical wave. At microwave frequencies you might be able to find ferrite control components designed to provide this function. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 16:42:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA22517; Wed, 27 May 1998 16:38:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:38:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 15:36:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"561ZV1.0.kV5.cFARr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19270 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:44 PM 5/27/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: >I have a question. As posted earlier my power / tube / ballast configuration >is as follows: > >POWER (+)--------[//////////]-------[BALLAST]------/\/\/\/\/\-----[(-)] Vince, You are using a floating power supply right? Your secondary is not grounded and you have a fullwave bridge now. If so, the following circuit may be usefull: ------------(+)---Power Supply---(-)-------------------- | | | | --(+)-o---Bulb--o--R1--o-----ammeter-----Ballast--(-)-- | | | V1 Ground V2 V1 gives exact voltage across bulb. V2 is proportional to current, but reversed in polarity from V1. You can insert an ammeter directly into circuit if desired. Ballast is kept at a low voltage. Power supply secondary has minimum stress. You may need to make sure your capacitors are floating though, i.e. well insulated from ground, and you. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 16:55:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA17306; Wed, 27 May 1998 16:53:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 16:53:06 -0700 X-Sender: ewall-rsg postoffice.worldnet.att.net 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: Ed Wall Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:52:36 +0000 Message-ID: <19980527235226.AAB25556 Default> Resent-Message-ID: <"eoM433.0.IE4.XTARr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19271 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greg Watson wrote: >Anyway ............. One small cautious step at a time .............. > >-- >Best Regards, > Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson Nice to see you back. Sorry for the hard-knock legal training. Ed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 18:08:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA06763; Wed, 27 May 1998 18:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805280102.UAA29788 neon.prysm.net> From: "Robert Calloway" To: Subject: Over unity Question Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:10:07 -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: <"fusJw1.0.Uf1.RWBRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19272 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello All, I have perhaps a very silly question. If a person were to design a wheel wich would turn by the power applied by the use of only permanet magnets, Is this considered over unity in the scientific world? Robert H. Calloway. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 18:29:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA10226; Wed, 27 May 1998 18:26:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:26:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:24:26 -0700 Message-Id: <199805280124.SAA19104 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: Re: Over unity Question Resent-Message-ID: <"JFHFI1.0.hV2.6rBRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19273 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: YES. To date, despite decades of effort, and numerous people who think they have done exactly this, no device exists that can in fact, accomplish this feat. Many claims exist, but no devices. All claims evaluated to date turn out to be the result of the person claiming success, having been mistaken and having failed to account for some input of energy, or some loss of energy. RT >Hello All, I have perhaps a very silly question. If a person were to design >a wheel >wich would turn by the power applied by the use of only permanet magnets, >Is this >considered over unity in the scientific world? Robert H. Calloway. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 18:53:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA14447; Wed, 27 May 1998 18:51:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:51:13 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <2b46d281.356cc214 aol.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:46:59 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"HXcKW.0.bX3.FCCRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19274 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-27 13:40:39 EDT, you write: > Vince > > It is always a good idea to put a zener diode across a voltage > > divider's output......<> Hank > Great tip, Hank! I should use this myself. I have a divider on a > 1000 volt source feeding a 5 volt signal to an A/D on my Gateway 2000. > If I lost my ground, I wonder how fast Win95 would run then? :-) > > Frank Stenger 1 kV appearing on the mutha board of the Gateway WOW!! You would be utilizing your maintenance contract.....I can see it now...[Tech].."Hi Frank, what seems to be the problem?.....[FS] ..."well, it wont boot up" [Tech]..."ok, lets have a look....hmmm whats that odor?" [FS]..."gee I don't know, but when I smelled that when it just stopped working." [Tech]..."what were you doing?" [FS]..."just reading my e-mail." :-) Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 18:59:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA19651; Wed, 27 May 1998 18:57:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 18:57:36 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <4471d501.356cc213 aol.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:46:58 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"tsCBe1.0.zo4.EICRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19275 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-27 11:07:17 EDT, Frank Stenger wrote: <> > Since E^2 for you is about 1,000,000 volts^2, you would need > a 1,000,000 ohm total divider resistance to have > 1 watt of heat in the divider. Frank, max volts here is 3 kV and the tube was running about 1.5 kV so thats 9 megohms (at least I think it is) I don't use ohms law much troubleshooting mainframe computers. Just plug and pray! :-) Hmm...today (5-27) I hung a 1/4 watt 1 megohm in series with a 150 v neon panel lamp (the lamp has a built in series resistor) and it smoked the 1 megohm resistor. I then tried 3 megohms...that worked ok ( I was playing around with a high voltage on indicator) So.... ...are you sure 1 megohm would be enough? > For a 500 to 1 ratio, just add a > 1,000,000/500 = 2000 ohm resistor in series with the 1 meg resistor. > If a 1 watt 1 meg resistor is hard to come by, use 4, 250,000 , 1/4 watt > resistors in series. The total resistance of the divider is then > 1,002,000 ohms - too close to 1 meg to worry about. A tap at the 2 K > resistor will give a 1,002,000/2000 = 501 divider ratio. Thinking about this all day has led me to go for a 100 to 1 ratio rather than 500 to 1. Why? Well, the power supply max is 3 kV, so 100 to 1 gives me a meter voltage of 30 volts. Correct? And would the circut look like: (+) HV-----/\/\/\/\/\-----|------/\/\/\/\/\---|----(-) 1 | 2 | -------M--------- For 100 to 1 what would be the values of R1 and R2? I'm sorry for all these truly basic questions but I haven't done anything like this...ever! M (meter) will be an off the shelf digital multimeter capable of reading to 1kV DC. They are about $15 bucks each. I figure I need four of them: 1, power supply voltage, 2, tube voltage drop, 3, ballast voltage drop, 4, current resistor shunt drop. 1,2 and 3 will need the 100 to 1 divider network.. Why four meters?....I refuse to swap meter leads on circuts that can kill me....and they are cheap. > When you select your meter, it should have an internal resistance much > higher than 2000 ohms so as not to upset the ratio too much. It's not listed in the specs in the catalog but I will call and find out. > If you want to do a bit of algebra, you could match the meter to the > divider, since the meter is in parallel with the "2000" ohm resistor. > Just be careful that you don't lose the path to ground for the divider > or 1000 volts could show up on the ungrounded end of the divider - a > 1000 volt source with a 1 meg resistance. <> > Frank Stenger I also like the suggestion from Hank Scudder for a zener diode for instrument protection.....I have already slagged two old (but good) analog ones. Thanks for all the help everyone. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 19:49:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA30419; Wed, 27 May 1998 19:41:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 19:41:43 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980527214227.00836100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:42:27 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Over unity Question In-Reply-To: <199805280102.UAA29788 neon.prysm.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"y7hFP.0.DR7.bxCRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19276 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:10 PM 5/27/98 -0500, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello All, I have perhaps a very silly question. If a >person were to design a wheel wich would turn by the >power applied by the use of only permanet magnets, >Is this considered over unity in the scientific world? Yes, provided there is no conventional energy input (i.e. electrical or chemical energy) to the wheel or the surrounding magnets. If you are evaluating such a device, be sure to look for "hidden" methods of coupling electrical power into the wheel. Examples include wires hidden inside the frame of the device and induction coils within the device driven by other coils located in the table under the device. To my knowledge, no such wheel exists today. Scott Little EarthTech International, Suite 300, 4030 Braker Lane West, Austin TX 78759 512-342-2185 (voice) 512-346-3017 (FAX) little eden.com http://www.eden.com/~little From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 20:22:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA08891; Wed, 27 May 1998 20:17:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:17:50 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <927e3b73.356cd6b0 aol.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:14:54 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"zrOtU.0.OA2.PTDRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19277 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-27 16:23:46 EDT, you write: > Hi Vince, > Horace has suggested a reasonable configuration, but I am somewhat > concerned with a possible confusion of which end of this line > is ground. The minus (-) end is ground. > With Horace's configuration the meter grounds should be at > the power supply [(-)]. This is a series circuit, the current is the > same in all of the components, therefore the current sampling > resistor can be placed at any convenient place. Horace has placed > it to allow the (-) supply terminal to share a ground connection > with both meters. > - > Now that you have a reasonable DC source, the voltage across the > tube (V) times the common current (I) should give a good value for > tube power input (V*I). Oscillations should not be a significant > problem, but can be easily checked for with a scope. Ahh yes...I think I understand. Let me state it the way I think you and Horace mean. PS(+)----[BALLAST]-----(M)-----[TUBE]-------(M)------/\/\/\/\/\------PS(-)Gnd Where (M) and (M) are suitable voltage divider networks and meters. I like it! Of course this means full voltage on the ballast assembly. I guess I will screw it up on the garage wall. Right now it sits on top of the power supply with the ground end closest to me. Sigh...I will make up the top cover for the supply. > - > Looking forward to hearing your V & I numbers with > and without K. It may go a couple of weeks George as I need to construct divider networks and order the meters but I will get there. > - > George Holz george varisys.com > Varitronics Systems Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 20:22:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA09131; Wed, 27 May 1998 20:18:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:18:30 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <645cf773.356cd6b0 aol.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:14:55 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"5YSWw3.0.UE2.4UDRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19278 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-27 19:38:38 EDT, you write: > Vince, > > You are using a floating power supply right? Your secondary is not grounded > and you have a fullwave bridge now. If so, the following circuit may be > usefull: <> Horace Heffner Horace, No, for safety, I have the negative (-) end grounded. I know it complicates things somewhat but this is an exciting time to be alive. Floating supplies make me nervous. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 20:35:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA12524; Wed, 27 May 1998 20:32:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:32:03 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <1ea2b473.356cd6bd aol.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:14:53 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"aZt7v3.0.a33.ogDRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19279 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-27 15:23:05 EDT, you write: >> [vince]So how much of that 50 mA was going to the reactor tube? > [JL] You do know the current in the series circuit as well as the power > at the resistor, but not the power at each of the other components, > since there could be reactive components (inductive or capacitive) that > might shift voltage and current out of phase in an AC system. Sorry John, I didn't mention this is well filtered DC. The power supply is full wave rectified with two 12 mfd filter capacitors. No load voltage is a maximum of ~3.2 kV. Loading the supply with sixteen 7.5 watt 120v lamps in series and supplying 1.9 kV, measuring ripple at the last lamp before ground was 0.8 volts peak to peak. Not too bad for a homebrew supply that started life in a microwave oven. >[JL] If you put one trace of a dual trace o-scope on the resistor, you > have the phase of the current in the circuit (which for systems > much less than RF frequences is essentially everywhere the same > phase.) On the second trace of the o-scope, you can move it from > point to point and see if the voltage phases vary. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^ John, this is something I will avoid so I can continue living. Voltages exceed 2kV in this setup, and with 24 microfarads of filter capacitors at ~3kV....well...you see what I mean. I already was nailed by the stage one power supply which only had ~1/2 microfarad. Luckely it was a thumb to wrist (left hand) that caught it....it was _nasty_!! AND it had been shut off for three hours! <> > - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-8928 - > - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - > - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - An aside here; John I have been reading your posts for better than 8 or 9 years now and have always enjoyed your 'to the point' rejoinders and advice. I still read but don't participate over on SPF...to much name calling and word twisting. Glad to see you on Vortex. You are a much valued participant vc Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 20:44:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA14687; Wed, 27 May 1998 20:40:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:40:54 -0700 From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199805280340.WAA11227 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode In-Reply-To: <1ea2b473.356cd6bd aol.com> from "VCockeram@aol.com" at "May 27, 98 11:14:53 pm" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 22:40:54 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL32 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"N29Zi1.0.Ob3.5pDRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19280 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Sorry John, I didn't mention this is well filtered DC. I'm sure you did in other posts. My time constrainst don't allow me to read much of them anymore. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan skypoint.com -- 612-633-8928 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 21:04:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA20182; Wed, 27 May 1998 21:00:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 21:00:44 -0700 Message-ID: <356CE0BD.6403 keelynet.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 22:57:49 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com CC: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet-L@lists.kz Subject: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Eql652.0.Ax4.f5ERr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19281 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts! Was it here that someone said the Minato self-running bicycle wheel and the scaled up generator version had long past been proven a fraud in Japan? I remember reading it and recently received information that the bicycle wheel does not IN FACT run by itself, but runs only when a very strong magnet is handheld near the wheel. Apparently Minato also knows this which is why he does not mount the magnet on a lockable swing arm to start the wheel and keep it running without human intervention. For those who took the time to experiment with the Hamel spinner, the resetting effect is identical, induced by a slight jitter of the hand to reload the spin... When the ring magnet is held over the disc magnet sitting on a ball bearing, the bearing spins rapidly until it slows or moves out of the influence of the ring magnet. http://www.keelynet.com/gravity/hamag.htm http://www.keelynet.com/energy/bedhispd.htm A friend of John Bedinis suggested cutting a very smooth slight depression in the table top so that as the ball moves away, it rolls slightly up the curve and then back down into the influence of the ring magnet to spin again...granted it would vary in speed but if it continued to run, it is a start. So whoever knows anything about how Minato is perceived in Japan, particularly his business practices, I would appreciate a reference(s) to where we can look it up. THANKS! -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 ICQ # - 13175100 / AOL - Keelyman KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 23:02:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA14761; Wed, 27 May 1998 22:58:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 22:58:57 -0700 Message-ID: <356CFD43.7D98 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 01:59:31 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode References: <4471d501.356cc213 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qJ3eJ2.0.Uc3.WqFRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19282 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 98-05-27 11:07:17 EDT, Frank Stenger wrote: > <> > > > Since E^2 for you is about 1,000,000 volts^2, you would need > > a 1,000,000 ohm total divider resistance to have > > 1 watt of heat in the divider. > > Frank, max volts here is 3 kV and the tube was running about 1.5 kV so > thats 9 megohms (at least I think it is) I don't use ohms law much > troubleshooting mainframe computers. Just plug and pray! :-) Vince, suppose we had this case: E_in = 3000 volts E_out = 5 volts Power lost in the divider + meter = 1 watt R_m = 1,000,000 ohms (input resistance of the meter) Now, with this input information, I use some algebra and come up with this exact (almost) solution: R_h = 8,985,000 ohms = the main divider resistance. R_l = 15,228 ohms = the low resistance (your R2) that feeds the meter For E_in = 3000 volts E_out = 30 volts Power lost in the divider + meter = 1 watt R_m = 1,000,000 ohms The values are now: R_h = 8,910,000 ohms R_l = 98,901 ohms Note that the 99 k resistor is now a good chunk of the meter input resistance so you need to know this meter resistance pretty good for accurate results. But, rather than use these odd ball resistor values, you could just get close and then run a calibration of the divider with a known input voltage that you can measure accurately with your "good" meters. I can give you resistors for any set of input conditions you give me, that is, the E_in, E_out, Power lost in divider + meter, and R_m, the input resistance of the meter (be it electronic or electromechanical). Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 23:14:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA21721; Wed, 27 May 1998 23:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:08:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <356C97D1.D3B010CC microtronics.com.au> References: <4920bb0a.356c6f1f aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:05:59 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT Resent-Message-ID: <"2_CyO2.0.JJ5.ozFRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19283 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greg - > I think it was Rick (Vortex) who suggested the > thermal-magnetic link as a possible energy > source. I talked about it a lot, but I don't think I originated the idea. Whatever. I'd still like to see a level rollaway. Never could get one from the plans. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 23:21:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA23000; Wed, 27 May 1998 23:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:18:08 -0700 (PDT) From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 02:15:05 EDT To: jdecker keelynet.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet-L@lists.kz Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re : Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 116 Resent-Message-ID: <"UKjfI.0.9d5.T6GRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19284 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 28/05/1998 06:02:30 , jdecker keelynet.com wrote : << For those who took the time to experiment with the Hamel spinner, the resetting effect is identical, induced by a slight jitter of the hand to reload the spin... When the ring magnet is held over the disc magnet sitting on a ball bearing, the bearing spins rapidly until it slows or moves out of the influence of the ring magnet. >> Hi All, A similar device like the Hamel Spinner has been already patented since 1988.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- 4753623 : Magnetic spinner device ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- INVENTORS: Krut; William A., Pittsburgh, PA 15203 ISSUED: June 28, 1988 FILED: Dec. 16, 1986 ABSTRACT: A magnetically operated rotative amusement device or unit of a substantially self-starting nature has a see-through or transparent container or bowl-like support base provided with a lower, centrally disposed, pivot- receiving socket. A spinner has a pivot pin adapted to rest in the socket and to extend upwardly towards an open mouth portion of the support base. The support base has either an inner collar or a relatively narrow bowl to support the spinner in an upright, slightly tilted position in a ready-to-operate relation therein. A dome-shaped lid is used to close-off an open mouth portion of the support base and has a centrally, downwardly extending, permanent magnet supported in a vertically adjustable relation in which it is slightly spaced from and aligned with a second and opposing magnet carried by an upper end of the spinner. The spinner may be caused to rotate or spin by moving the lid in an angular relation to a closing-off position from a side of the bowl that is opposite to a tilted positioning of the spinner within the bowl. If the lid is in place or in a permanently mounted position with respect to the bowl, then spinning movement may be effected by slightly tilting the support base. Rotation of the spinner thus accomplished will continue for an effective period of approximately two or three minutes using a pivot pin on the spinner part and the socket therefor of a relatively hard and smooth material of minimized frictional resistance, for example, a tapered-end steel pivot pin and a socket of glass. ------------------------------------------------------------------ You will find all informations at : http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/cgi-bin/viewpat.cmd/4753623 ALL THE TESTS of Hamel Spinning disc that I have done, STOP after few minutes in FIXED position. As far as I am concerned, today, I think that the Hamel Spinning disc is a magnetic spin top device which uses PARAMETRIC EXCITATION BY HANDS to maintain its is spin. If you have the correct excitation frequency with YOUR HANDS you can obtain a VERY HIGH ENERGY SPIN with A LITTLE MOVEMENT OF YOUR HANDS. The energy induced with YOUR HAND is only to compensate the friction on the support. For all those want to see the diagram, pictures and video of the Hamel spinner in action, you may see also :http://members.aol.com/overunity/html/hamspin3.htm You can obtain the same effect, if you put the steel ball in a flat cylindrical box. :-) The most interesting effect in the Hamel spinner is the use of this principle for linking three units linked together (like the Hamel Fs)...The use of three "magnetic" units (three conical shapes linked together) may open some new ways to explore in the antigravity domain (??)...This has been done by David Hamel ("his claim") with his "Flying" (I hope) Saucer.... For all those want to see the diagram, pictures and animations about the Hamel FS, you may see also: http://members.aol.com/overunity2/html/hamelfs.htm Sincerely, Jean-Louis Naudin (France) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed May 27 23:39:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA21267; Wed, 27 May 1998 23:38:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:38:17 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <6ca090ec.356d0626 aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 02:37:24 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"solGb1.0.9C5.NPGRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19285 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-05-28 02:00:07 EDT, you write: <> > I can give you resistors for any set of input conditions you give me, > that is, the E_in, E_out, Power lost in divider + meter, and R_m, the > input resistance of the meter (be it electronic or electromechanical). > > Frank Stenger Ok Frank, this is what I get from an LCD panel meter from Midwest Surplus' catalog: 3-1/2 digit LCD display with auto polarity, auto zero and decimal point selectable. Requires 9-12 VDC 1mA power. 200 mV full scale sensitity. Part No. 29-01...........Price $12.95 Not much you can do with those "specs" I guess. The idea of a panel meter appeals to me as I would be able to mount four of them on a panel, and with suitable divider networks feeding each, be able to monitor all parameters of tube input power. Wishful thinking with the info provided right? Do I need to get these meters, measure input resistance and start from there?..........Or go with the $15 multimeters? Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 01:00:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA03205; Thu, 28 May 1998 00:56:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 00:56:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:54:41 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"CNOcW.0.wn.cYHRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19287 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:46 PM 5/27/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: > Hmm...today (5-27) I hung a 1/4 watt 1 megohm in series with a 150 v >neon panel lamp (the lamp has a built in series resistor) and it smoked >the 1 megohm resistor. I then tried 3 megohms...that worked ok ( I was >playing around with a high voltage on indicator) So.... >...are you sure 1 megohm would be enough? Did you put this across the primary coil or secondary coil? Across the primary sounds OK for the resistor, but you wouldn't get enough power for the light bulb: I = V/R = 120/1,000,000 A = 1.2x10^-4 A = 0.12 mA P = (I^2)*R = 0.0144 W so this can't be what you did. If you put it across a 2 KV secondary you broke two cardinal rules: (1) TOO MUCH VOLTAGE ACROSS A CARBON RESISTOR. (2) MORE THAN 1/8 WATT CONTINUOUS INTO A 1/4 WATT RESISTOR. I = V/R = (2,000 V)/(1,000,000 ohm) = 2x10^-3 A = 2 mA. P = (I^2)*R = 4 W ======> SMOKING! Hint: If you put 4 identical resistors in parallel or 4 identical resistors in series, they each get ony 1/4 the heat. More resisters is better! If you put 4 identical resisters in series, they each only get 1/4 the voltage drop. Here is how you figure out what resistance to put in place so as not to burn out the bulb or the resistor. The LED probably takes 10 mA. At 120 V we get: R = V/I = (120 V)/(.010 A) = 12 k ohm You should verify this or find out the mA rating of the bulb. Let's use that as an example So 120 K is about what the internal resistor in the bulb provides. If you want to put the bulb into a 2000 V circuit you need: R = V/I = (2000 V)/(0.010 A) = 200 k ohm The bulb already has 12 k, so all you need to add is 188 k ohm. I would use at least 4 resistors to be sure the volatge drop across each resistor is under 500 V. Some people might think this is excessive, but there is a big capacitor behind the voltage, so you want the resistors to be reliable. Reliability improves with lower voltage drops. It also avoids cascading failures. Ok, so we now have four 47 k resistors to make the needed 188 k, and each carries the 0.01 A. The power on each 47 k resister is: P = (I^2)R = ((0.01 A)^2)(47 k) W = 4.7 W You could use four 10 W resistors as ballast to get the full 0.01 A brightnes from the indicator bulb running at 2000 V. No matter how you cut it, if the lamp takes 10 mA you have to dissipate P = (I^2)R = (0.01 A)^2(188 k) = 18.8 W. You could do it with 10 4 watt resistors, for example. If you have a 1 mA LED things are much better. You then need 2 M ohm resistance total. The bulb has 120 k internal resistance, so you need an extra 1.88 Mohms, in four 470 k resistors, which at 0.001 A each consume 0.47 W. You thus need to add four 470 K 1 W resistors in series. It's important to find out what current your bulb requires. I hope these examples help you figure out how to calculate your needs. This is all very similar to the voltage divider consierations. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 01:01:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA03177; Thu, 28 May 1998 00:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 00:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 23:54:36 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow Discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"jKf0B2.0.Zn.XYHRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19286 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:14 PM 5/27/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 98-05-27 16:23:46 EDT, you write: > >> Hi Vince, >> Horace has suggested a reasonable configuration, but I am somewhat >> concerned with a possible confusion of which end of this line >> is ground. > >The minus (-) end is ground. > >> With Horace's configuration the meter grounds should be at >> the power supply [(-)]. This is a series circuit, the current is the >> same in all of the components, therefore the current sampling >> resistor can be placed at any convenient place. Horace has placed >> it to allow the (-) supply terminal to share a ground connection >> with both meters. >> - >> Now that you have a reasonable DC source, the voltage across the >> tube (V) times the common current (I) should give a good value for >> tube power input (V*I). Oscillations should not be a significant >> problem, but can be easily checked for with a scope. > >Ahh yes...I think I understand. Let me state it the way I think you and >Horace >mean. >PS(+)----[BALLAST]-----(M)-----[TUBE]-------(M)------/\/\/\/\/\------PS(-)Gnd > >Where (M) and (M) are suitable voltage divider networks and meters. >I like it! >Of course this means full voltage on the ballast assembly. I guess I will >screw it up on the garage wall. Right now it sits on top of the power >supply with the ground end closest to me. Sigh...I will make up the top >cover for the supply. Vince, That is why I gave you the alternative circuit, below, which simply moves the balast over on the negative side of the power supply: ------------(+)---Power Supply---(-)-------------------- | | | | --(+)-o---Bulb--o--R1--o-----ammeter-----Ballast--(-)-- | | | V1 Ground V2 One end of ballast is thus at near to ground voltage V2. This is not a floating power supply, as the loop has a ground point at "ground". You can put the ground point anywere it is convenient since your secondary coil can handle the full potential, provided your capacitors are insulated from ground, and you. This is not that important anyway, as you have a pretty big voltage drop on your ballast. It's just another alternative. Another alternative is simply placing a high voltage voltmeter across M and M above in your drawing. I think you can buy a commercial HV meter for about $100. Better to get the experience of building your voltage divider though as you can then have other ways to improve things. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 01:05:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA04692; Thu, 28 May 1998 01:02:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 01:02:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 00:01:11 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"t-SsK1.0.C91.geHRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19288 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 2:37 AM 5/28/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: >Do I need to get these meters, measure input resistance and start >from there?..........Or go with the $15 multimeters? Watch out for the auto off "feature". If the DMM's have it, then they are a nuisance. Otherwise, for the price, you get a lot more with the DMM's. Why do you need 4 meters? You measure the tube voltage and the current (2 meters). You have a current sensing resistor for the oscilloscope. What else is there? Primary current and voltage? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 01:40:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA02615; Thu, 28 May 1998 01:17:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 01:17:27 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 00:17:52 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Over unity Question Resent-Message-ID: <"r8MtP.0.ne.NsHRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19289 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:10 PM 5/27/98, Robert Calloway wrote: >Hello All, I have perhaps a very silly question. If a person were to design >a wheel >wich would turn by the power applied by the use of only permanet magnets, >Is this >considered over unity in the scientific world? Robert H. Calloway. Only if it keeps turning indefinitely. It has to be like the energizer bunny - it keeps going and going ... Overunity is defined by (total energy out)/(total energy in) > 1. Unity is defined as (total energy out)/(total energy in) = 1. You have to account for all the energy inputs that make the wheel turn, and account for how much energy the wheel generates in heat, etc., as it turns. If the wheel operates continuously in a steady state, you can look at the (power out)/(power in) = COP. COP stands for "coefficient of power." Overunity could then also be defined as COP > 1. If the wheel turns continuously and indefinitely with *no energy* input then the device is called self-sustaining. COP = infinity. That is the ultimate proof of overunity. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 04:17:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA17062; Thu, 28 May 1998 04:16:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 04:16:56 -0700 Message-ID: <000001bd8a29$f2e49200$9641d3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 20:44:06 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"8_xDY1.0.UA4.dUKRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19290 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Greg, you said: >Also remember that I asked the >question "Where could the energy come from" many times in those early >days. I think it was Rick (Vortex) who suggested the thermal-magnetic >link as a possible energy source. If memory serves me, I several times directed your attention to Harold Aspden, who has devoted much of his adult life to developing a self-consistent aether physics in which he sees the portal to tapping aether energy in the interactions of heat and magnetism. He has made a profound, not trivial study of this. His interest was triggered during graduate study of anomalous heat losses in transformer cores. His URL is http://www.energyscience.co.uk. I suggest you visit. The documentation is very extensive. Regards, Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 06:30:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA06604; Thu, 28 May 1998 06:29:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 06:29:41 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00cd01bd8a3c$46415700$4e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: 3624239 Detailed View (http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=362423 Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 07:26:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8A09.F4F9EB00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"hnqk6.0.6d1.4RMRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19291 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8A09.F4F9EB00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Arthur P. Fraas' molten Lithium Pellet Fusion Patent, 3,624,239 Nov 30, 1971. I talked to Art this morning. Art is 82 and still going strong. Retired from Oak Ridge Labs and lives in Knoxville, Tennessee. Currently working on fast pyrolysis technology. Art has several neat patents. FJS http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=3624239 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8A09.F4F9EB00 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=" 3624239 Detailed View.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=" 3624239 Detailed View.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?patent_number=3624239 Modified=6079496C3B8ABD0111 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8A09.F4F9EB00-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 07:53:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA11730; Thu, 28 May 1998 07:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 07:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:48:20 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Re: Exit procedure? Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805281048_MC2-3E6A-7475 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id HAA11665 Resent-Message-ID: <"x6ENa.0.5t2.jdNRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19292 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jim Some guy wrote < Can somebody please tell me how to get off this list?> Can somebody please tell me how to change receiving every message individually to getting some sort of digest of messages.....if that's possible? Cheers. -Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 07:52:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA21577; Thu, 28 May 1998 07:50:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 07:50:55 -0700 Message-ID: <356D79EE.CCB interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:51:26 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode References: <6ca090ec.356d0626 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"O8Do1.0.0H5.DdNRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19293 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 98-05-28 02:00:07 EDT, you write: > > <> > > > I can give you resistors for any set of input conditions you give me, > > that is, the E_in, E_out, Power lost in divider + meter, and R_m, the > > input resistance of the meter (be it electronic or electromechanical). > Ok Frank, this is what I get from an LCD panel meter from Midwest > Surplus' catalog: > > 3-1/2 digit LCD display with auto polarity, auto zero and decimal point > selectable. Requires 9-12 VDC 1mA power. 200 mV full scale > sensitity. Part No. 29-01...........Price $12.95 > > Not much you can do with those "specs" I guess. The idea of a panel > meter appeals to me as I would be able to mount four of them on a > panel, and with suitable divider networks feeding each, be able to > monitor all parameters of tube input power. Wishful thinking with the info > provided right? > Do I need to get these meters, measure input resistance and start > from there?..........Or go with the $15 multimeters? Vince, can the panel meters be powered by a 9-volt battery? I'm a bit ignorant on the details of these meters but if they and their "power supply" can float in your circuit to act like a "moving-coil" panel meter, then I guess they would be OK. Horace, George, and others have had good suggestions on safety, etc. so I'll stick to just the divider needed for a given meter. Since you are going to multiply two meter readings together to get power, why don't you go with the most accurate meter? $12.95 or $15 - not much difference. Yes, you will need to measure or find out the input resistance for a good divider calculation. I think Horace mentioned a pot in parallel with the small divider resistor to trim the meter reading. Horace, others, - what do you think of Vince's meter choices? Just remember, a high meter input resistance means you can use a low power divider. My DMM with 10 meg input resistance would be great, but a 1 meg input would be very good too. I say pick the meter for accuracy - because of the power calculation - be sure it and the divider will be safe in your circuit location. What say others?? Then we can calculate the "best" divider resistors for you when we know the meter input resistance and the actual input voltage level to read 3000 volts on the meter face. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 10:04:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA16591; Thu, 28 May 1998 09:58:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 09:58:48 -0700 Message-ID: <356D971E.3F4E keelynet.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:55:58 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freenrg-l eskimo.com CC: vortex-l eskimo.com, KeelyNet-L@lists.kz Subject: Re: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? References: <01bd8a40$6aaffb60$d31b16cb ppp.lm.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mPqGq.0.134.6VPRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19294 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Roger! At this point, I'm a bit confused. I saw the short video clip and he did hold it in his hand, but NOW, someone sent in two pics of the thing mounted in an aluminum base and with a fixed magnet and in one of them, the wheel is spinning bigtime. So the verdict will remain out until a few of us can actually duplicate it. I am of the opinion that Minato is so secretive because he knows that the device is just so simple and that if someone can see it up close and take some measurements, they will be able to easily duplicate it. If you look at just about every machine or invention, it all spawned from one simple anomaly or effect, then was combined with other techniques to create the full scale and COMPLEX patentable and thus saleable version. EVGRAY did it based on his high voltage capacitor experiments, that is, he made a large engine based on that simple initial discovery. I think Minato is fully aware of this and afraid people will simply steal his basic idea and go far beyond what he's done, leaving him out in the cold. If he'd just release it in a copyrighted shareware format, freely to the world, his name would forever be attached to it and all manner of honors and opportunities would come his way. We need that one success story using this format to show that it will work with a new discovery and amply reward the inventor. At any rate, the pics aren't to be made public yet and I can't provide any URL for them....have to play the game for now... -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 ICQ # - 13175100 / AOL - Keelyman KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 10:16:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA06200; Thu, 28 May 1998 10:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 09:11:10 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Caution on SMOT Resent-Message-ID: <"pU75R.0.oW1.RiPRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19295 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 8:44 PM 5/27/98, Mike Carrell wrote: >Greg, you said: > >>Also remember that I asked the >>question "Where could the energy come from" many times in those early >>days. I think it was Rick (Vortex) who suggested the thermal-magnetic >>link as a possible energy source. > > >If memory serves me, I several times directed your attention to Harold >Aspden, who has devoted much of his adult life to developing a >self-consistent aether physics in which he sees the portal to tapping aether >energy in the interactions of heat and magnetism. I think the first was Larry Wharton: At 9:07 AM 5/5/97, Larry Wharton wrote: >In Re to Greg Watson's expressions of interest > >>I have explained the results I am getting with my linear model. I ask >>for feedback as to where and / or how I may be making a mistake. I ask >>for feedback as to how I can improve my test setup. But the only >>feedback I get is "CLOSE THE LOOP". >> >>I can show a real energy gain and I ask for comment on where the energy >>may be coming from. What do I get, "CLOSE THE LOOP". >> >>I express concern for the cost of using this energy and ask for >>comment. "CLOSE THE LOOP" comes back. > >A "CLOSE THE LOOP" demo would be nice but the work is still of great >interest without it. The linear model testing is very significant and it >could be that Greg has made a major discovery. My guess for the source of >the energy is conversion of thermal energy into magnetic energy and then >into mechanical energy. In a previous posting I showed that the power >density for magnetic interactions, S , was given by: > > S = d(mu)/dt H dot H > >with B = mu H . This result comes from standard E&M theory and I think >that it is remarkable that standard theory gives an energy conservation >equation with a non-zero source term. A proof of conservation of energy is >only possible under certain circumstances such as: > > mu = constant (the linear region - then d(mu)/dt = 0 ) > H applied only in one direction. > In more than one dimension mu is isotropic. > >If Greg's device is not covered by one of these conditions then there is a >possiblity that it may actually be producing energy. The energy produced >would come from the thermal energy in the magnetic material. > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 Email - wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 10:30:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA00902; Thu, 28 May 1998 10:27:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:27:42 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 09:26:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: other Marinov motor Resent-Message-ID: <"flQBp3.0.xD.BwPRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19296 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 4:19 PM 5/26/98, William Beaty wrote: >On Tue, 26 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> Why look for the arcane when the obvious is at hand? > >To verify that there's no arcane involved, to test by experiment rather >than assuming that the obvious explanation is real, to let experiment be >the judge. My bias is showing isn't it? 8^) I feel so certain that the rotation of the magnetic fields into a useful position permitted by the hysteresis of the magnetic fields generated in the balls by the radial current is the reason the device works that I can't entertain other ideas. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 10:41:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA03477; Thu, 28 May 1998 10:38:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:38:39 -0700 Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 01:38:34 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980529014156.29effd24 po.pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8 po.pacific.net.sg 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: Mpowers Consultants Subject: Gravitational Polarization of Light Resent-Message-ID: <"DdBXT2.0.Fs.U4QRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19297 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Looking for, but not finding, any reports of any effects of gravity on variously polarization angles of e-m stuff. I guessed someone out there with a telescope would have noticed any effects of gravity on polarization by now and would have reported if there were any variations on gravitational lensing through the various polarities of light coming from distant stars. I see they use polarization to deduce dust characteristics, however. Perhaps someone done did it and decided there wasn't anything to report (that's newsworthy in itself, however !) Query: Light (from a distant star, perhaps) polarized with e-field normal to the gravitational field of an intermediate (large, massive) body should be bent (diverged from its original path) more than light of other polarity angles as it passes through the g-field, or does it ...? (not by very much, mind you) Follow-up Query: Are there any other variations in the way gravity may affect light of differing polarization angles ? anyone hear of that ? just curious... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 10:47:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA04712; Thu, 28 May 1998 10:42:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:42:41 -0700 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805221744_MC2-3DE9-8C83 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:42:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Kinetic Furnace, Case device non-updates Resent-Message-ID: <"k0KIs3.0.O91.F8QRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19298 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Case is now able to sustain a 200 deg C temperature in his Dewar insulated >container with about 20 watts input. I hope this will be enough to allow a >self-sustaining reaction, but if it is not -- because Case cannot squeeze 20 >Naturally our best hope remains that Case will achieve 20 watts or better, and >the input can be turned off completely. I still say that would prove the issue >beyond question. The debate here petered out after Merriman said he fears we >will test with only one thermocouple, and I got upset with him and pointed out >that we repeatedly said we would never do that. We published our plans here in >detail. We said we will use a mercury thermometer plus the thermocouple. Jed, You are on the right track here. If you achieve a self-sustainer that must output 20 watts to maintain the temperature difference with zero energy input, then the energy produced, E, is given by E = 20*time (joules). If E exceeds the available chemical energy by a large factor then the production of non-chemical energy is proven. With the device at about 200 C and in an insulated Dewar container there will be no part which has the possibility of being colder than the ambient temperature. Therefore the device cannot be acting as a heat pump. Even it were acting as a heat pump the Carnot efficiency is about 2/5. This just means that we have to divide E by about 2.5 and that is not such a big deal. I would think that you would run the device long enough so that E is at least 100 times the possible chemical energy and a 2.5 factor will not make any difference. Do not worry about a few possible objections at this time. If the experiment works everyone will accept the obvious conclusion in time. The only other alleged self-sustaining reaction, heat after death, had two fatal flaws. The palladium rods were taken out of the cell and placed in a container for which no calorimetry calibration was available, and the effect did decline in a time period on the order of a day. The Case self-sustainer, on the other hand, will be fairly well calibrated and it presumably will be able to go on for days or weeks. 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 May 28 10:57:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05653; Thu, 28 May 1998 10:45:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:45:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:45:44 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Exit procedure? In-Reply-To: <199805281048_MC2-3E6A-7475 compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vygA-.0.5O1.9BQRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19299 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Soo! Here's the whole thing (also for everyone who has misplaced their copy). Read down to the part about vortex-digest eskimo.com. Basically you subscribe to vortex-digest, wait a day or two until the digest messages start arriving, then unsubscribe from vortex-l 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 ***************************************************************************** WARNING: AT LEAST READ THE RULES BELOW! The Vortex-L list was originally created for discussions of professional research into fluid vortex/cavitation devices which exhibit anomalous energy effects (ie: the inventions of Schaeffer, 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, chemical transmutation, 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. PLEASE READ THE RULES BEFORE SUBSCRIBING. 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. Unsubscribe: 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 forwards each received message within minutes or hours of receipt. Vortex-digest collects messages, then sends them as single large chunks. Vortex-L and Vortex-digest are two separate lists. It is possible to subscribe to one or the other, or both. Help: To obtain a copy of this file, send a blank email with the word "help" in the subject line. Send it to vortex-L-request eskimo.com 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: THE "UNSUBSCRIBER" MIGHT GET YOU 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. Missed messages are available as textfiles on the Vortex-L webpage. ************************************************************************** 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. Any help you can give is sincerely appreciated. 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, hop on board! Help us test "crazy" claims rather than ridiculing them or explaining them away. (For a good analysis of the negative aspects of skepticism, see ZEN AND THE ART OF DEBUNKERY by D. Drasin, on WEIRD SCIENCE page.) 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 delete 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. 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 different list 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. 6. "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 Thu May 28 11:38:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA17359; Thu, 28 May 1998 11:34:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:34:55 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:34:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Superposition magnetic fields? Resent-Message-ID: <"yZQvU.0.oE4.5vQRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19300 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I seem to be muddled in my thinking about the prospect of cancellation effects in merging EM waves in joining waveguides. There appears to be a paradox, and I am having difficulty resolving it. EM waves readily travel through each other without the kinetic effects of particles, thus are said to superposition. Common experience says this is so. The waves, when crossing, can generate interference patterns, but go on their merry way unimpeded by the crossing. No apparent problem here. On the other hand, magnetic field lines in any magnetic field are closed circles. The magnetic field lines, magnetic flux, is actually in the form of a flux tubes that act in some respects like an inflated balloon. Adjacent flux tubes in opposing directions repel each other. They can create an unlimited amount of force, i.e. magnetic pressure, when being forced into increasingly smaller volumes. An interesting test of this is to take two thin strong magnets and drop them into a form fitting slot made of transparent plastic so they are oriented like this: | | | | |NS| |NS| |NS| |NS| | | | | | | | | <---- flux tube interface? | | | | | | |NS| |NS| |NS| |NS| The top magnet floats above the bottom magnet at many times the N-S thickness. The "like poles repel" rule is insufficient explanation of this, because, as the lateral (vertical in drawing) distance increases, the attractive influence of the unlike poles nearly matches the repelling influence of the unlike poles. Yet, the magnets float in this sideways orientation at almost the same height as when repelling face to face, pole to pole. This, to me, is an indication of direct interaction between flux tubes, and an indication of the reality of their existence as entities. It seems possible that the tubes maintain their individual nature in this case, and that there may be a real boundary, a frictionless interface, between the flux tubes of the top magnet and the bottom magnet. However, if the magnet directions above are reversed, there appears to be an attraction between the flux tubes, an overlapping or interleaving that reduces the pressure, and in in fact creates an attraction. All this is relatively moot, except for the fact that, without the restraining plastic slot in the example, the magnets both torque around and then attract. Given this nature of flux, it is not possible for me to imagine the joining, the superposition, of the opposed magnetic components of EM waves when travelling through joining waveguides. This is true no matter what the initial orientation or topology of the two joining waves. The closed magnetic field lines, it seems, should reorient so as to merge and reinforce. I can see the electrostatic fields cancelling or overlapping, but the magnetic field flux loops should always reorient to reinforce, essentially by each rotation 90 degrees, or at least by unravelling and parallelizing of their flux loops to any degree necessary to merge. Once they do that they should generate on their next contraction a reinforced electrostatic field of combined energy. A similar phenomenon could be imagined for two very flexible parllel wires with opposing current. Intitally they would repel. However, any slight twist would be amplified until a large torque would then create parallel segments and bring the parallel segments of the wire together. I think simmilar mechanics, applied to a single "flexible wire model", a lightning bolt, result in the formation of bead lighting. I know am out of the vector field model here, but from a common experience point of view the above all makes sense to me. What does not make sense now though, is how EM waves can manage to travel through each other without their magnetic field loops interfering with the process, tending to cause wave joining. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 11:43:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA19428; Thu, 28 May 1998 11:39:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:39:25 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:38:59 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Tolman twists Marinov's balls? ;) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"IRsVL.0._k4.MzQRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19301 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 28 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > My bias is showing isn't it? 8^) I feel so certain that the rotation of > the magnetic fields into a useful position permitted by the hysteresis of > the magnetic fields generated in the balls by the radial current is the > reason the device works that I can't entertain other ideas. Or it just means that you might be a closet theorist? :) I note that the author of the Marinov ball-bearing motor webpage stated his thermal-expansion theory as fact without offering evidence. The real reason I asserted that other mechanisms might be important is that MY pet theory is different and obviously superior! :) Of course if we have to rely on me, we may never see evidence, since my fanatical drive to experiment usually ends at thought-experiments only. The ball-bearing motor is a type of cylindrical homopolar motor running in self-excited mode. The required "field magnet" fields might come from a sort of electron-drift coriolus effect, rather than from the usual spiral slots as with a self-excited homopolar generator. If the ball bearings were replaced with copper disks having spiral slots cut in them, the Marinov motor would be changed into a self-excited faraday-disk motor. See one version here: SELF-EXCITED HOMOPOLAR CYLINDER MOTOR: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/chevron.gif Also my collection of untried thought-experiments at: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/n-mach.html Self-excited homopolar devices are supposed to need spiral geometry to create a circular component to the current in order to form a "stator" field normally supplied by permanent magnets. But I wonder if this really is the case. Perhaps the rotating motion of the metal disk and the radial motion of electron drift combine to create a spiral electric current in the disk. Simple rotary motion would not create this, since it transports both the electron sea and the positive metal ions as one. But since the electrons are moving inwards or outwards, their tiny inertia would lead to a tiny tangential motion, which might end up as a fairly hefty circular component to the electric current. As with a tornado, the effect would require manual intervention initially in order to decide between CW and CCW. I've always wondered how the Earth's liquid core could act as a self-excited homopolar generator. Wouldn't it need vast volumes of high-resistance iron in a spiral pattern, in order to route the current in the proper spiral-shaped low-resistance iron paths, so to form the required "stator field"? But if mechanical rotation causes the electron sea to spiral, the mystery is explained. A non-electric effect. Mechanical only, like coriolus spiralling of earth's atmosphere. But since the "fluid" is charged, the spiralling causes a magnetic dipole field. I guess this would be very similar to the "Tolman effect", where the electron sea of a mechanically-jerked wire will flow ahead. If the electron sea of a spinning disk tends to migrate to the rim (centrifugal pseudoforce), then perhaps a radial flowing electron sea will tend to spiral if the disk is made to spin (coriolus pseudoforce). If a current was fed from the rim of a metal disk and extracted from its center, no dipole field would appear, but if the disk was spinning, then a dipole field might arise, with polarity determined by the sense of rotation of the disk. If so, I wonder if this is already in the literature? Ooo, I just thought of a terrible subject heading for this message. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Thu May 28 12:01:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA23115; Thu, 28 May 1998 11:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 10:53:52 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Superposition magnetic fields? Resent-Message-ID: <"jZEzU1.0.3f5.fCRRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19302 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote in this thread: "Adjacent flux tubes in opposing directions repel each other." It should obviously read: "Adjacent flux tubes oriented in the same direction repel each other." The content of the post is unaffected by the above mental lapse. Of course, the entire post may still be a mental lapse! Sorry! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 12:07:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA24963; Thu, 28 May 1998 12:03:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 12:03:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:55:51 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wharton on heat-after-death Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805281458_MC2-3E72-2E01 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"AkLH-.0.g56.8KRRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19303 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Larry Wharton >INTERNET:wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Larry Wharton writes: The only other alleged self-sustaining reaction, heat after death, had two fatal flaws. The palladium rods were taken out of the cell and placed in a container for which no calorimetry calibration was available . . . In which experiment? I have never heard of anyone doing this. As far as I know when you remove palladium rods and expose them to cool air that will quench the heat after death reaction. In the experiments I have read about with palladium by Pons and Fleischmann, McKubre, Mizuno and others the Pd always remained in the cell. In most cases it remains in the liquid D2O. After a boil-off it is in D2O vapor. Please cite your references on this. I am curious to know who successfully transferred a hot cathode out of a cell. I'd like to know how they did it. Why did they put it in an uncalibrated cell? That's a strange thing to do! Speaking of references, a couple weeks ago you wrote: "I have made the claim that entire CETI like systems that were producing large amounts of alleged excess energy, have been put into closed insulated containers and the temperature rise of the entire system has been measured." That news came as a big surprise to me and to other readers of this forum. We asked you to describe this event in greater detail, and to give us references describing who did this, when, where, how many times, what is a "CETI like" cell etc., etc. I am sure you will remember this, because I e-mailed you the message I posted here asking these questions. Please follow up on this. This sounds like an important experiment, so I would like to know more about it. I might add that it is bad form to claim that thus and such experiment was done, and then to ignore people when they ask politely for more information. . . . and the effect did decline in a time period on the order of a day. There are many examples of Pd heat-after-death that continued much longer than one day, and gas loaded heat (which is effectively always heat-after-death) goes for months. Mizuno observed massive heat-after-death lasting two weeks, which produced 114 MJ and evaporated 36 liters of water. The Pd remained in the closed cell. The cell was detached from electrolysis and submerged in a 20 liter bucket of water, to cool it down and quench the reaction. The Case self-sustainer, on the other hand, will be fairly well calibrated and it presumably will be able to go on for days or weeks. It will presumably go for years, possibly centuries. It already has gone on for months. The only question has been: was the heat real or was it an artifact? If the self-sustaining tests show the heat is real I think we can reasonably conclude that in previous tests with the external blanket heater it was also real. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 12:20:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA30468; Thu, 28 May 1998 12:17:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 12:17:28 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 11:17:50 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re:Superposition magnetic fields? Resent-Message-ID: <"utNu22.0.tR7.6XRRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19304 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Simplifying my question: EM waves are said to superposition. The fields comprizing the EM waves thus superposition. Magnetic fields are part of EM waves. Magnetic fields do not in all cases superposition, otherwise the top magnet in the slot in Fig. 1 would fall, it's field adding to the bottom magnet's field. This doesn't happen. How is it that the magnetic components of EM waves superposition when static magnetic fields do not? Slot | v | | | | |NS| |NS| |NS| |NS| | | | | | | | | <---- flux tube interface? | | | | | | |NS| |NS| |NS| |NS| Fig, 1 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 13:34:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA08267; Thu, 28 May 1998 13:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:22:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.16.19980528123353.34c71ab4 ap.net> X-Sender: mjs ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (16) Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 12:33:53 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Shambrook Subject: Re: ROOTS opportunity In-Reply-To: <4cbb9711.3566d842 aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_896384033==_" Resent-Message-ID: <"jfbgd1.0.312.iTSRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19305 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --=====================_896384033==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Frank, On 5/23/98 EDT, you wrote: > >>If I had to do it all over again I would have put ZPE on the back burner and >devoted an equal zeal (with the limited free time that I had) to investments > The attached (WordPerfect 6) Summary will give you a current Overview of ROOTS. If you are interested in a possible investment ($5,000 minimum), let me know and I will forward a Private Placement package. This must still be considered very high risk and at least for now ROOTS stock is illiquid. It might be 3 years to an IPO, assuming the market window is open and the firm decides to go public (highly probable but not certain). Please keep this confidential, as we don't want to solicit investors on Vortex which would constitute a public offering. Mark Goldes, CEO --=====================_896384033==_ Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CURRENT.NEW" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CURRENT.NEW" /1dQQ01LAAABCgIAAAAAAAIAHQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAkBAAAABgAAAKYBAAAIIwEAAAAPAQAArAEA AAklAQAAAAYAAAC7AgAAAFUBAAAALgAAAMECAAALMAIAAABAAAAA7wIAAABVCwAAAEgAAAAvAwAA CAEBAAAADAAAAEMMAAAACQEAAAAGAAAAdwMAAAgCAQAAABAAAABPDAAAACEBAAAAkAAAAF8MAAAA IQEAAAAgBAAA7wwAAAAhAQAAABAIAAAPEQAAACEBAAAAEAgAAB8ZAAAAIQEAAAAQCAAALyEAAAAh AQAAAJAAAAA/KQAAACEBAAAAIAQAAM8pAAAAIQEAAAAgBAAA7y0AAAAhAQAAACAEAAAPMgAAACEB AAAAIAQAAC82AAAAIQEAAACQAAAATzoAAAAhAQAAACAEAADfOgAAACEBAAAAIAQAAP8+AAAAIQEA AAAQCAAAH0MAAAggAQAAABYBAAB9AwAACSkBAAAAHgAAAC9LAAAIIgEAAACwBwAAkwQAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJMEAAD//0g8AAAAAVAAYQBuAGEAcwBvAG4AaQBjACAASwBYAC0A UAA0ADQAMgAwACAATABhAHMAZQByAAAAUwT6LwAM+gAAIADUzNQiJAAADgBVUxv6UEFONDQyMC5Q UlMADywB5ADkAJgB5ACYAeQALAEwAP8AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AEjAAAAAAOccS5DsHhSkAQAEAPQBPAD+FTYQWAcAAAE5AAAAYAAoFQAAEBYAQwBvAHUAcgBpAGUA cgAAAAAAAAAAAAEAAAAEACgAAAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARL2ziQAoQAAAKEAAADRBgwAAAEA AQAMANHTBQwAAAEAAQAMANMtAIQcbhSOCAAAFkEBAHBgABcIAIYUMABTAHcAaQBzAHMAIAA3ADIA MQAAAFIAbwBtAGEAbgAAAFMAcABlAGUAZABvAAAAAAD//8g8AAA8ANQXNhBYBwAAATkBAABgACsF AAAQFgBDAG8AdQByAGkAZQByAAAAAAAAAAAABS0AhBxuFI4IAAAWQQEAcGAAFwgAhhQwAFMAdwBp AHMAcwAgADcAMgAxAAAAUgBvAG0AYQBuAAAAUwBwAGUAZQBkAG8AAAAAAAAvAEgcvhR6CAAAFkEB AHCQABcIAIYULgBTAHcAaQBzAHMAIAA3ADIAMQAAAEIAbwBsAGQAAABTAHAAZQBlAGQAbwAAAAAA AEEA+hlyCwoAAAAWQQEEcGAAFwgAihQ+AFcAUAAgAFQAeQBwAG8AZwByAGEAcABoAGkAYwBTAHkA bQBiAG8AbABzAAAAAABUAHkAcABlACAAMQAAAAAAAFQCygBzADQAZABkAGQALAEBACwBAQAAAAD0 AWQARQT+//7//v/+//7//v/+/////v/////////+///////+//////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////7//v/+/////////1QG3gB9ACoASgA4AEoALAEB ACwBAQAvAAH0AUoAxkT+//7//v9dA/7//v/+///////////////iAv/////+///////+////ZwL+ /////v////////////////////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/1QGPgD6AFMA lQBvAJUALAEBACwBAQAvAAHoA5UAxkT+//7//v/+//7//v/+//////////////9xAf/////+//// ///+/////v/+/////v////////////////////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+ /xQG3wD6AFMAngBvAJ4ALAEBACwBAQB4AAHoA54AzED+//7//v/+//7//v/+//////////////// ///////+///////+/////v/+/////v////////////////////////////////////////////7/ /v/+//7//v/+/1QGcwDCAZYADAHIAAwBLAEBACwBAQAvAAEIBwwBxkT+//7//v/+//7//v/+//// ///////////+///////+///////+/////v/+/////v////////////////////////////////// //////////7//v/+//7//v/+/1QLuwCJAB4AbAA4AGwAsAQBALAEAAC/AAH0AWwAw8b+//7//v/+ //7//v/+///////////////////////+//7//v/+///////+//7//v/+//////////////////// //////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/xQG+gB9ACoATwA4AE8ALAEBACwBAQB4AAH0AU8A zED+//7//v/+//7//v/+///////////////////////+///////+/////v/+/////v////////// //////////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/1QGTwBkACEAPAAsADwALAEBACwB AQAvAAGQATwAxkT+//7//v/+//7//v/+///////////////+///////+///////+/////v/+//// /v////////////////////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/1QGwQCJAC4AUgA9 AFIALAEBACwBAQAvAAEmAlIAxkT+//7//v9JBf7//v/+//////////////9TBP/////+///////+ ////zgT+/////v////////////////////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/xQG IQCJAC4AVwA9AFcALAEBACwBAQB4AAEmAlcAzED+//7//v/+//7//v/+//////////////////// ///+///////+/////v/+/////v////////////////////////////////////////////7//v/+ //7//v/+/1QL8gCXACAAdwA9AHcAsAQBALAEAAC/AAEmAncAw8b+//7//v/+//7//v/+//////// ///////////////+//7//v/+///////+//7//v/+//////////////////////////////////// //////7//v/+//7//v/+/1QG8wBuACUAQgAxAEIALAEBACwBAQAvAAG4AUIAxkT+//7//v/+//7/ /v/+///////////////+///////+///////+/////v/+/////v////////////////////////// //////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/1QGzgCWADIAWQBDAFkALAEBACwBAQAvAAFYAlkAxkT+ //7//v/+//7//v/+//////////////8/Bv/////+///////+/////v/+/////v////////////// //////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+/xQGvwCWADIAXwBDAF8ALAEBACwBAQB4 AAFYAl8AzED+//7//v/+//7//v/+///////////////////////+///////+/////v/+/////v// //////////////////////////////////////////7//v/+//7//v/+//////8IAAcAOPzMPMz8 bPz8gMGA44B/ACAACAAHAAAAAAAAAAAADQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIAAcA/PwYMGD8/Pz8gMGA44B/ ACAACAAKAAAA/f8AAAAADQAAAAAAAAAAAP3/AAAIAAoAxmRsbCg4ODBwYMGA44B/ACAACP////8A AAAAAAAADQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIAAkA/P7Hw8PDx/78YMGA44B/ACAACAAKAAAA/f8AAAAADQAA AAAAAAAAAP3/AAAIAAoANn7GxsZ+Ngb+eMGA44B/AFcBdQFnAVcBVAGn/lcBTwHV/lcBTgGV/lcB TQHH/j0AAADGMgAAcpwAAAgjfAAsAAECCAA5DGUBAAAAAf7/IgBAAEgATwBaAHEAgACCAP////// /4oA////////47MIRT////////7/wMwAMLMAi88wwM/8wAP8ADAwNAAAAAAAAAgv////////Trf/ ++AEBQAEAAKrD/XwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA8G1wz5/+CQBAAAAAAAAABAX8MlJRgEBMTCAA gAAAAAAAACIAggB1AaYB1wEnAtQCPgNFA////////+YD////////Xi41MoBbjXEqODhTii40LjJb W1tbW1tbW1tbMTGKiopXp2pudnZqYX94K1RqWYp4gGmAb2tfdmaXZWRjOzI7p1NTWmNXY1ssY14l JlYlj15hY2M3Ui9eUHlPVFBTU1On8VMuU1MAU1NTU1MAEAAQU1NTU1NTAABTWQAmalpqWmpaalpq Wp6TdldqW2pbaltqWyslKyUrJSsleF6AYYBhgGGAYXZedl52XnZeZFRqWnZjgGGAYWRUAGFpYmpa alpqWnZXdld2V3ZXdmNqW2pbaltqW39jf2N/Y39jf2N/Y3heeF4rJSslKyUrJXRMVCZqVlklWTZZ JYZTWSZ4XnhveF54XoBhgGHAmm83bzdvN2tSa1JrUmtSXz9fL18vdl52XnZedl52XnZel3lkVGNQ Y1BjUAAAdmNZJXhebzdrUl8vZFRkVIZzgGF2XmpbKyUAJYBhLwAAAAAAAFMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA UwAAAAAAAAAAAFMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUy8AAAAAp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6en p6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6dOcgBwYgBTUzVXSkpbZG9bREiPj1s8R1tbZY88KgAAAEREU6cp KYOnU1OKAACDAKcAAAAAVXl6UFGnAJgAAAAqRI+Pj4+PjwAAAAAA0gCnPKsAAAAAiYmSkpJYd56Q awBTioqnpwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACkpKSkaIqKioqKABxTigAA AIqKioqKAACKiqenU1OnU2RkZGQAAAAAADYAXIoAAIoAADY/AABbAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAB9AAAAAIoAAAAAVwVjY2MAaqefAGUAXgAAXwBvXgBN AAAAXYBcAAAAAAAAAF0AAAAAAAAAYgAAAGZiAABJAAB2dAAAAAB/AABlAE0AXQAAAAAAAAAAAAB/ AFAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGVlZWVlZWVlZWVlZWVlZWVl ZWVlZWVNTU1NTU1NXV1dXV1dXV1dXV1dXV1dXV1dXV1dXS4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAbwAAAAAAAAAAAAABACIA4gDIAioDjAMsBIYFWgZoBv// /////6oH////////XgBbAGsAZAAAAbYAGQHjAFMAbwBvAKcAFQFbAGcAWwBkALYAtgC2ALYAtgC2 ALYAtgC2ALYAYwBjABUBFQEVAa4ATQHUANwA7QDsANQAwQD+APAAVgCoANQAsgAVAfAAAQHSAAEB 3QDWAL4A7ADLAC0ByQDIAMcAdgBkAHYATQGnAKcAtADGAK4AxgC2AFgAxgC9AEkATACsAEoAHgG9 AMEAxgDGAG4ApABdAL0AoADyAJ8AqQCgAKcApwCnAE0B8QCnAFsApwCnAAAApwCnAKcApwCnAAAA IAAAACAApwCnAKcApwCnAKcAAAAAAKcAswAAAEwA1AC0ANQAtADUALQA1AC0ANQAtAA8ASUB7QCu ANQAtgDUALYA1AC2ANQAtgBWAEkAVgBJAFYASQBWAEkA8AC9AAEBwQABAcEAAQHBAAEBwQDsAL0A 7AC9AOwAvQDsAL0AyACpANQAtADtAMcAAQHBAAEBwQDIAKkAAADBANIAxQDUALQA1AC0ANQAtADt AK4A7QCuAO0ArgDtAK4A7ADGANQAtgDUALYA1AC2ANQAtgD+AMYA/gDGAP4AxgD+AMYA/gDGAP4A xgDwAL0A8AC9AFYASQBWAEkAVgBJAFYASQDoAJcAqABMANQArACyAEoAsgBsALIASgANAacAswBN APAAvQDwAN4A8AC9APAAvQABAcEAAQHBAIABNQHdAG4A3QBuAN0AbgDWAKQA1gCkANYApADWAKQA vgB+AL4AXQC+AF0A7AC9AOwAvQDsAL0A7AC9AOwAvQDsAL0ALQHyAMgAqQDHAKAAxwCgAMcAoAAA AAAA7ADGALIASgDwAL0A3QBuANYApAC+AF0AyACpAMgAqQAMAeYAAQHBAOwAvQDUALYAVgBJAAAA SQABAcEALwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAApwAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAACnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAApwAvAAAAAAAAAAAA TQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFN AU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU4A5QAAAOAAxAAAAKcApwBrAK4AlACUALYA yADdALYAiACQAB4BHgG2AHgAjgC2ALYAyQAeAXgAUwAAAAAAAACJAIkApwBNAVEAUQAFAU0BpwCn ABUBAAAAAAUBAABNAQAAAAAAAAAAqgDyAPMAoACiAE0BAAAwAQAAAAAAAFMAiQAeAR4BHgEeAR4B HgEAAAAAAAAAAAAApAEAAE0BeACrAAAAAAAAAAAAEQERASQBJAEkAbEA7wA8ASEB1QAAAKcAFQEV AU0BTQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEgBSAFIAUgBaAAVARUBFQEVARUBAAA4AKcAFQEAAAAAAAAVARUBFQEV ARUBAAAAABUBFQFNAU0BpwCnAE0BpwDIAMgAyADIAAAAAAAAAAAAAABtAAAAtwAVAQAAAAAVAQAA AABtAH4AAAAAALYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPoAAAAAAAAAAAAVAQAA AAAAAAAArQAFAMYAxgDGAAAA1ABNAZ8AAADJAAAAvQAAAAAAvgAAAN4AvQAAAJoAAAAAAAAAugAB AbgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAC7AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAxAAAAAAAAADLAMUAAAAAAJIAAAAAAO0A 6AAAAAAAAAAAAP4AAAAAAMkAAACaAAAAugAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP4AAACgAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADJAMkAyQDJAMkAyQDJAMkAyQDJAMkAyQDJAMkAyQDJAMkAyQDJAMkAyQDJ AJoAmgCaAJoAmgCaAJoAugC6ALoAugC6ALoAugC6ALoAugC6ALoAugC6ALoAugC6ALoAugC6ALoA ugAuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA3gAAAAAAAAABACIA4gDIAioD jAMsBIYFWgZoBv///////6oH////////XgBeAG4AbgAAAb0AHwHpAFYAegB6AKcAFQFeAG8AXgBq AL0AvQC9AL0AvQC9AL0AvQC9AL0AZgBmABUBFQEVAboATQHkAOoA+ADyANkAxwADAfcAZgC3AOkA wQAiAfcABgHeAAYB7gDeAMYA7wDQADcB0ADPAMgAfwBqAH8ATQGnAKcAuwDLALcAzAC+AGwAywDI AFoAWgC4AFsAJAHHAMoAywDLAIAAtQBqAMcAsAD+AKsAswCoAKcApwCnAE0B8QCnAF4ApwCnAAAA pwCnAKcApwCnAAAAKAAAACgApwCnAKcApwCnAKcAAAAAAKcAyAAAAFoA5AC7AOQAuwDkALsA5AC7 AOQAuwBNASYB+AC3ANkAvgDZAL4A2QC+ANkAvgBmAFoAZgBaAGYAWgBmAFoA9wDHAAYBygAGAcoA BgHKAAYBygDvAMcA7wDHAO8AxwDvAMcAzwCzAOQAuwDzAM4ABgHKAAYBygDPALMAAADKANsAywDk ALsA5AC7AOQAuwD4ALcA+AC3APgAtwD4ALcA8gDMANkAvgDZAL4A2QC+ANkAvgADAcsAAwHLAAMB ywADAcsAAwHLAAMBywD3AMgA9wDIAGYAWgBmAFoAZgBaAGYAWgAIAbUAtwBaAOkAuADBAFsAwQCD AMEAWwAgAboAwgBdAPcAxwD3AO8A9wDHAPcAxwAGAcoABgHKAHgBPQHuAIAA7gCAAO4AgADeALUA 3gC1AN4AtQDeALUAxgCSAMYAagDGAGoA7wDHAO8AxwDvAMcA7wDHAO8AxwDvAMcANwH+AM8AswDI AKgAyACoAMgAqAAAAAAA8gDMAMEAWwD3AMcA7gCAAN4AtQDGAGoAzwCzAM8AswAaAfQABgHKAO8A xwDZAL4AZgBaAAAAWgAGAcoALwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAApwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACnAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA pwAvAAAAAAAAAAAATQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFN AU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU0BTQFNAU4A5QAAAOAAxAAAAKcA pwBuALoAlQCVAL0AyADzAL0AjACXACUBJQG9AHwAlQC2ALYAyQAlAXwAVgAAAAAAAACTAJMApwBN AU8ATwAFAU0BpwCnABUBAAAAAAUBAABNAQAAAAAAAAAAzAAjASIBwgDBAE0BAABHAQAAAAAAAFYA kwAlASUBJQElASUBJQEAAAAAAAAAAAAArAEAAE0BfACrAAAAAAAAAAAAEQERASQBJAEkAbEA7wA8 ASEB3AAAAKcAFQEVAU0BTQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEgBSAFIAUgBaAAVARUBFQEVARUBAAA4AKcAFQEA AAAAAAAVARUBFQEVARUBAAAAABUBFQFNAU0BpwCnAE0BpwDIAMgAyADIAAAAAAAAAAAAAABtAAAA twAVAQAAAAAVAQAAAABtAI0AAAAAAL0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPoA AAAAAAAAAAAVAQAAAAAAAAAAwAAFANMA0wDTAAAA2wBNAZ8AAADKAAAAygAAAAAAwgAAAOgAxgAA AJ8AAAAAAAAAyAAGAcUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA1gAAAAAAAADYAMIA AAAAAJYAAAAAAPcA6gAAAAAAAAAAAAABAAAAAMoAAACfAAAAyAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAABAACuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADKAMoAygDKAMoAygDKAMoAygDKAMoAygDKAMoAygDK AMoAygDKAMoAygDKAJ8AnwCfAJ8AnwCfAJ8AyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgA yADIAMgAyADIAMgAyAAuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA7gAAAAAA AAABACIA4gDIAioDjAMsBIYFWgZoBv///////6oH////////XgCkAMAAtADMAUgB+gGYAZYAyADI ACwB8gGkALoApAC0AEgBSAFIAUgBSAFIAUgBSAFIAUgBsgCyAPIB8gHyAToBWAJ+AYwBqgGoAX4B XAHKAbABmgAuAX4BQAHyAbABzgF6Ac4BjgGCAVYBqAFuAR4CagFoAWYB1AC0ANQAWAIsASwBRAFk AToBZAFIAZ4AZAFUAYQAiAA2AYYAAgJUAVwBZAFkAcYAKAGoAFQBIAG0AR4BMAEgASwBLAEsAVgC 8QAsAaQALAEsAQAALAEsASwBLAEsAQAAOgAAADoALAEsASwBLAEsASwBAAAAACwBQgEAAIgAfgFE AX4BRAF+AUQBfgFEAX4BRAE4AhACqgE6AX4BSAF+AUgBfgFIAX4BSAGaAIQAmgCEAJoAhACaAIQA sAFUAc4BXAHOAVwBzgFcAc4BXAGoAVQBqAFUAagBVAGoAVQBaAEwAX4BRAGqAWYBzgFcAc4BXAFo ATABAABcAXoBYgF+AUQBfgFEAX4BRAGqAToBqgE6AaoBOgGqAToBqAFkAX4BSAF+AUgBfgFIAX4B SAHKAWQBygFkAcoBZAHKAWQBygFkAcoBZAGwAVQBsAFUAZoAhACaAIQAmgCEAJoAhACiARABLgGI AH4BNgFAAYYAQAHCAEABhgDkASwBQgGKALABVAGwAZABsAFUAbABVAHOAVwBzgFcAbQCLAKOAcYA jgHGAI4BxgCCASgBggEoAYIBKAGCASgBVgHiAFYBqABWAagAqAFUAagBVAGoAVQBqAFUAagBVAGo AVQBHgK0AWgBMAFmASABZgEgAWYBIAEAAAAAqAFkAUABhgCwAVQBjgHGAIIBKAFWAagAaAEwAWgB MAHiAZ4BzgFcAagBVAF+AUgBmgCEAAAAhADOAVwBLwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAsAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAsAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALAEvAAAAAAAAAAAAWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJY AlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAlgCWAJYAk4A nAEAAJQBYAEAACwBLAHAADoBCgEKAUgBaAGOAUgB9AAEAQICAgJIAdgAAAFIAUgBagECAtgAlgAA AAAAAAD2APYALAFYApIAkgDWAVgCLAEsAfIBAAAAANYBAABYAgAAAAAAAAAAMgG0AbYBIAEkAVgC AAAkAgAAAAAAAJYA9gACAgICAgICAgICAgIAAAAAAAAAAAAA9AIAAFgC2ACrAAAAAAAAAAAA7AHs AQ4CDgIOAj4BrgE4AggCgAEAACwB8gHyAVgCWAIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAE4CTgJOAk4CaADyAfIB8gHy AfIBAABkACwB8gEAAAAAAADyAfIB8gHyAfIBAAAAAPIB8gFYAlgCLAEsAVgCLAFoAWgBaAFoAQAA AAAAAAAAAADEAAAASgHyAQAAAADyAQAAAADEAOIAAAAAAEgBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAMIBAAAAAAAAAADyAQAAAAAAAAAAOAEFAGQBZAFkAQAAfgFYAp8AAABqAQAAVAEA AAAAVgEAAJABVAEAABYBAAAAAAAATgHOAUwBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABQAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA YAEAAAAAAABuAWIBAAAAAAYBAAAAAKoBogEAAAAAAAAAAMoBAAAAAGoBAAAWAQAATgEAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMoBAAAgAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABqAWoBagFqAWoBagFqAWoBagFq AWoBagFqAWoBagFqAWoBagFqAWoBagFqARYBFgEWARYBFgEWARYBTgFOAU4BTgFOAU4BTgFOAU4B TgFOAU4BTgFOAU4BTgFOAU4BTgFOAU4BTgEuAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAkAEAAAAAAAAAAP//////////IgD/////////////////////////////Zm9vb2RTb1Mn Uz09WVl6WTo6kJBZPDVTU2+QPCcnJz09PVN+JyeQhVNTlp9vkFOFU29TU1l7e1BQbG9Tb29vJD2Q kJCQkJBTU1OQkMunbzyTiZCNjoGUnYOglZuOkJGRkJGRkZFGWJRZAHsAewAAACIAggB1AaYB1wEn AtQCPgNFA////////+YD////////Xi83N4Bej3UrPT1Tii84LzVeXl5eXl5eXl5eMzOKiopdp3J1 fHlsY4F7M1x1YZF7g2+Dd29jd2icaGdkPzU/p1NTXWZcZl82ZmQtLVwukmNlZmZAWzVjWH9WWVRT U1On8VMvU1MAU1NTU1MAFAAUU1NTU1NTAABTZAAtcl1yXXJdcl1yXaeTfFxsX2xfbF9sXzMtMy0z LTMte2ODZYNlg2WDZXdjd2N3Y3djZ1lyXXpng2WDZWdZAGVtZnJdcl1yXXxcfFx8XHxceWZsX2xf bF9sX4FmgWaBZoFmgWaBZntke2QzLTMtMy0zLYRbXC11XGEuYUJhLpBdYS97Y3t3e2N7Y4Nlg2W8 nndAd0B3QG9bb1tvW29bY0ljNWM1d2N3Y3djd2N3Y3djnH9nWWRUZFRkVAAAeWZhLntjd0BvW2M1 Z1lnWY16g2V3Y2xfMy0ALYNlLwAAAAAAAFMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUwAAAAAAAAAAAFMAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAUy8AAAAAp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6enp6en p6dOcgBwYgBTUzddSkpeZHpeRkyTk14+SltbZZM+KwAAAElJU6cnJ4OnU1OKAACDAKcAAAAAZpKR YWGnAKMAAAArSZOTk5OTkwAAAAAA1gCnPqsAAAAAiYmSkpJYd56QbgBTioqnpwAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACkpKSkaIqKioqKABxTigAAAIqKioqKAACKiqenU1OnU2Rk ZGQAAAAAADYAXIoAAIoAADZHAABeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAB9AAAAAIoAAAAAYAVqamoAbaefAGUAZQAAYQB0YwBPAAAAZINiAAAAAAAAAGYAAAAA AAAAawAAAGxhAABLAAB7dQAAAACAAABlAE8AZAAAAAAAAAAAAACAAFcAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGVlZWVlZWVlZWVlZWVlZWVlZWVlZWVPT09PT09PZGRkZGRk ZGRkZGRkZGRkZGRkZGRkZC4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAdwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIAggB1AaYB1wEnAtQCPgNFA////////+YD////////XiQrKGZJ cFshLCxDbyQpJChJSUlJSUlJSUlJKChvb29GhVVYX15VTWZgIkNVR29gZ1RnWFZMXlF4UFBQLygv hUNDSE9GT0kjT0wdHkUeckxNT08sQiVMQGFAREBDQ0OF8UMkQ0MAQ0NDQ0MADQANQ0NDQ0NDAABD SAAeVUhVSFVIVUhVSH51X0ZVSVVJVUlVSSIdIh0iHSIdYExnTWdNZ01nTV5MXkxeTF5MUERVSF9Q Z01nTVBEAE1UT1VIVUhVSF9GX0ZfRl9GXk9VSVVJVUlVSWZPZk9mT2ZPZk9mT2BMYEwiHSIdIh0i HV08Qx5VRUceRytHHmxDSB9gTGBZYExgTGdNZ02afFgsWCxYLFZCVkJWQlZCTDJMJUwlXkxeTF5M XkxeTF5MeGFQRFBAUEBQQAAAXk9HHmBMWCxWQkwlUERQRGtcZ01eTFVJIh0AHWdNLwAAAAAAAEMA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQwAAAAAAAAAAAEMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQy8AAAAAhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWF hYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYVOXABaTgBDQytGOztJUFhJNjpyckkwOUlJ UHIwIQAAADc3Q4UgIGiFQ0NvAABoAIUAAAAARGFhQEGFAHoAAAAhN3JycnJycgAAAAAAqACFMKsA AAAAbW11dXVHYH50VQBDb2+FhQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACDg4OD aG9vb29vABZDbwAAAG9vb29vAABvb4WFQ0OFQ1BQUFAAAAAAACwASW8AAG8AACwyAABJAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABkAAAAAG8AAAAARQVPT08AVYWf AFAATAAATABZTAA+AAAASmdKAAAAAAAAAEsAAAAAAAAATgAAAFFPAAA6AABfXQAAAABmAABQAD4A SgAAAAAAAAAAAABmAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAFBQUFBQ UFBQUFBQUFBQUFBQUFBQUFA+Pj4+Pj4+SkpKSkpKSkpKSkpKSkpKSkpKSkpKSi4AAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIAggB1AaYB 1wEnAtQCPgNFA////////+YD////////XjI7N41km30uPT1cmDI5MjdkZGRkZGRkZGRkNjaYmJhg t3V5goJ1aoyEL1x1YpiEjXSNenZpgnCmb25tQTdBt1xcY21gbWQwbWgoKl8pnWhqbW09WjNoWIVX XVhcXFy38VwyXFwAXFxcXFwAEgASXFxcXFxcAABcYgAqdWN1Y3VjdWN1Y66hgmB1ZHVkdWR1ZC8o LygvKC8ohGiNao1qjWqNaoJogmiCaIJobl11Y4JtjWqNam5dAGp0bHVjdWN1Y4JggmCCYIJggm11 ZHVkdWR1ZIxtjG2MbYxtjG2MbYRohGgvKC8oLygvKIBTXCp1X2IpYjtiKZRcYiqEaIR6hGiEaI1q jWrTqno9ej16PXZadlp2WnZaaUVpM2kzgmiCaIJogmiCaIJopoVuXW1YbVhtWAAAgm1iKYRoej12 Wmkzbl1uXZN/jWqCaHVkLygAKI1qLwAAAAAAAFwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAXAAAAAAAAAAAAFwAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAXC8AAAAAt7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3 t7e3t7dOfgB7bABcXDtgUVFkbnpkS0+dnWRCTmRkb51CLgAAAEtLXLctLZC3XFyYAACQALcAAAAA XoWGWFm3AKcAAAAuS52dnZ2dnQAAAAAA5wC3QqsAAAAAlpahoaFhg66fdQBcmJi3twAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAC0tLS0aJiYmJiYAB9cmAAAAJiYmJiYAACYmLe3XFy3 XG5ubm4AAAAAADwAZZgAAJgAADxFAABkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAACKAAAAAJgAAAAAXwVtbW0AdbefAG8AaAAAaQB6aABVAAAAZo1lAAAAAAAAAGcA AAAAAAAAbAAAAHBsAABQAACCgAAAAACMAABvAFUAZgAAAAAAAAAAAACMAFgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAG9vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29VVVVVVVVVZmZm ZmZmZmZmZmZmZmZmZmZmZmZmZi4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAegAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIAggB1AaYB1wEnAtQCPgNFA////////+YD////////XjQ9 PY1onoAvQ0NcmDQ9NDpoaGhoaGhoaGhoODiYmJhmt32BiIV3bY6IOGWAaqCIkHqQg3ptg3KrcnJu RjpGt1xcZ3BlcGk7cG4yMmUyoW1vcHBGZDptYYxeYlxcXFy38Vw0XFwAXFxcXFwAFgAWXFxcXFxc AABcbgAyfWd9Z31nfWd9Z7eiiGV3aXdpd2l3aTgyODI4MjgyiG2Qb5BvkG+Qb4Ntg22DbYNtcmJ9 Z4ZxkG+Qb3JiAG94cH1nfWd9Z4hliGWIZYhlhXB3aXdpd2l3aY5wjnCOcI5wjnCOcIhuiG44Mjgy ODI4MpFkZTKAZWoyakhqMp5mazOIbYiDiG2IbZBvkG/ProNGg0aDRnpkemR6ZHpkbVBtOm06g22D bYNtg22DbYNtq4xyYm5cblxuXAAAhXBqMohtg0Z6ZG06cmJyYpuGkG+DbXdpODIAMpBvLwAAAAAA AFwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAXAAAAAAAAAAAAFwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAXC8AAAAAt7e3t7e3t7e3 t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7e3t7dOfgB7bABcXD1mUlJoboZoTVOhoWhE UmRkb6FELwAAAFFRXLcrK5C3XFyYAACQALcAAAAAcKCga2q3ALQAAAAvUaGhoaGhoQAAAAAA6wC3 RKsAAAAAlpahoaFhg66feQBcmJi3twAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAC0 tLS0aJiYmJiYAB9cmAAAAJiYmJiYAACYmLe3XFy3XG5ubm4AAAAAADwAZZgAAJgAADxOAABoAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACKAAAAAJgAAAAAagV0dHQA eLefAG8AbwAAawCAbQBXAAAAbpBsAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAdgAAAHdrAABTAACIgQAAAACNAABv AFcAbgAAAAAAAAAAAACNAGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAG9v b29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29XV1dXV1dXbm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubm5ubi4AAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP////// ////IgD/////////////////////////////Znp6em5celwrXENDYmKGYkBAn59iQjtcXHqfQisr K0NDQ1yKKyufk1xcpa96n1yTXHpcXGKHh1hYd3pcenp6KEOfn5+fn59cXFyfn9+3ekKhlp6bnI2j rZCvpKucnqCgnqCgoKBMYKJiAIcAhwAAACIAggB1AaYB1wEnAtQCPgNFA////////+YD//////// XigvLHBQfGQlMTFJeigtKCxQUFBQUFBQUFBQLCx6enpNk11haGhdVXBqJkpdTnpqcVxxYV5UaFmE WFhYNCw0k0lJT1dNV1AnV1MgIUwhflNVV1cwSClTRmtGSkZJSUmT8UkoSUkASUlJSUkADgAOSUlJ SUlJAABJTwAhXU9dT11PXU9dT4uBaE1dUF1QXVBdUCYgJiAmICYgalNxVXFVcVVxVWhTaFNoU2hT WEpdT2hYcVVxVVhKAFVcV11PXU9dT2hNaE1oTWhNaFddUF1QXVBdUHBXcFdwV3BXcFdwV2pTalMm ICYgJiAmIGZCSiFdTE4hTi9OIXZJTyJqU2pialNqU3FVcVWpiGEwYTBhMF5IXkheSF5IVDdUKVQp aFNoU2hTaFNoU2hThGtYSlhGWEZYRgAAaFdOIWpTYTBeSFQpWEpYSnZlcVVoU11QJiAAIHFVLwAA AAAAAEkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASQAAAAAAAAAAAEkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASS8AAAAAk5OTk5OT k5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5OTk5NOZQBjVgBJSS9NQUFQWGFQPEB+ flA1P1BQWH41JQAAADw8SZMkJHOTSUl6AABzAJMAAAAAS2trRkeTAIYAAAAlPH5+fn5+fgAAAAAA uQCTNasAAAAAeHiBgYFOaYt/XgBJenqTkwAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AACQkJCQaHp6enp6ABhJegAAAHp6enp6AAB6epOTSUmTSVhYWFgAAAAAADAAUXoAAHoAADA3AABQ AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABuAAAAAHoAAAAATAVX V1cAXZOfAFgAUwAAVABiUwBEAAAAUnFRAAAAAAAAAFIAAAAAAAAAVgAAAFlXAABAAABoZgAAAABw AABYAEQAUgAAAAAAAAAAAABwAEYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhYWFhEREREREREUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUi4AAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYgAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIA ggB1AaYB1wEnAtQCPgNFA////////+YD////////XjdAPJltqYgyQ0Nkpjc+NzxtbW1tbW1tbW1t OzumpqZpyH+Ejo1/dJmQM2V/a6aQmn6ahYFyjXq1eXh3RzxHyGRkbHdpd201d3EsLWctq3F0d3dC YzhxYJFfZWBkZGTI8WQ3ZGQAZGRkZGQAEwATZGRkZGRkAABkawAtf2x/bH9sf2x/bL2wjml/bX9t f21/bTMsMywzLDMskHGadJp0mnSadI1xjXGNcY1xeGV/bI53mnSadHhlAHR+dn9sf2x/bI5pjmmO aY5pjXd/bX9tf21/bZl3mXeZd5l3mXeZd5BxkHEzLDMsMywzLItbZS1/Z2sta0FrLaFkay6QcZCF kHGQcZp0mnTnuYVChUKFQoFjgWOBY4FjcktyOHI4jXGNcY1xjXGNcY1xtZF4ZXdgd2B3YAAAjXdr LZBxhUKBY3I4eGV4ZaGKmnSNcX9tMywALJp0LwAAAAAAAGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZAAAAAAAAAAA AGQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZC8AAAAAyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjI yMjIyMjIyMjIyMhOiQCHdQBkZEBpWVlteIVtUVerq21IVW1teatIMgAAAFJSZMgxMZ3IZGSmAACd AMgAAAAAZpGSYGHIALcAAAAyUqurq6urqwAAAAAA/ADISKsAAAAApKSvr69qj72tgABkpqbIyAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADFxcXFaKampqamACFkpgAAAKampqamAACm psjIZGTIZHh4eHgAAAAAAEEAbqYAAKYAAEFLAABtAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACWAAAAAKYAAAAAaAV3d3cAf8ifAHkAcQAAcgCFcQBdAAAAb5pvAAAA AAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAdQAAAHp2AABXAACOiwAAAACZAAB5AF0AbwAAAAAAAAAAAACZAGAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXl5eXldXV1d XV1db29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vb29vby4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAhQAAAAAAAAAAAAABACIA4gDIAioDjAMsBIYFWgZoBv///////6oH//// ////XgA5AEIAQgCZAHEArACMADMASQBJAGQApgA5AEMAOQA/AHEAcQBxAHEAcQBxAHEAcQBxAHEA PQA9AKYApgCmAG8AyACJAI0AlQCRAIIAdwCbAJQAPQBuAIwAdACuAJQAnQCFAJ0AjwCFAHcAjwB9 ALsAfQB8AHgATAA/AEwAyABkAGQAcAB6AG4AewByAEEAegB4ADYANgBvADcArwB3AHkAegB6AE0A bQA/AHcAaQCZAGcAawBlAGQAZABkAMgA8QBkADkAZABkAAAAZABkAGQAZABkAAAAGAAAABgAZABk AGQAZABkAGQAAAAAAGQAeAAAADYAiQBwAIkAcACJAHAAiQBwAIkAcADIALEAlQBuAIIAcgCCAHIA ggByAIIAcgA9ADYAPQA2AD0ANgA9ADYAlAB3AJ0AeQCdAHkAnQB5AJ0AeQCPAHcAjwB3AI8AdwCP AHcAfABrAIkAcACSAHsAnQB5AJ0AeQB8AGsAAAB5AIMAegCJAHAAiQBwAIkAcACVAG4AlQBuAJUA bgCVAG4AkQB7AIIAcgCCAHIAggByAIIAcgCbAHoAmwB6AJsAegCbAHoAmwB6AJsAegCUAHgAlAB4 AD0ANgA9ADYAPQA2AD0ANgCfAG0AbgA2AIwAbwB0ADcAdABPAHQANwCtAG8AdQA4AJQAdwCUAI8A lAB3AJQAdwCdAHkAnQB5AOEAvgCPAE0AjwBNAI8ATQCFAG0AhQBtAIUAbQCFAG0AdwBXAHcAPwB3 AD8AjwB3AI8AdwCPAHcAjwB3AI8AdwCPAHcAuwCZAHwAawB4AGUAeABlAHgAZQAAAAAAkQB7AHQA NwCUAHcAjwBNAIUAbQB3AD8AfABrAHwAawCpAJMAnQB5AI8AdwCCAHIAPQA2AAAANgCdAHkALwAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAABkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AABkAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZAAvAAAAAAAAAAAAyADIAMgAyADI AMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgA yADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAMgAyADIAE4AiQAAAIcAdQAAAGQAZABCAG8AWQBZAHEAeACSAHEAVABb ALAAsABxAEsAWQBtAG0AeQCwAEsAMwAAAAAAAABYAFgAZADIAC8ALwCdAMgAZABkAKYAAAAAAJ0A AADIAAAAAAAAAAAAewCvAK4AdQB0AMgAAADEAAAAAAAAADMAWACwALAAsACwALAAsAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAQEAAMgASwCrAAAAAAAAAAAApACkAK8ArwCvAGoAjwC9AK0AhAAAAGQApgCmAMgAyAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAMUAxQDFAMUAaACmAKYApgCmAKYAAAAhAGQApgAAAAAAAACmAKYApgCmAKYAAAAAAKYA pgDIAMgAZABkAMgAZAB4AHgAeAB4AAAAAAAAAAAAAABBAAAAbgCmAAAAAACmAAAAAABBAFUAAAAA AHEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJYAAAAAAAAAAACmAAAAAAAAAAAAcwAF AH8AfwB/AAAAgwDIAJ8AAAB5AAAAeQAAAAAAdQAAAIsAdwAAAF8AAAAAAAAAeACdAHYAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAB6AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgQAAAAAAAACBAHUAAAAAAFoAAAAAAJQAjQAAAAAAAAAA AJkAAAAAAHkAAABfAAAAeAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJkAAABpAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAB5AHkAeQB5AHkAeQB5AHkAeQB5AHkAeQB5AHkAeQB5AHkAeQB5AHkAeQB5AF8AXwBfAF8A XwBfAF8AeAB4AHgAeAB4AHgAeAB4AHgAeAB4AHgAeAB4AHgAeAB4AHgAeAB4AHgAeAAuAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAjwAAAAAAAAAOAAoACwAMAA0ADgAPABAAEQAS ABMAFAAVABYAFwDdChAAgwEFAAMA9s4hEADd0QYMAAABAAEADADR0wUMAAABAAEADADT3QsLAAMA AFcLAN3SAA4AAAIAwAOwBA4A0tIBDgAAAgDAA7AEDgDS0QEOAAACADgEsAQOANHRAA4AAAIAOASw BA4A0dQaHwCAAQYACAD0AcZEAQD0AQAA9AEEAPQBRQQfANTUGx8AhwEGAAgA6APGRAIA6AN7APQB BgD0AcZEHwDU8gzy1CUNAIABCAAAAA0A1FJvb22AVGVtcGVyYXR1cmWAU3VwZXJjb25kdWN0b3Jz gEluYy6AhIBST09UU/MM89QbIwCGAQYACAD0AcZEAQD0AfYA6AMGAOgDxkSKAAAAIwDU1BsfAIcB BgAIAAgHxkQEAAgHewD0AQYA9AHGRB8A1NAEFQAACwAJAAE4BAAAAAABIBUA0NQbIwCGAQYACAD0 AcZEAQD0AewBCAcGAAgHxkQMAQAAIwDUzNQbHwCHAQYACAAmAsZECAAmAnsA9AEGAPQBxkQfANRS b29tgFRlbXBlcmF0dXJlgFN1cGVyY29uZHVjdG9yc4BJbmMugChST09UUyks8QI4DPGA8QM4DPFp c4Bjb21tZXJjaWFsaXppbmeAdGhlgHdvcmxkJ3OAZmlyc3SAcm9vbdABFQAACwAJAAFuBjYCAgAB IBUA0HRlbXBlcmF0dXJlgHN1cGVyY29uZHVjdG9ycy6AgFRoZYB0ZWNobm9sb2d5gISAdHJhZGVt YXJrZWSAYXOAVWx0cmFjb25kdWN0b3Jz8CkE8ICEgGluY2x1ZGVzgGZvdXLQARUAAAsACQABRgcO AwMAASAVANB5ZWFyc4BvZoBlYXJseYBwcm9kdWN0gGRldmVsb3BtZW50gGFzgHdlbGyAYXOAbmVh cmx5gHNp8QI5DPHUJQ0AgAEBAAAADQDU8QM5DPF4dGVlboB5ZWFyc4BvZoBwdWJsaXNoZWSAc2Np ZW50aWZpY4ByZXNlYXJjaC6Az0GAbGFuZG1hcmuAVS5TLoBwYXRlbnSAaGFzgGJlZW6AYXBwcm92 ZWSAYW5kgHBhdGVudHOAYXJlgHBlbmRpbmeAd29ybGR3aWRlLoCAgMzMV2hpbGWAdGhlgGJlc3SA ZXhpc3RpbmeAc3VwZXJjb25kdWN0b3JzgHdpbGyAbm90gG9wZXJhdGWAYWJvdmWAdGVtcGVyYXR1 cmVzgG9mgG1pbnVzgDE3MIBkZWdyZWVzz0ZhaHJlbmhlaXQsgFJPT1RTgHBvbHltZXKAc3VwZXJj b25kdWN0b3JzgGFyZYB1c2FibGWAYXSAdGVtcGVyYXR1cmVzgHJhbmdpbmeAZnJvbYBhYnNvbHV0 ZYB6ZXJvz3RvgDM5MIBkZWdyZWVzgEaAKDIwMIBkZWdyZWVzgEMpLoCAzMxBc4ByZXBvcnRlZIBp boBTY2llbnRpZmljgEFtZXJpY2FuLIBkaXN0aW5ndWlzaGVkgHNjaWVudGlzdHOAaGF2ZYBwcmVk aWN0ZWSAdGhhdIBhgHJvb22AdGVtcGVyYXR1cmXPc3VwZXJjb25kdWN0b3KAd2lsbIBpbml0aWF0 ZYBhgHNlY29uZIBpbmR1c3RyaWFsgHJldm9sdXRpb24ugIBJboAxOTk3gHRoZYBtYXJrZXSAZm9y gHByb2R1Y3Rzz2luY29ycG9yYXRpbmeAY3J5b2dlbmljgHN1cGVyY29ugmR1Y4J0b3JzgHdhc4Ak N4BiaWxsaW9uLoCASG93ZXZlciyAbWFya2V0c4Bmb3KAcm9vbYB0ZW1wZXJhdHVyZc9zdXBlcmNv bmR1Y3Rpdml0eYBhcmWAZm9yZWNhc3SAdG+AZ3Jvd4B0b4BzZXZlboB0aW1lc4B0aG9zZYBwcm9q ZWN0ZWSAZm9ygHJlZnJpZ2VyYXRlZIBzdXBlcmNvbmR1Y3RvcnMugM/MVWx0cmFjb25kdWN0b3Jz gGNvbmR1Y3SAZWxlY3RyaWNpdHmAYXSAbGVhc3SAMTAwLDAwMIB0aW1lc4BiZXR0ZXKAdGhhbiyA Z29sZCyAc2lsdmVygG9ygGNvcHBlciyAbGVhZGluZ890b4B0aGVpcoB1c2WAdG+AZWZmaWNpZW50 bHmAZ2VuZXJhdGUsgGNhcnJ5gGFuZIBzdG9yZYBlbmVyZ3kugIBGaXJzdIBwcm90b3R5cGWAcHJv ZHVjdHMsgGlugGVhcmx5z2RldmVsb3BtZW50LIB3aWxsgGFwcGVhcoB3aXRoaW6AdHdvgHllYXJz LIBpbmNsdWRpbmeAc29saWSEc3RhdGWAY29udmVyc2lvboBvZoBoZWF0gGludG+AZWxlY3RyaWNp dHkugIBBz2pvaW50gGRldmVsb3BtZW50LIBsaWNlbnNpbmcsgGFuZIBuaWNoZYBtYXJrZXSAc3Ry YXRlZ3mAaGFzgGJlZ3VuLoCAU2VsZWN0ZWSAcHJvZHVjdHOAd2lsbIBiZYBjYXJyaWVkz3RvgHRo ZYBwaWxvdIBwbGFudIBsZXZlbDuAb3RoZXJzgHdpbGyAYmWAbGF1bmNoZWSAYnmAc3RyYXRlZ2lj gHBhcnRuZXJzLszMUk9PVFOAU2NpZW50aWZpY4BBZHZpc29yeYBCb2FyZIBpbmNsdWRlczqARHIu gE1hdHSAQWxkaXNzaSyAYW6AaW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbGx5gHJlY29nbml6ZWSAc2NpZW50aXN0gGlu z2VsZWN0cmljYWxseYBjb25kdWN0aXZlgHBvbHltZXJzO4BEci6ASmFtZXOAKEppbSmAU21pdGgs gHRoZYBDaGllZoBTY2llbnRpc3SAb2aAdGhlgFN1cGVyY29uZHVjdGl2aXR5z0NlbnRlcoBhdIB0 aGWATG9zgEFsYW1vc4BOYXRpb25hbIBMYWJvcmF0b3J5gGFuZIBEci6AV2lsbGlhbYAoQmlsbCmA TGl0dGxlLIBQcm9mZXNzb3KARW1lcml0dXOAYXSAU3RhbmZvcmTPVW5pdmVyc2l0eYB3aG+AYW50 aWNpcGF0ZWSAdGhlgHBvc3NpYmlsaXR5gG9mgGGAcG9seW1lcoByb29tgHRlbXBlcmF0dXJlgHN1 cGVyY29uZHVjdG9ygGlugDE5NjQuzMxXZYBoYXZlgGNvbXBsZXRlZIB0aHJlZYBGZWRlcmFsgFNt YWxsgEJ1c2luZXNzgElubm92YXRpb26AUmVzZWFyY2iAKFNCSVIpgGNvbnRyYWN0c4BpbnZvbHZp bmeAbmVhcoS88QA4DPG88QE4DPF0ZXJtgGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uc4BvZoB0aGWAVWx0cmFjb25kdWN0 b3JzLIB3aXRogGGAdG90YWyAdmFsdWWAb2aAJDUzNSwwMDAugIBBgGZvdXJ0aIBTQklSgGNvbnRy YWN0gGhhc89iZWd1boBhbmSAdGhlgGdvdmVybm1lbnSAaGFzgGludml0ZWSAYYBQaGFzZYBJSYBj b250cmFjdIBwcm9wb3NhbIBmb3KAbW9yZYB0aGFugCQ3NTAsMDAwLszMTWFnbmV0aWOAUG93ZXKA SW5jLoAoTVBJKSyAdGhlgHBhcmVudIBjb21wYW55LIBldmFsdWF0ZXOAYnJlYWt0aHJvdWdogGVu ZXJneYB0ZWNobm9sb2dpZXOAd2hpY2jPd2hlboBjb3VwbGVkgHdpdGiAdGhlgFVsdHJhY29uZHVj dG9ycyyAd2lsbIBvcGVugHBhdGhzgHRvgGGAcmV2b2x1dGlvboBpboBlbmVyZ3mAcHJvZHVjdGlv biyAc3RvcmFnZc9hbmSAZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uLoCAVWx0cmFjb25kdWN0b3JzgGNhboB0cmFuc21p dIByZW5ld2FibGWAcG93ZXKAdG+AdGhlgHBvaW50gG9mgHVzZSyAYW5kgHdpbGyAaGVscM9kZWNl bnRyYWxpemWAdGhlgHByb2R1Y3Rpb26Ab2aAZWxlY3RyaWNpdHksgHdpdGiAbWFueYBwcmVzZW50 gHV0aWxpdHmAY3VzdG9tZXJzgHN1YnN0aXR1dGluZ4BvboRzaXRlgHBvd2VyLoDPzFdlgHN1cHBv cnSAb2ZmaWNlc4BhbmSAbGFib3JhdG9yeYBmYWNpbGl0aWVzgDUwgG1pbGVzgE4ugG9mgFNhboBG cmFuY2lzY2+AYW5kgGxhYm9yYXRvcmllc4BpboBNb3Njb3cuzPIM8sxGSU5BTkNFOvMM84CAJDIu NYBtaWxsaW9ugGhhc4BiZWVugHByb3ZpZGVkgHRvgGRhdGWAZnJvbYBBbmdlbIBpbnZlc3RvcnMu gICAJDGAbWlsbGlvboBvZoB0aGF0gHN1bYBoYXPQARUAAAsACQAB3CSkICYAASAVANBiZWVugGlu dmVzdGVkgGRpcmVjdGx5gGlugFJPT1RTLIB3aGljaIBpc4Bub3eAc2Vla2luZ4AkNYBtaWxsaW9u gGZvcoBmdXJ0aGVygHByb2R1Y3SAZGV2ZWxvcG1lbnSAYW5kz3dvcmtpbmeAY2FwaXRhbC6AgFdl gHdlbGNvbWWAYWRkaXRpb25hbIBBbmdlbIBpbnZlc3RvcnMugIBXZYBhbnRpY2lwYXRlgGFugElQ T4BpboB0aHJlZYB0b4BmaXZlgHllYXJzLszM8gzyTUFOQUdFTUVOVDrzDPOAgE1hcmuAR29sZGVz LIBDaGFpcm1hboAmgENFT4Bpc4BhboBlbnRyZXByZW5ldXKAd2l0aIAyNYB5ZWFyc4BvZoBleHBl cmllbmNlgGlugHRoZYDQARUAAAsACQABPCgEJCoAASAVANBlbmVyZ3mAZmllbGQugIBLZW6AV29v bGxlciyAQ09PLIB3YXOAQ0VPgG9mgGGAdmVudHVyZYBjYXBpdGFsgGZ1bmRlZIBoaWdohHRlY2iA Y29tcGFueS6AgEtldmluz1NoYW1icm9vayyAUHJlc2lkZW50gGlzgGGAUGguRC6ARWxlY3RyaWNh bIBFbmdpbmVlcoBhbmSAaGFzgG1hbmFnZWSAZGl2ZXJzZYBlbmdpbmVlcmluZ4BhbmTPbWFudWZh Y3R1cmluZ4Bwcm9qZWN0c4Bhc4B3ZWxsgGFzgG5ld4Bwcm9kdWN0gGludHJvZHVjdGlvbi6AgFN0 ZXBoZW6ATmV0dCyAVi5QLoBmb3KAQnVzaW5lc3PPRGV2ZWxvcG1lbnSAYW5kgFRlY2hub2xvZ3mA aGFzgGV4cGVydGlzZYBpboBhZHZhbmNlZIBwaHlzaWNzgGFuZIBtYW55gHllYXJzgG9mgHN0cmF0 ZWdpY4BhbmTPYXBwbGllZIBtYXJrZXSAYW5hbHlzaXMsgHBsYW5uaW5ngGFuZIBleGVjdXRpb24u zPID8tQbIwCGAQYACAD0AcZEAQD0AdgDJgIGACYCxkRkAQAAIwDU4IAQAAAAAHohxwAYJBAA4HJl doA1LzE0Lzk4iNAEFQAACwAJAAFMLRQpMAABIBUA0PMD8/IM8tQbHwCHAQYACABYAsZEDABYAnsA 9AEGAPQBxkQfANQzMDFBgE4ugE1haW6AU3QugIBQLk8ugEJveIA4ODCAgFNlYmFzdG9wb2yAQ0GA gDk1NDczgICANzA3LjgyOS45MzkxgICARkFYgDcwNy44MjkuMTAwMtQbIwCGAQYACAD0AcZEAQD0 AcQFWAIGAFgCxkQLEAAAIwDU1BsfAIcBBgAIACYCxkQIACYCewD0AQYA9AHGRB8A1NAGFQAACwAJ AAHyLbopMQABIBUA0NQbIwCGAQYACAD0AcZEAQD0AdgDJgIGACYCxkSjEAAAIwDU8wzzh8zMzMzM zPEDNQzx --=====================_896384033==_-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 14:44:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA20578; Thu, 28 May 1998 14:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 13:27:39 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: ROOTS opportunity & attachment stripping Resent-Message-ID: <"JNOIJ2.0.R15.oSTRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19306 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:33 PM 5/28/98, Michael Shambrook wrote: >Please keep this confidential, as we don't want to solicit investors on >Vortex which would constitute a public offering. LOL! Is this a joke? This is a public list. The archives are viewable by anyone with www access. This is publishing in a major way. On the other hand, you sent a Microsoft Word attachment, which for most people simply makes for a lot of unviewable garbage in the archives. It would be great if the newslist software stripped attachments, other than small GIFs, before distribution and archiving. Attachments are such a nuisance, and for some users a virus threat, especially HTML/JAVA attachments. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 14:55:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23895; Thu, 28 May 1998 14:47:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:47:41 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <8fadde20.356dd88e aol.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 17:35:09 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: ROOTS opportunity Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"_rQGy1.0.Ar5.tjTRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19307 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thank you Mark. Give me some time to read the attached file. I know of your work in superconductivity and I strongly believe that there is a connection between superconductivity and ZP energy. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 15:00:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA25601; Thu, 28 May 1998 14:52:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:52:55 -0700 Message-ID: <356DDB9E.140A keelynet.com> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 16:48:14 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vramos ctv.es CC: vortex-l eskimo.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com, KeelyNet-L@lists.kz Subject: Re: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? References: <01bd8a40$6aaffb60$d31b16cb ppp.lm.net.au> <356D971E.3F4E@keelynet.com> <356DC972.D67880BF@ctv.es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mq7G72.0.WF6.ooTRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19308 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Vicente et al! This was the point of my original post; > Was it here (as on this list) that someone said the Minato > self-running bicycle wheel and the scaled up generator > version had long past been proven a fraud in Japan? It got morphed into all kinds of questions about validity, so I reiterate, WHO ON THIS LIST (if here) SAID THEY KNEW PEOPLE IN JAPAN WHO KNEW MINATO TO BE A FRAUD? That's all I'm asking. Hey, most of this stuff is FAR out of our control, but that is the way it is (for now) and we just have to keep checking and asking for more details...for those who don't want to follow it fine, lots of other things on the Internet to waste time with......I just happen to think there is something to it as do many others who have expressed interest in it, so we plod on. What happens IF (and it is a big IF), any one of us either duplicates Minato's device or he finally releases a plan showing anyone how to build one? Geez, all that time and bandwidth and claims and retractions on OTHER magnetic devices, ramps and such, was that name or any of those people labelled as crazy? No, isn't that peculia? You wrote; > add Mr Minato to the large list of crazy inventors (Hammel, > Hubbard, Kromrey, Bedini... (place here your favs).). I think you are WAY OUT OF BOUNDS calling John Bedini crazy on three wide-ranging mailing lists...I know him to be an honorable guy who I consider to be brilliant....you should talk with him personally before branding him like that publicly. Hamel and Kromrey I don't know but they are still alive and I know Hamel is available for interview/discussion. Bedini finds most of the people who call him complaining about his designs CHANGED THE PLANS, then complain when it doesn't work as stated. Well, DUH.... So, I am disappointed that you appear so eager to throw the baby out with the bathwater, it would seem your best approach would be to ignore the posts about these 'crazy' guys and stick with the chemical minutiae and smotson 'proofs'...that ALSO never seem to end with any final proof or evidence of o/u, heck, even unity.... Nowadays, I've become as big a pessimist as anyone, just asking that if someone makes a claim, that they agree to let it be independently proven, and this is particularly with regard to overunity, to date, NADA, though the claims abound. Anyway, the video shows the thing does spin when holding a magnet near it and it struck me as very similar to the Hamel Spinner. The Johnson device used shaped magnets, Minato does not. I simply remembered reading a post from someone that Minato was considered a fraud in Japan and was just wanting more info on that; who, where, when... So, all these questions come into play with Minato (and others); 1) Why has no working device been displayed in the media? 2) Why has no working device been shipped to the US for demonstration yet? 3) Why was Minato's website removed where the pictures WERE? 4) Why on the video did Minato NOT show it self-running but relied on holding the magnet near it, just like the Hamel spinner? 5) Why is there all this mystery about it unless; a) money and investors are involved? b) the inventor is greedy or paranoid about theft? c) the inventor KNOWS the thing is a fraud and is covering up? d) the inventor knows it is so simple that it could be easily duplicated and possibly ripped off or EXPANDED on far beyond what he has been able to do to date... And of course, now the Tony Binn claims from England for a gravity driven inertial type device which smacks of the Bessler wheel...still trying to find out more about that one....so give up??....NEVER, as long as there is a chance to see and actually build MY OWN self-running machine, I'll be watching, discussing, networking, doing whatever experiments I can. The tabletop off-the-shelf parts device that will prove the basic principle of the device is all I need to show the inventor isn't just 'crazy' or out to scam money, but they sure shoot themselves in the foot when they get secretive or are after big money FIRST....in time, in time...we will have at LEAST a self-running UNITY device. Hamel does appear a bit confused in his video but Bedini is one of the most lucid and logical people I've met. It serves no positive purpose to slam ANYONE as crazy in a public mailing list, let alone THREE of them...private emails, sure, tear them up, but PUBLIC???? -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 ICQ # - 13175100 / AOL - Keelyman KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 15:20:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA28886; Thu, 28 May 1998 15:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD8A5B.D10EB160 pm3-149.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'freenrg-L eskimo.com'" Cc: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: OFF-TOPIC: New planet discovered? Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 17:12:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id PAA28828 Resent-Message-ID: <"yD45i1.0._27.T9URr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19309 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greetings all, sorry for the off topic post: Has anyone heard any information about the planet supposedly discovered by the Hubble Space Telescope orbiting a star 450 light years away? If so, email me and let me know. Best regards, Kyle R. mcallister Email: stk sunherald.infi.net Phone: 228-875-0629 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 15:53:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA01654; Thu, 28 May 1998 15:41:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:41:49 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0940 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 08:38:24 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Resent-Message-ID: <"1Wi5Y2.0.mP.iWURr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19310 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vince If you use separate meters for each voltage, you need to be very careful about the insulation of them. Most meters are not rated for 3000volts, and the insulation could break down. At the very least mount them on glass or acrilic plastic to keep them away from ground, and DONT TOUCH THEM. Analog meters have a lower resistance in general, and might load down the voltage divider if you put the meter across it. A cheap meter may have a resistance of about 1Megohm (look in the manual that comes with them)(or measure them with another meter). Better to use the meter itself as the lower leg of the voltage divider. For example, you can put 19 Megohms of resistors in series with a meter, using the meter itself as the lower leg of a 20:1 voltage divider, and then use a 100 volt scale to read 2000 volts Use the formula W = V^2/R to calculate the wattage needed for any resistors (V is voltage, R resistance in ohms). As Horace said, double the wattage for any resistor you use (Use a 2 watt resistor if you calculate 1 watt). If you use several meters, use a separate battery supply for each one, as the internal insulation probably won't be large enough to share batteries. Good luck Hank > ---------- > From: VCockeram aol.com[SMTP:VCockeram@aol.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 6:46 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode > > In a message dated 98-05-27 11:07:17 EDT, Frank Stenger wrote: > <> > > > Since E^2 for you is about 1,000,000 volts^2, you would need > > a 1,000,000 ohm total divider resistance to have > > 1 watt of heat in the divider. > > Frank, max volts here is 3 kV and the tube was running about 1.5 kV so > thats 9 megohms (at least I think it is) I don't use ohms law much > troubleshooting mainframe computers. Just plug and pray! :-) > > Hmm...today (5-27) I hung a 1/4 watt 1 megohm in series with a 150 > v > neon panel lamp (the lamp has a built in series resistor) and it > smoked > the 1 megohm resistor. I then tried 3 megohms...that worked ok ( I was > playing around with a high voltage on indicator) So.... > ...are you sure 1 megohm would be enough? > > > For a 500 to 1 ratio, just add a > > 1,000,000/500 = 2000 ohm resistor in series with the 1 meg > resistor. > > If a 1 watt 1 meg resistor is hard to come by, use 4, 250,000 , 1/4 > watt > > resistors in series. The total resistance of the divider is then > > 1,002,000 ohms - too close to 1 meg to worry about. A tap at the 2 > K > > resistor will give a 1,002,000/2000 = 501 divider ratio. > > Thinking about this all day has led me to go for a 100 to 1 ratio > rather > than 500 to 1. Why? Well, the power supply max is 3 kV, so 100 to 1 > gives me a meter voltage of 30 volts. Correct? And would the circut > look > like: (+) HV-----/\/\/\/\/\-----|------/\/\/\/\/\---|----(-) > 1 | 2 | > -------M--------- > For 100 to 1 what would be the values of R1 and R2? > I'm sorry for all these truly basic questions but I haven't done > anything > like this...ever! > > M (meter) will be an off the shelf digital multimeter capable of > reading to 1kV DC. > > They are about $15 bucks each. I figure I need four of them: > > 1, power supply voltage, 2, tube voltage drop, 3, ballast voltage > drop, > 4, current resistor shunt drop. 1,2 and 3 will need the 100 to 1 > divider > network.. Why four meters?....I refuse to swap meter leads on > circuts > that can kill me....and they are cheap. > > > When you select your meter, it should have an internal resistance > much > > higher than 2000 ohms so as not to upset the ratio too much. > > It's not listed in the specs in the catalog but I will call and find > out. > > > If you want to do a bit of algebra, you could match the meter to > the > > divider, since the meter is in parallel with the "2000" ohm > resistor. > > Just be careful that you don't lose the path to ground for the > divider > > or 1000 volts could show up on the ungrounded end of the divider - > a > > 1000 volt source with a 1 meg resistance. > <> > > Frank Stenger > > I also like the suggestion from Hank Scudder for a zener diode for > instrument > protection.....I have already slagged two > old (but good) analog ones. > Thanks for all the help everyone. > > Regards, > Vince Cockeram > Las Vegas Nevada > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 16:13:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07965; Thu, 28 May 1998 16:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 16:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356DEC53.3E9B skylink.net> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 15:59:31 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? References: <01bd8a40$6aaffb60$d31b16cb ppp.lm.net.au> <356D971E.3F4E@keelynet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IDN1K.0.Ny1.CxURr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19311 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jerry W. Decker wrote: > I think Minato is fully aware of this and afraid people will simply > steal his basic idea and go far beyond what he's done, leaving him out > in the cold. I'm not sure it is his idea to begin with. Diagrams of Minato's motor and bicycle wheel device were up on the net. Sorry I don't have the URL and can't find these on the net now. As I recall the motor uses rectangular shaped magnets with one corner pointing in the direction of rotation, and the bicycle wheel device uses crescent shaped magnets on the rotor, with the point of the crescent pointing in the direcion of rotation. At the time I saw it, bicycle wheel device seemed to me essentially the same as Johnson's the permanent magnet motor invention. Johnson's device was built on a lazy susan. US Patent 415431, Permanent Magnet Motor, Howard R. Johnson, April 1979 The stories about the devices are also remarkably similar. Johnson claims it provided continuous motion with fixed magnets. Others state that it only works if you hold the stator magnet in your hand and consciously or unconsiously move it to provide energy to the rotor. There is an odd coincidence in many of the all magnet motors which claim to run without a power source. The rotor magnets are often crescent or banana shaped, or another shape which comes to a point, with the point the direction parallel to the stator -- longitudinal to motion. There are as many as half a dozen like this, I don't remember them all off hand. But the Kawai motor also has this type of construction, as well Minato and Johnson. It is an odd coincidence that so many of these things have a similar element of construction. Could these things work? If they do, it may be related to the magnetocaloric effect, negative viscosity, and violation of the second law of thermodynamics in self-ordered systems. There are some interesting temperature anomolies in the experiment described in the reference below. Although not highly mathematical, the paper is hard to read for other reasons. The purpose of the experiment was not related to the temperature anomalies, and the authors do not discuss it. It is hard to summarize the experiment. If you get the paper you can see the anomaly in the top chart of figure three. A permanent magnet is repetitively cycled through the saturation points of its BH curve. The magnetization force is applied relatively quickly, but the cycle time between re-magnetization is very slow -- i.e. remagnetization in the opposite direction every 200 seconds. At all times when the magnet is left to itself -- no change in the applied source field, the magnet cools itself. Not an anomaly. A magnet will self-order itself, decrease its entropy, and drop its temperature. But the temperature in this experiment always decreases by a greater amount, than the temperature increase that occurs during the re-magnetizaion. The chart shows five cycles of re-magnetization, over a total time period of 1200 seconds. The ending temperature of the magnet is lower after each cycle, and also lower than the starting temperature. Magnetic Dependence of Magnetic Viscosity Measurements in NdFeB, L.Folks, R.Street, R.Woodward, and P.G.McCormick, Journal of Applied Physics, Vol 75 No 10 p6634, May 1994 Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 17:50:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA12785; Thu, 28 May 1998 17:47:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 17:47:42 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980529084941.0085f8f0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 08:49:41 +0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: John Winterflood Subject: Re: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? In-Reply-To: <356DEC53.3E9B skylink.net> References: <01bd8a40$6aaffb60$d31b16cb ppp.lm.net.au> <356D971E.3F4E keelynet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VgCot2.0.z63.eMWRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19312 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: >... >Magnetic Dependence of Magnetic Viscosity Measurements in NdFeB, >L.Folks, R.Street, R.Woodward, and P.G.McCormick, Journal of >Applied Physics, Vol 75 No 10 p6634, May 1994 Hey these guys are just across the corridor from me! I'll have to look into it. I'm sure they will be highly amused to know their work is being quoted as suggesting free energy. I have had a few discussions with Dr Robert Street (who heads the magnetics group here). He is one of the staunchest "defenders of the faith" (against the free-energy, cold-fusion, etc fringe) that I have ever met! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 20:36:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA14608; Thu, 28 May 1998 20:33:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 20:33:13 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980528212150.0074cd30 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 21:21:53 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: Re: Cancellation Experiment: was Woodward and ZPE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"LunCW2.0.gZ3.rnYRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19313 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >In your experiment, let's say you have perfect splitters at >the junctions, and inversely also perfect combiners. From >your result, a standing wave in the mid section, it appears >that the B wave travels through the mid section and back up >the source of the A wave -- appearing to be, from the >perspective of the A wave transmitter a perfect reflection. >The A wave does the same thing. Or, you could also argue that >the B wave is completely reflected at the junction and only >provides enough energy to the mid-section to keep the >standing wave going. But reflection at a matched impedance >junction does not fit well with transmission line theory. >The standing wave in the center section consists only of >an E field. The H fields, and the currents, of the two waves >cancel in the mid-section. Yes, a resonant condition is achieved in the center of the line. It is important to realize that the notion of impedence is larger than just the physical constants of the circuit; it also includes the electromagnetic wave at the point of interest. The "impedence" of points on a standing wave vary from infinity (at a voltage peak) to zero (at a current peak). Check out things like transmission line stub tuning to see how this is used to synthesize any impedence desired. > >In whatever way it happens, the anomaly is: How does the B >wave, and the A wave, "know" that propagation is not allowed >along the outside parts of the main wave-guide, and why is a >travelling wave also not permitted in the mid-section? Well, really there are two travelling waves interfering; the result being this sort of strange animal we call a standing wave. This is a bit like the chicken and egg story; but I stick to the notion that the fundamental thing we are dealing with is the travelling wave. > >The short answer is that it is the only way in which energy >can be conserved. True. And when your B wave hits the junction, >it somehow knows this? Maybe the wave acquires this kind of >universal topological information from those pesky angels that >someone has suggested are also involved in hiding the energy >of the scalar wave. A more prosaic explanation of where the >energy goes in a scalar wave, is into the longitudinal >field components, which double in size when two circular EM >photons with 180 degree spacial phasing are superposed -- >resulting in a scalar wave with a quantum spin of 2. >Something else must happen if you try to superpose two >circular EM photons which are spacially in-phase, because >a circularly polarized photon always has a quantum spin >equal to 1. You can not construct an EM photon with spin 2. This seems strange to me. My understanding is that the spin 1 particle carries vector EM. A spin 2 particle would carry energy which would be described by a tensor; not a scalar. now for a big snip of some interesting stuff... >If your experiment is set-up using circularly polarized >waves, you may see a stranger anomaly than the one you >have now. If circulary polarized waves are used, the >longitudinal components no longer cancel along the ends >of the main waveguide, but they do cancel if you superpose >each of the waves along each of the return paths, >and they also cancel in the mid-section of the main guide. >There is no longer any mode of propagation for the A >wave back along the source guide of the B wave, and >similary for the B wave back along the source of the >A wave. Hence, no reflection should appear to the >generators. In the mid-section of the main wave guide, >you have superposition of two circulary polarized waves >travelling in opposite directions (opposite spins). >This should result in an unusual double-frequency standing >wave in the mid-section having complete cancellation >at each junction, and complete cancellation in the exact >middle of the mid-section. > Well, I did these experiments with strip transmission line; can't really study polarized waves with this. I was building and studying transmission line circuits; from some experiments with coupling I "discovered" the quarter wave coupling circuit (ignorance is bliss :^) Consider this... 50Ohm==========================================50ohm ===================== = = = driver The end of the driver element is a quarter wave long. When driven with RF; a travelling wave will emerge from only one end of this device. The other end produces nothing. Further, one can replace the terminated section with a loop of line which is an integer number of wavelengths. The result is a "standing" travelling wave. Weird again; yes? Combining two such circuits in opposition yields the first circuit I mentioned. I'll have to think some about the circular polarized bit; get back to you later on this. K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 20:49:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA21992; Thu, 28 May 1998 20:46:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 20:46:40 -0700 Message-ID: <356E0ADE.D9414C5E microtronics.com.au> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 10:39:50 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing References: <356AA072.56965007 microtronics.com.au> <19980528.171934.3638.1.tv@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"C-pCP2.0.7L5.5-YRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19314 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tim Vaughan wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > Good to hear from you ! Welcome back to the list ! > I appreciate your persistence despite all the legal troubles. > Look forward to seeing the SMOT kit. It is my understanding that it is > a "roll away" kit not a "roll around" kit. > > If it is not "rollarounf", does this new backward design lend itself to linking > and a "roll around" self running arrangement ? Have you tried this ? My goal was a NEW APPROACH (non DMEC) "Solid" Rollaway design. I will leave linking to others. I am still "Trying" to work through the DMEC deal. I don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water. > Another experimenter that experienced similar effects and power scale-up imitations > was Westley Gary from 1879 that you have posted linked on your web pages or on one I placed at: > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/4810 I am VERY aware of the Westley devices. I and others have built a few. > I think the idea thermal negative entropy (fluctuation coherence) is > right on. Even though it is a small effect now, it is a genuine > perpetual motion machine apparently violating the 2nd Law of > Thermodynamics. That is still a breakthrough by any measure and has the > potential of scale-up with more understanding of the phenomena. I hope so. > As the Nobel Physicist P.W. Bridgman stated, there is no fundamental > principle that would prevent this possibility. (Read the book "The Nature > of Thermodynamics by P.W. Bridgman). Few understand the 2nd Law as well > as he did. James Clerk Maxwell also understood that this possibility > might exist. The most recent prominent Physicist to theorize on this is > Harold Asden, especially with regard ferromagnetic effects. I will check out Asden's site. Never could get the link to work? > Hope this winter is healthy for you with the nutritional supplements you > are taking. Still winter here in California with lots of rain. Twice > the normal rainfall so far. El Ninio strikes again. The APGL REALLY works. Several women friends are using it and in a few weeks will have blood workups. It appears from the lack of menopausal effects that their Estrogen level have been restored. A doctor friend is thinking about doing a 6 month test with full blood and physical testing. Its AMAZING stuff waking up and looking at a younger face staring back at you in the morning mirror. > Tim HI Tim, Thanks for the kind comments. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 22:07:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA27770; Thu, 28 May 1998 22:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 22:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 19:30:54 -0400 From: Soo Subject: OFF-TOPIC: New planet discovered? Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199805281930_MC2-3E79-DFBA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id WAA27701 Resent-Message-ID: <"qSny22.0.jn6.G6aRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19315 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle Check out http://oposite.stsci.edu/pubinfo/latest.html for the latest Hubble stuff. The first entry on the site is a piccie of the star you mention with additional information. I have bookmarked addresses for all the "space cadet" stuff on the www, so if you want a listing of them get back to me in email. Soo (part-time sad space cadet) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu May 28 22:43:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA01937; Thu, 28 May 1998 22:42:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 22:42:04 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 21:41:50 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: [off topic] Pakistan bomb EMP Resent-Message-ID: <"nBkWd.0.RT.XgaRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19316 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I received a copy of the EMP trace of one of the Pakistan bombs courtesy of Charlie Plyler of the ULF-SCI list, who captured it at a distance of 11,987 km. The initial negtive pulse from the blast lasted about 0.06 seconds. Using a speed of sound of in rock of about 3500 m/sec, that gives a blast hole radius of about 390 m. Is that about right? Is there a relationship between underground EMP duration and bomb size? I hear there were two earthquakes in western China, Sinkiang Prov., and one at the Afghanistan-USSR border within a miunute of each other, radius 341 km. Coincidence? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 00:35:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA07320; Fri, 29 May 1998 00:33:46 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 00:33:46 -0700 Message-ID: <356E6425.56DA keelynet.com> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 02:30:45 -0500 From: "Jerry W. Decker" Reply-To: jdecker keelynet.com Organization: KeelyNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: KeelyNet-L lists.kz CC: freenrg-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? References: <01bd8a40$6aaffb60$d31b16cb ppp.lm.net.au> <356D971E.3F4E@keelynet.com> <356DC972.D67880BF@ctv.es> <356DDB9E.140A@keelynet.com> <356DE800.2ED3@skylink.net> <356E3A9F.7EC6@keelynet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Wk1SY.0.un1.LJcRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19317 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Gnorts, Hi and all that stuff! The following are photos from the Minato site in Japan, sorry it's all in Japanese and the Alta Vista translator doesn't 'do' Japanese to English yet... -------------- Energy version kind of a combination of EV Gray and the Magnapulsion engine from Florida (could not locate Magnapulsion IBM patent server); http://iac.co.jp/~creation/MAG/top.html http://iac.co.jp/~creation/MAG/top.html http://iac.co.jp/~creation/MAG/top.html Bicycle Wheel version http://iac.co.jp/~creation/MAG/top.html Comments on monopoles, Howard Johnson patent, Kawai, regauging and magnetic motor devices including the Minato Patents; http://www.escribe.com/science/keely/msg02172.html Thanks to 'MR 2 ducks' for sharing the Minato photo URL... -- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 ICQ # - 13175100 / AOL - Keelyman KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 00:42:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA12119; Fri, 29 May 1998 00:40:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 00:40:54 -0700 Message-ID: <356E2278.74DA skylink.net> Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 19:50:32 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superposition magnetic fields? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-Jal71.0.ky2.0QcRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19318 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > Simplifying my question: > > EM waves are said to superposition. The fields comprizing the EM waves > thus superposition. Magnetic fields are part of EM waves. Magnetic fields > do not in all cases superposition, otherwise the top magnet in the slot in > Fig. 1 would fall, it's field adding to the bottom magnet's field. This > doesn't happen. How is it that the magnetic components of EM waves > superposition when static magnetic fields do not? EM fields can be self-interacting, and to some extent maybe superposition is a bit over-rated. For example the Faraday effect -- or by duality you could also rotate a photon in an electric field, except in practice it is more difficult to get energy in an E field. Also, about one of your other comments. B fields always exist in closed loops. Presumably so. Where is the closed loop in a travelling wave, without the existence of a longitudinal component. And, your comment about interaction of flux? If each flux tube is truly a tube -- containing all the flux, there should be no interaction unless you attempt to cross them. Is superposition violated in your magnet experiment? Why does the array of horizontally magnetized magnets, position itself the same distance away as does the same array of vertically polarized magnets. If you start to draw flux lines, it doesn't seem to work. However, if you ignore flux lines and do a geometry superposition, it does seem to work. Put your hand over all of the north poles or all of the south poles. The geometry of each half looks the same as the geometry of the other array of magnets. > Slot > | > v > > | | > | | > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > | | > | | > | | > | | <---- flux tube interface? > | | > | | > | | > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > > Fig, 1 > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 00:59:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA22708; Fri, 29 May 1998 00:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 00:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.16.19980528164610.345f21a6 ap.net> X-Sender: mjs ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (16) Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 16:46:10 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Shambrook Subject: Re: Minato device is much like the Hamel Spinner? In-Reply-To: <356DEC53.3E9B skylink.net> References: <01bd8a40$6aaffb60$d31b16cb ppp.lm.net.au> <356D971E.3F4E keelynet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"es1_a2.0.iY5.3fcRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19319 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:59 PM 5/28/98 -0700, you wrote: >Jerry W. Decker wrote: >> I think Minato is fully aware of this and afraid people will simply >> steal his basic idea and go far beyond what he's done, leaving him out >> in the cold. > >I'm not sure it is his idea to begin with. Diagrams of Minato's motor >and bicycle wheel device were up on the net. Sorry I don't have the URL >and can't find these on the net now. As I recall the motor uses rectangular >shaped magnets with one corner pointing in the direction of rotation, and >the bicycle wheel device uses crescent shaped magnets on the rotor, with >the point of the crescent pointing in the direcion of rotation. At the >time I saw it, bicycle wheel device seemed to me essentially the same as >Johnson's the permanent magnet motor invention. Johnson's device was built >on a lazy susan. > >US Patent 415431, Permanent Magnet Motor, Howard R. Johnson, April 1979 > >The stories about the devices are also remarkably similar. Johnson >claims it provided continuous motion with fixed magnets. Others state >that it only works if you hold the stator magnet in your hand and >consciously or unconsiously move it to provide energy to the rotor. > >There is an odd coincidence in many of the all magnet motors which >claim to run without a power source. The rotor magnets are often >crescent or banana shaped, or another shape which comes to a point, >with the point the direction parallel to the stator -- longitudinal >to motion. There are as many as half a dozen like this, I don't >remember them all off hand. But the Kawai motor also has this type >of construction, as well Minato and Johnson. > >It is an odd coincidence that so many of these things have a similar >element of construction. Could these things work? If they do, it may >be related to the magnetocaloric effect, negative viscosity, and >violation of the second law of thermodynamics in self-ordered systems. > >There are some interesting temperature anomolies in the experiment >described in the reference below. Although not highly mathematical, >the paper is hard to read for other reasons. The purpose of the >experiment was not related to the temperature anomalies, and the >authors do not discuss it. > >It is hard to summarize the experiment. If you get the paper >you can see the anomaly in the top chart of figure three. >A permanent magnet is repetitively cycled through the >saturation points of its BH curve. The magnetization force >is applied relatively quickly, but the cycle time between >re-magnetization is very slow -- i.e. remagnetization in the >opposite direction every 200 seconds. At all times when the >magnet is left to itself -- no change in the applied source >field, the magnet cools itself. Not an anomaly. A magnet will >self-order itself, decrease its entropy, and drop its temperature. >But the temperature in this experiment always decreases by a >greater amount, than the temperature increase that occurs >during the re-magnetizaion. The chart shows five cycles of >re-magnetization, over a total time period of 1200 seconds. >The ending temperature of the magnet is lower after each cycle, >and also lower than the starting temperature. > >Magnetic Dependence of Magnetic Viscosity Measurements in NdFeB, >L.Folks, R.Street, R.Woodward, and P.G.McCormick, Journal of >Applied Physics, Vol 75 No 10 p6634, May 1994 > >Regards, >Robert Stirniman Robert, > >Just after his 1979 magnetic motor Patent appeared we built two prototypes of Howard Johnson's rotary motor. They both appeared to work if you held the stator magnets in your hand. However, when we constructed artificial hands to hold the stator, they would rotate 359 degrees and stop. Clearly, they were being pumped by human energy even though it was not at all apparent. Shortly afterwards, Prof. William Harrison, probably still at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, wrote a paper with Johnson that detailed the mathematics of a linear version of the motor - and showed why it could not function as a rotary device. Frank Chilton, who once taught electromagnetics at Stanford, found an error in the Kawai Patent that made it clear it could not exceed unity. Kawai has never claimed over unity performance since. My apologies to Vortex for the ROOTS letter to Frank Z. I goofed and accidently sent it on a VO e-mail rather than to one having only his private address. Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc. & ROOTS (a subsidiary) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 02:21:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA04982; Fri, 29 May 1998 02:19:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 02:19:43 -0700 Message-Id: <356E6F4E.4AD2B99F verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:18:22 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Radiation from a Uniformly Accelerated Charge (eprint:gr-qc/9805097) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"E0IP9.0.dD1.ksdRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19320 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, abstract gr-qc/9805097 From: Soker Noam Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 05:57:36 GMT (10kb) Radiation from a Uniformly Accelerated Charge Author: Amso Harpaz, Noam Soker (Univ. of Haifa) Comments: Latex, uses aasms4.sty, 14 pages, Accepted for publication in General Relativity and Gravitation. For a postscript file please contact Noam Soker: soker physics.technion.ac.il The emission of radiation by a uniformly accelerated charge is analyzed. According to the standard approach, a radiation is observed whenever there is a relative acceleraion between the charge and the observer. Analyzing difficulties that arose in the standard approach, we propose that a radaition is created whenever a relative acceleration between the charge and its own electric field exists. The electric field induced by a charge accelerated by an external (nongravitational) force, is not accelerated with the charge. Hence the electric field is curved in the instantanous rest frame of the accelerated charge. This curvature gives rise to a stress force, and the work done to overcome the stress force is the source of the energy carried by the radiation. In this way, the "energy balance paradox" finds its solution. Isn't it sound familiar? Available trom xxx.lanl.gov hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 03:06:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA23290; Fri, 29 May 1998 03:05:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 03:05:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:03:09 +0100 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: magnetic shield Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xQV5A.0.qh5.UXeRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19321 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vo, Sorry I've been away for a bit making some money. I've got a question for you, should you care to answer. Imagine I have a magnetic shielding material like mu-metal or better a superconductor, imagine I have an uniform field and I move the said material along the equipotential lines, how much energy is expended do that? Imagine now I have a radial magnetic field like between a loudspeaker's magnets and the voice coil. In the gap I insert a slotted shield like a 'squirrel cage' of an induction motor and spin it. Forgetting friction etc. what stops it from turning - is their a magnetic braking effect? If not on the outside of the shield, the flux is being modulated... Insert a pickup coil... Where's the catch? Personally, I'm skeptical about the idea but would like to give it a go - with mu-metal at least. Don't have the facilities for superconductors though. Will look into analysis of it. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 04:07:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA00409; Fri, 29 May 1998 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 04:00:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002d01bd8af0$5d184e20$148cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Electric Discharge, Vortex Tube Experiment Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 04:55:52 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"mjBnR.0.I6.8LfRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19322 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Stuff Needed: A pair of pillow blocks 1" bore, sleeve,Ultra-High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMW-PE)or ball bearing, costing from $5.00 up, and a glass or metal tube 1/2 filled with water or liquid metal, and a 1/4" dia axial electrode. Arrange end seals to get electrical contact to the fluid and the axial electrode Mount on a board, and using an "O" Ring belt, spin it up to make a vortex cavity. Using slip ring contacts, apply a voltage through a current-limiting resistor. SAFETY DISCLAIMER. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 04:49:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA06189; Fri, 29 May 1998 04:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 04:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980529074458.007ccc00 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 07:44:58 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: update: A closer look at one "negative" result Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9eLmJ.0.RW1.-1gRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19323 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I want to thank Scott Little, and the others who have continued with helpful and interesting comments regarding the page at http://world.std.com/~mica/littleks.html The clarifications have yielded identification of two new potential calorimetric artifacts, one possibly giving rise to a false postive, and the other a possible false negative, from those who fail to 'zero' their calorimeters at zero input electrical power. Mitchell Swartz ==================================================== This announcement at this time, and excerpt are only for contributors to vortex-l. (c) 1998 JET Energy Technology, Inc. The draft manuscript and the excerpt may not be copied, redistributed, or transmitted in any form electronic, magnetic, paper, photographic, or otherwise. ==================================================== ==================================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 08:27:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA14855; Fri, 29 May 1998 08:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 08:21:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805281458_MC2-3E72-2E01 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:04:20 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Wharton on heat-after-death Resent-Message-ID: <"EqHRv.0._d3.a9jRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19325 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A In Re to Jed Rothwell's comments: >Larry Wharton writes: > > The only other alleged self-sustaining reaction, heat after death, had > two fatal flaws. The palladium rods were taken out of the cell and > placed in a container for which no calorimetry calibration was > available . . . > >In which experiment? I have never heard of anyone doing this. As far as I know >when you remove palladium rods and expose them to cool air that will quench >the heat after death reaction. In the experiments I have read about with >palladium by Pons and Fleischmann, McKubre, Mizuno and others the Pd always >remained in the cell. In most cases it remains in the liquid D2O. After a >boil-off it is in D2O vapor. Please cite your references on this. I believe that in most of the heat after death events the palladium rods were loaded in a liquid but are in a gas during the heat after death. Since the calibration is done in the liquid cell stage it certainly does not apply to a gas phase. The actual removal of the rods from the cell is irrelevant. The important fact is that the rods are in a gas as opposed to a liquid and there has been no calorimetry done for the gas phase. I do recall a report in Infinite Energy by Jed claiming that Mizuno had actually removed a loaded palladium rod from the cell and placed it in another container in which the heat after death was observed. Maybe I recalled this incorrectly. If the alleged heat after death effect is destroyed by removing the rods from the cell, then it would appear to be just a measurement artifact. >Speaking of references, a couple weeks ago you wrote: "I have made the claim >that entire CETI like systems that were producing large amounts of alleged >excess energy, have been put into closed insulated containers and the >temperature rise of the entire system has been measured." That news came as a >big surprise to me and to other readers of this forum. We asked you to >describe this event in greater detail, and to give us references describing This information comes from informed sources and the experiment has been replicated at different laboratories. It is not expected that a public announcement with all the details be made because the experiments were made by believers and it conclusively proved that they were wrong. After the Power Gen 95 CETI Demo it was obvious that the entire system was not heating up commensurate with the supposed power generation. The logical next step was to place the entire system in an insulated container and measure the temperature rise. This experiment was done at two or more independent laboratories with CETI like cells producing large apparent excess heat. However the temperature rise was consistent only with the total energy input to the system. Thus the experiment proved that a large apparent excess heat could be measured by the traditional combined flow calorimetry technique, but that the actual excess heat was zero. These experiments were done and then kept secret as they disproved the excess heat claims. I know very few details about them and would like to know more myself. I had hoped that Jed would investigate himself and find out some more details. But then again, it most likely would be a waist of time. I can just imagine a future posting from Jed: From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wharton on secret CETI experiments Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com To: Vortex Larry Wharton writes: These experiments were done and then kept secret as they disproved the excess heat claims. . . . I have spoken with Dennis Cravens and have been assured that there have been no secret experiments done in which an entire working CETI system has been placed in an insulated container and the secular temperature increase with time indicated zero excess heat production. I would guess that Wharton is either imagining this or lying about it. It is unacceptable and very bad form for Wharton to be fantasizing about these non-existent experiments. I don't have time for this. I need to spend my time on important cf projects like the Ragland triode and the Case, always a week away, self-sustaining experiment. - Jed 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 Fri May 29 09:23:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA29313; Fri, 29 May 1998 09:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 09:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 08:16:37 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Superposition magnetic fields? Resent-Message-ID: <"Kp9m03.0.t97.Z_jRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19326 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:50 PM 5/28/98, Robert Stirniman wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> Simplifying my question: >> >> EM waves are said to superposition. The fields comprizing the EM waves >> thus superposition. Magnetic fields are part of EM waves. Magnetic fields >> do not in all cases superposition, otherwise the top magnet in the slot in >> Fig. 1 would fall, it's field adding to the bottom magnet's field. This >> doesn't happen. How is it that the magnetic components of EM waves >> superposition when static magnetic fields do not? > >EM fields can be self-interacting, and to some extent maybe superposition >is a bit over-rated. For example the Faraday effect -- or by duality you >could also rotate a photon in an electric field, except in practice it >is more difficult to get energy in an E field. It seems strange that the interacting, momentum exchange, with photons requires a net charge, a particle attached to a field. Even interference experiments require matter to make the slits, don't they? Ordinary light or radio waves travel right through each other, don't they? Yes, photon-photon interactions create interference patterns, but don't affect direction. Momentum of photons is conserved by *keeping* momentum, not by rules of photon-photon momentum exchange. If B fields interacted between photons, then there would be momentum and angular momentum exchange. Even the initial creation of the photon's momentum requires a charged particle, as does absorbtion of the photon. Possibly interesting experiment - interaction of x-rays with neutrons. > >Also, about one of your other comments. B fields always exist in closed >loops. Presumably so. Where is the closed loop in a travelling wave, >without the existence of a longitudinal component. To advance, any wave requires some kind of longitudinal component, doesn't it? Otherwise it must sit in place. Maybe I don't really understand your question. If an E field collapses, the B field is created *around* the collapsing E field, true? Thus the closed B loops. In a waveguide the parts of the loops interacting with the walls (charged particles there again!) get distorted, but the loops are still closed, even if flattend in the wall area. > >And, your comment about interaction of flux? If each flux tube is truly >a tube -- containing all the flux, there should be no interaction unless >you attempt to cross them. I wish I hand't brought up flux tubes, as they are only a digression from the main question, and a very old model of reality, long abandoned. It just seems such an appropriate model for the way the thin magnets act when in parallel. They seem to have real and compressable boundaries. One way to look a flux tube is that it is a manifold of genus 1 (a distortable torus) that encloses a fixed number of magnetic field lines. Nature makes its own strange rules. If flux tubes exist, in a real sense, then there must be one for each charged particle. The flux tube model must be, at least in approximation, in the limit, isomorphic to a Maxwellian view. They must exert lateral pressure depending on lateral compression. They must exert longitudinal tension. Two flux tubes in parallel must repel, i.e. exert lateral pressure on each other. It is this pressure that extends flux tubes out into a macro environment in permanent magnets. About a wire, the flux tubes must be stretched in thin lateral loops, each half parallel for the lateral extension, that "cancel" in effect everywhere but where the loop reverses direction out in space near the wire, creating the appearance of circular fields around the wire. It is interesting that if flux tubes are a real thing that the magnetic field about a wire should be grainey at some level, and that it should advance longitudinally with the electrons in the wire. The A of the flux tube exists in a real sense in a real location in the orbital or spinning charge field that creates the flux tube. Two flux tubes in parallel, but in opposite directions, must tend to stretch each other longitudinally. Adjacent tubes on an angle other than parallel will tend to rotate into parallel and identical directions. The fields of attracting magnets superimpose. This superposition is caused by the tendency of flux tubes to stretch and rotate until they are parallel, a kind of zipper effect. Despite the interaction that normally prevents it, it appears flux tubes can pass through each other and themselves. With no other flux tubes around, a flux tube will expand laterally. In it's initial configuration the flux tube is a torus, with the spinning charge inside. This is a complex model and I can see why it was abandoned. But I wonder if there is some now missing key to understanding in the model? > >Is superposition violated in your magnet experiment? Not literally. If you add the vector fields you get the resulting field. However, I think the issue is really the momentum exchange. The permanent magnetic fields, or electromagnetic fields, can not pass though each other without momentum and/or angular momentum exchange. If photon magnetic fields could do this we would see reflecting collisions, and polarisation shifts in photon-photon interaction. Does this happen? Polarizaion rotation etc. requires fields attched to charged articles. Strange isn't it? It's like the magnetic fields in the photon are different from those attached to charged particles. >Why does the >array of horizontally magnetized magnets, position itself the same >distance away as does the same array of vertically polarized magnets. >If you start to draw flux lines, it doesn't seem to work. However, >if you ignore flux lines and do a geometry superposition, it does >seem to work. Put your hand over all of the north poles or all of >the south poles. The geometry of each half looks the same as the >geometry of the other array of magnets. With two pairs of poles you have 6 interactions, and by the above process you seem to be ignoring the 2 attracting combinations between the two separate magnets. > >> Slot >> | >> v >> >> | | >> | | >> |NS| >> |NS| >> |NS| >> |NS| >> | | >> | | >> | | >> | | <---- flux tube interface? >> | | >> | | >> | | >> |NS| >> |NS| >> |NS| >> |NS| >> >> Fig, 1 Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 09:28:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA29813; Fri, 29 May 1998 09:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 09:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0949 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superposition magnetic fields? Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 09:00:46 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"stfUl.0.iH7.Z2kRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19327 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace The magnetic fields B and H vectors do superimpose. They add vectorially. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 1998 12:17 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re:Superposition magnetic fields? > > Simplifying my question: > > EM waves are said to superposition. The fields comprizing the EM > waves > thus superposition. Magnetic fields are part of EM waves. Magnetic > fields > do not in all cases superposition, otherwise the top magnet in the > slot in > Fig. 1 would fall, it's field adding to the bottom magnet's field. > This > doesn't happen. How is it that the magnetic components of EM waves > superposition when static magnetic fields do not? > > > > Slot > | > v > > | | > | | > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > | | > | | > | | > | | <---- flux tube interface? > | | > | | > | | > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > |NS| > > > Fig, 1 > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 11:32:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA28709; Fri, 29 May 1998 11:20:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:20:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:38:52 +0100 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: re: magnetic shield Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"p37nh.0.H07.5nlRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19328 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Vo, Imagine I have a magnetic shielding material like mu-metal or better a superconductor, imagine I have an uniform field and I move the said material along the equipotential lines, how much energy is expended doing that? Imagine now I have a radial magnetic field like between a loudspeaker's magnets and the voice coil. In the gap I insert a slotted shield, of said material, like a 'squirrel cage' of an induction motor and spin it. Forgetting friction etc. what stops it from turning - is their a magnetic braking effect? If not, on the outside of the shield, the flux is being modulated... Let the flux cross a pickup coil... Where's the catch? Personally, I'm skeptical about the idea but would like to give it a go - with mu-metal at least. Don't have the facilities for superconductors though. Will look into analysis of it. Obviously, if field lines such that it causes any force component to act circumferially, work will be done. Incidently, if you were moving along an equipotential line with the superconductor and you experienced some kind of braking force you would be aware of absolute motion, no? So can there be a braking force? Puzzling ain't it? I'm sure I've got something wrong here. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 11:34:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA01303; Fri, 29 May 1998 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 08:56:46 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: magnetic shield Resent-Message-ID: <"O41aE.0.CK.2vlRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19330 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:03 AM 5/29/98, Cornwall RO wrote: >Vo, > >Sorry I've been away for a bit making some money. > >I've got a question for you, should you care to answer. Imagine I have a >magnetic shielding material like mu-metal or better a superconductor, >imagine I have an uniform field and I move the said material along the >equipotential lines, how much energy is expended do that? None - except for eddy currents. > >Imagine now I have a radial magnetic field like between a loudspeaker's >magnets and the voice coil. In the gap I insert a slotted shield like a >'squirrel cage' of an induction motor and spin it. Forgetting friction >etc. what stops it from turning - is their a magnetic braking effect? It is practically imposible to create a field that is gradient free inside the volume of the moving conductor. Therefore you get eddy currents which, by Lenz, will oppose the motion of the fields creating them. This is simply an efficiency problem. > >If not on the outside of the shield, the flux is being modulated... Insert >a pickup coil... Where's the catch? The current generated in the pickup coil creates a magnetic field that opposes the field change, and thus creates a force that opposes the motion of the "shield", which itself is a magnet. Energy is conserved, as is the second law - unless you can figure out one of those "pointed magnet preferential heat exchange" schemes. 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 12:13:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA09984; Fri, 29 May 1998 12:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:11:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:02:26 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Wharton on heat-after-death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zeyUI2.0.vR2.WXmRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19331 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 29 May 1998, Larry Wharton wrote: > This information comes from informed sources and the experiment has been > replicated at different laboratories. It is not expected that a public > announcement with all the details be made because the experiments were made > by believers and it conclusively proved that they were wrong. If believers spread rumors that secret CF experiments are successful, then other believers will accept it as further evidence supporting CF. Skeptics will reject it as groundless rumors and 'urban legends' told 3rd-hand, instead demanding hard data and claimants' names. If skeptics spread rumors that secret CF experiments prove it was all a measurement artifact, then other skeptics will accept it as evidence disproving CF. Believers will reject it as groundless rumors and 'urban legends' told 3rd-hand, instead demanding hard data and claimants' names. I say, why not reject all "secret" experiments as the self-serving rumors that they are? Only publicized, non-secret experiments should be taken seriously, no matter how strongly the "secret" ones might support our positions, be they pro-CF or anti-CF. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If our side takes rumors seriously, we have no right to complain when the other side does the same. If we feel disgust at double standards held by others, we should strive to eliminate double standards of our own. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Fri May 29 12:21:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA10456; Fri, 29 May 1998 12:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356F0867.2071A80B gorge.net> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 12:11:35 -0700 From: tom gorge.net (Tom Miller) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lightning References: <199805291527.IAA16567 mx2.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9GiH31.0.DZ2.RZmRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19332 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This talks about a pattern in lightning storms just prior to tornadoes (vortices): http://www.newsday.com/ap/rnmpwh02.htm Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 14:45:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA12383; Fri, 29 May 1998 14:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:27:53 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wharton on heat-after-death Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805291732_MC2-3E99-B12B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"uNCsb2.0.I13.-doRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19333 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; Larry Wharton >INTERNET:wharton climate.gsfc.nasa.gov Larry Wharton writes: I believe that in most of the heat after death events the palladium rods were loaded in a liquid but are in a gas during the heat after death. Since the calibration is done in the liquid cell stage it certainly does not apply to a gas phase. The only people who did that, as far as I know, were Pons and Fleischmann. They calibrated and modeled for both phases, as described in their papers. I believe they also saw heat-after-death in their boiling liquid phase cell with the condenser. The actual removal of the rods from the cell is irrelevant. Yes, irrelevant, impossible, and it didn't happen. The important fact is that the rods are in a gas as opposed to a liquid and there has been no calorimetry done for the gas phase. But of course it is done. Why shouldn't it be? I do recall a report in Infinite Energy by Jed claiming that Mizuno had actually removed a loaded palladium rod from the cell and placed it in another container in which the heat after death was observed. That is incorrect. He never did. Regarding the claim that a "CETI like" systems "have been put into closed insulated containers" Wharton reports: This information comes from informed sources and the experiment has been replicated at different laboratories. Uh huh. Well . . . if you cannot give me any names or particulars, I cannot believe it. As a journalist I must have verifiable facts, names, telephone numbers . . . I cannot take anyone's word for a report. Please understand, you would not want to read a magazine or a newspaper in which the reporters swallow a story without checking or asking questions. I am sorry, but I do not buy vague, anonymous reports of physically impossible phenomena. That is why I categorically reject reports of magic magnet motors. I think someone is pulling your leg, Larry. As a matter of fact, the public would be shocked if it knew how often reporters at big-name news organizations *do* report stories without bothering with background checks and verification. It is a scandal. Some reporters are lazy and gullible. Not me though! It is not expected that a public announcement with all the details be made because the experiments were made by believers and it conclusively proved that they were wrong. Now I *know* someone is pulling your leg! I am in contact with every major "believer" who would bother to run a test of this nature. I am sure they would have informed me if they had done a test like this and gotten a negative results. Most "believers" consider themselves CETI's rivals and would be thrilled with this result. They would plaster it all over Internet and write a six-page report in I.E. After the Power Gen 95 CETI Demo it was obvious that the entire system was not heating up commensurate with the supposed power generation. Nope, it wasn't. Every measure and ever simulation performed showed conclusively that the cell was heating up the expected amount. Mitchell Jones performed detailed tests with similar device, and he agreed with me. He 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 is absurd to suppose that the flow rate measurement could have been sufficiently in error to account for all of the excess*. . . . 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 The logical next step was to place the entire system in an insulated container and measure the temperature rise. This experiment was done at two or more independent laboratories with CETI like cells producing large apparent excess heat. Impossible! You are claiming that flow calorimetry does not work. This has nothing to with cold fusion per se. These experiments were done and then kept secret as they disproved the excess heat claims. I know very few details about them and would like to know more myself. I had hoped that Jed would investigate himself and find out some more details. But then again, it most likely would be a waist of time. LOL! You mean a waste of time. How the hell could I investigate it? Somewhere in the world, some unnamed person has performed a secret ill-defined test that yielded impossible results, and you hope *I* have investigated it?!? Don't be ridiculous. How could I even know about it? By ESP, or remote viewing? Talk about impossible challenges!!! You know that I never heard about this before today, but you want us to believe you hoped I investigated it? Give us a break! I think you are kidding. If you were serious you would tell us names, addresses, dates etc. Because after all, these results support your point of view, so why are *you* keeping them secret? Did the researchers force you to sign a non-disclosure agreement? Did you take part in the work? I suppose it is possible that a disappointed group of researchers wish to keep this work secret, but why should you honor their wishes? I can just imagine a future posting from Jed: I have spoken with Dennis Cravens and have been assured that there have been no secret experiments done in which an entire working CETI system has been placed in an insulated container and the secular temperature increase with time indicated zero excess heat production. I would guess that Wharton is either imagining this or lying about it. It is unacceptable and very bad form for Wharton to be fantasizing about these non-existent experiments. Secular temperature? I take it this experiment was not performed in a monastery. I am beginning to think this is a fantasy. It sounds like one. Fantasy or not, you cannot expect people to believe such tales without corroborating evidence: names, dates, specifics. Even these specifics would not be enough. Extraordinary claims call for data, videos, actual demonstrations. Wharton, Swartz and others who dispute me here claim that standard flow calorimetry techniques do not work. If they could prove these extraordinary assertions, or if this mysterious hidden group of disappointed scientists would reveal their miraculous work, these people would become world-famous overnight. I must have heard two dozen tales about equally preposterous things like magic magnet machines and anti-gravity machines. People have brought antigravity machines to Gene's lab. A guy showed up at my office last month and swore that he had one in his garage and he would bring it "in a few days" to show me. These people never follow through, and no sane person would believe them without physical proof. You may be lying or you may not be. I cannot judge. But you make it look like a lie with these absurd statements about a secret experiment (why should *you* keep it secret!?!) and about how you expected me to magically know about this and investigate it. You are going out of your way to make it difficult for people to believe you. We cannot check your facts. If you are telling the truth, you are doing it in such a way as to hurt your own credibility, and to ensure that nobody takes you seriously. And if you are lying I would advise you not to get a job on Wall Street, because you have no talent for deception. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 15:02:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA04481; Fri, 29 May 1998 14:59:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 14:59:20 -0700 Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:51:31 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Wharton on heat-after-death Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805291753_MC2-3E91-3953 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"qaQAm3.0.J51.s-oRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19334 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex William Beaty writes: I say, why not reject all "secret" experiments as the self-serving rumors that they are? Amen. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If our side takes rumors seriously . . . . . . we are fools. I never have. Forget rumors, I do not buy a large fraction of the official papers published in proceedings. You would be amazed how many reports of CF heat, transmutation, and whatnot I have never cited and I do not take seriously. I do not attack these papers, I ignore them. They are irrelevant. A poorly done paper by Professor A does not detract from brilliant work by Professor B. Prof. B is not responsible for A's performance. The only times I report shockingly bad results or null results are when the author has disappointed me or mother nature has pulled a fast one. That is why I discussed Yamaguchi's failure to replicate his own NTT experiments at IMRA. If Prof. A failed to replicate Yamaguchi, but the experts had told me Prof. A did a lousy job, that is not newsworthy. (With an experiment like Yamaguchi's I must depend upon other people's evaluations because I do not have enough knowledge to judge for myself. This makes me very nervous.) Mizuno said the same thing about reports of transmutations at ILENR2: "There were no penetrating questions expressing doubt about the truth of these surprising results. . . . few people questioned whether transmutation really did occur. The results were taken for granted, as if they were an expected, natural extension to earlier cold fusion findings. In some of the talks the measurement conditions were not clear, or the treatments to exclude contamination were not described adequately . . ." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 15:31:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22014; Fri, 29 May 1998 15:23:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:23:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006601bd8b4f$cdb4d720$678cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: ARC Takes College High-Tech (http://www.jlab.org/news/articles/deuteron.html) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:18:37 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0020_01BD8B1D.6FA775C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"JpZRv2.0.rN5.mLpRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19335 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0020_01BD8B1D.6FA775C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jefferson Labs on Deuteron structure. http://www.jlab.org/news/articles/deuteron.html ------=_NextPart_000_0020_01BD8B1D.6FA775C0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="ARC Takes College High-Tech.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ARC Takes College High-Tech.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.jlab.org/news/articles/deuteron.html Modified=2004DD914F8BBD012A ------=_NextPart_000_0020_01BD8B1D.6FA775C0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 15:43:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA15310; Fri, 29 May 1998 15:39:36 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:39:36 -0700 Message-ID: <356F371A.779D skylink.net> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:30:50 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superposition magnetic fields? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7rgjc1.0.ik3.WapRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19336 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > It seems strange that the interacting, momentum exchange, with photons > requires a net charge, a particle attached to a field. Can a photon only interact with a charge carrier? I don't think so. I believe photons must interact with the fields of other photons. Here are some possible quandries. 1. The Faraday effect. A vertically polarized photon is rotated by a magnetic field. Angular momentum is exchanged with the magnetic field. One might argue that the momentum is exchanged with the mass which generates the field -- and it is. But from the perspecitive of field theory, or from the quantum perspective the interaction occurs at the photon's location. Interaction with what? The only thing there is the fields, or the quanta of the fields. 2. In a transmission line you can create an effective open or short circuit with a tuned stub of 1/4 or 1/2 wavelength. This standing wave in the tuned stub has a peak or a zero at the junction of the stub. The travelling wave in the main guide interacts with the wave generated by the stub, and is completely reflected at the junction. You have a wave completely reflected by the action of another wave, or you could view it as self-interaction. In either view there is clearly a momentum transfer occuring at the junction. If you believe that superposition of EM waves always valid in a linear system, and that EM waves only have transverse components. The travelling wave in the main guide should not care about what the wave in the stub is doing. Yet it does. The answer lies in the longitudinal wave components. 3. Circularly polarized photons are quantums always with spin 1. You can not directly superpose two spacially in-phase circular photons to create more spin with the same photon structure at the same point in space. 4. Tired photon models, and theories of massive electrodynamics. A photon with a longitudinal field has a small but finite rest mass. In theory these photons can interact. In theory they also lose energy during propagation -- hence, red shifted. > To advance, any wave requires some kind of longitudinal component, doesn't > it? Otherwise it must sit in place. Well yes. I surely believe this. Unfortunately the conventional model of a popagating EM field consists only of transverse fields. > I wish I hand't brought up flux tubes, Me too. > The permanent > magnetic fields, or electromagnetic fields, can not pass though each other > without momentum and/or angular momentum exchange. If photon magnetic > fields could do this we would see reflecting collisions, and polarisation > shifts in photon-photon interaction. Does this happen? Polarizaion > rotation etc. requires fields attched to charged articles. Strange isn't > it? It's like the magnetic fields in the photon are different from those > attached to charged particles. The idea of photon-photon interaction is not unheard of. Please see references in separate vortex message sent along with this one. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 15:45:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA24922; Fri, 29 May 1998 15:41:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:41:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <356F3725.49A4 skylink.net> Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:31:01 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Photon-Photon Interaction Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"4ThUt3.0.B56.YcpRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19337 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Do EM fields act on themselves? Copied below are some snips from an alta-vista web search under the words "photon photon interaction". I am sure many more articles such as these will show up on a search of the LANL physics pre-print server. First, an intriguing link with a question about photon-photon interaction. Oddly enough, it is appears to be from someone at the Whitehouse..... http://cres1.lancs.ac.uk/~esarie/msgs/messages/msgs4338.html Question posed by robert (robert whitehouse.gov) on Tue Aug 22 1995. Are Gluons responsible for photon-photon interaction, and if so, how did they cross the c-boundary? ... Unfortunately the links to the question and suggested answer are no longer active. There is one active link, which if you read Dutch might be interesting. ========================================================== Snipped from -- http://wings.buffalo.edu/SBF/S.html SEED Self Electroöptical Effect Device. My sloppy notes say this was invented by Dave Miller at ATT in about 1981. The device is essentially a p-i-n diode in which light controls the electric field configuration and thus the light absorption, leading to much larger nonlinear optic effects than one would get from direct photon-photon interaction, or even from local electron-mediated photon-photon interaction. ============================================================ Snipped from -- http://fysrg.fys.ruu.nl/cas/1995/sap-40.htm Author M Braun Title The photon-photon interaction at low x in the theory of reggeized gluons with a running coupling and N-c- >infinity Source Phys Lett B 357: 1-2 (AUG 31 1995) Page(s) 138-144 Abstract The forward elastic amplitude for scattering of real and weakly virtual photons is studied in the framework of the theory of reggeized gluons, with large N-c and a running coupling constant introduced in the manner which preserves the bootstrap condition. Transition from a single to multiple pomeron exchanges is observed as x gets smaller. For very low x the amplitude acquires an eikonal form. The photon structure function reveals a strong violation of scaling: it grows as Q(2). As a function of x it behaves as (ln(1/x)ln ln(1/x))(2). Correspondingly the cross-section for physical photons grows with energy as (ln s ln In s)(2). Hadronic structure functions and cross-sections are also briefly discussed. ================================================================= Snipped from -- http://info.desy.de/pub/preprints/hep-ph/9308/00index.html Paper: hep-ph/9308293 From: "M. Hossein Partovi" Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 12:13:20 PDT (8kb) DETECTING THE PHOTON-PHOTON INTERACTION BY COLLIDING LASER BEAM INTERFEROMETRY, by M. Hossein Partovi, 10 pages, Revtex 3.0. ================================================================== Snipped from -- http://www-dapnia.cea.fr/Publications/Spp/spp92.html DAPNIA/SPP92-04 Summary of the ECFA linear collider working group on beamstrahlung and photon-photon interaction. - W. Kozanecki [ Show_Paper (108Kb)] ================================================================= Snipped from -- http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/SQO/research.html Giant Kerr nonlinearities: Observation of quantum effects in optics relies on the existence of strong dissipation-free nonlinear interactions between photons. We have recently invented a new atomic scheme which exhibits two-photon absorption limited giant Kerr nonlinearities. The elimination of single-photon loss by an electromagnetically induced transparency increases the available nonlinear phase shift by as much as 10 orders-of-magnitude. We are interested in an experimental demonstration of this enhancement in atomic vapors as well as pursuing implementations in semiconductors and doped fibers. When such a resonant dissipation-free nonlinear medium is placed inside a high-finesse optical cavity, the photon-photon interaction strength easily exceeds the cavity decay rate and the linewidth of the driving field. We have recently shown that the optical cavity-mode in this limit is well- described by a spin-1/2 Hamiltonian. Among the new concepts that follow this analogy are $\pi$-pulses for photons that switch the state of the cavity with arbitrary accuracy and realization of a single-photon pump. ================================================================ Snipped from -- http://www.agora.demon.co.uk/relmech.txt There are, however, many other and additional possible explanations for the "red-shift" of starlight, including light ray interaction with interstellar matter; photon-photon interactions (See "Non-velocity redshifts and photon-photon interaction" by J.C. Pecker, A.P. Roberts and J-P. Vigier in Nature 237, [1972] pp. 227-9); ================================================================= Snipped from -- http://l3www.cern.ch/analysis/wpage/egl3info.document EGPJ: Program PHOJET Author: SR.Engel Description: This generator simulates hadronic two-photon collisions. The generator is using the ideas of the Dual Parton Model (DPM) combined with perturbative QCD to give an almost complete figure of the photon-photon interaction in e+e- athigh energies. The DPM provides a well developed basic scheme for the simulation of high energy hadronic interactions. The model relates the free parameters necessary to describe the cross-sections directly to multiparticle production and connects both soft and hard subprocesses by an unitarization scheme. Multiple soft and hard interactions are characteristic features of the model. ============================================================= Snipped from -- http://ais.towson.edu/~dan/the-farc.txt Arp[110] has discovered observational evidence of galaxies joined by luminous bridges that have completely different red shifts, thereby casting doubt on the assumption that the red shift is a Doppler effect. Pecker et al.[111] have presented a photon-photon interaction theory that explains the red shift as an energy loss in which the lost energy goes into a soft photon pair. 110.News,Physics Today,25(2),17(1972). 111.J.C.Pecker,A.P.Roberts,J.P.Vigier,Nature,237,227(1972); Editorial,p.193. ============================================================== From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 15:56:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22432; Fri, 29 May 1998 15:53:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:53:39 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980529185211.007ce6e0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:52:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Wharton on heat-after-death In-Reply-To: <199805291732_MC2-3E99-B12B compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"_rSiQ.0.BU5.jnpRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19338 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:27 PM 5/29/98 -0400, Jed wrote: > Wharton, Swartz and others who dispute me here claim that >standard flow calorimetry techniques do not work. Wrong. VERTICAL FLOW CALORIMETRY may produce errors at low flow IF there is Bernard instability, AND if the simplified equation is used without accounting for the other factor. [Also there is no substitute for thermal waveform reconstruction and other methods of calibration for such calorimeters.] Simple English, yes? Please stop stating incorrectly what is said, Jed, in those published papers. We have been through this enough times to avoid any disingenuous misstatement. Thank you for your consideration on this. Dr. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 16:21:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA02623; Fri, 29 May 1998 16:16:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:16:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980529191259.007d8b50 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 19:12:59 -0400 To: "Vortex-L" , From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: deuteron structure In-Reply-To: <006601bd8b4f$cdb4d720$678cbfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"u7IDi3.0.te.07qRr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19340 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:18 PM 5/29/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Jefferson Labs on Deuteron structure. > >http://www.jlab.org/news/articles/deuteron.html > >Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\ARC Takes College High-Tech.url" > Not much there on deuteron structure, but those interested might also try (in addition to the considerable literature on this), Swartz, M., 1996, "Possible Deuterium Production >From Light water excess enthalpy experiments using Nickel Cathodes", Journal of New Energy, 3, 68-80 (1996) which discusses and reviews the deuteron structure and its excited nuclear states. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 16:49:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA08729; Fri, 29 May 1998 16:47:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:47:14 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8B31.DD8B6380 pm3-139.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: Superluminal? Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 18:44:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAB08681 Resent-Message-ID: <"YJA7g1.0.C82._ZqRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19341 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello all: Since there has been talk of scalar waves recently, I thought I'd add something. Whenever I hear of something that is postulated to transmit scalar waves, I hear that they propagate at superluminal velocity. The same thing for "curl-free A" (what is this? ). What is it that is supposed to make such wave propagate at greater than c? Kyle R. mcallister Email: stk sunherald.infi.net Phone: 228-875-0629 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri May 29 22:02:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA01940; Fri, 29 May 1998 22:00:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 22:00:18 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: Robert Stirniman Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 23:04:26 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <356F3725.49A4 skylink.net> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: electrodynamics & longitudinal wave etc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"UwfIK.0.7U.X9vRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19342 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 29-May-98, Robert Stirniman wrote: >Do EM fields act on themselves? ---Big Snip--- I want second Mike Carrols suggestion that Harold Aspdens theories deserve to be considered. He covers these questions at length and has developed an internally consistant theory that answers many of these questions and gives accurate predictions for all the physical constants. He also derives G in terms of the charge mass ratio of the electron thus uniting gravity and electrodynamics. I have only recently received his publications and begun to study his work. There is however, a lot of information on his website: http://www.energyscience.co.uk/ There is a lot of opinion to wade through in his writing to get to the ideas but I find the effort is very worthwhile. Hard core relativity fans will probably have a hard time with Dr. Aspdens theory. ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 02:06:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA30578; Sat, 30 May 1998 02:03:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 02:03:53 -0700 Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 02:03:55 -0700 Message-Id: <199805300903.CAA00727 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: Re: Superluminal? Resent-Message-ID: <"hM2vM1.0.iT7.ujyRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19343 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Hello all: > >Since there has been talk of scalar waves recently, I thought I'd add something. Whenever I hear of something that is postulated to transmit scalar waves, I hear that they propagate at superluminal velocity. The same thing for "curl-free A" (what is this?). What is it that is supposed to make such wave propagate at greater than c? > Transverse Waves on the ocean travel at about a meter per second. we see them wash up on shore. Sound, or compression waves, in water travel at 1,500 m/s. If the universe is an ocean of aether, and EM are transverse waves, and if there exist compression waves or longitudinal waves, then they should travel much faster. It is possible they will travel at just sqrt(3) faster, or it is possible they may travel very much faster. This would be known if we knew the properties of the aether more precisely. Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 03:33:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28970; Fri, 29 May 1998 16:14:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 16:14:05 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980529191251.007dacb0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 19:12:51 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Wharton on heat-after-death Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"iQTaJ2.0.G47.w4qRr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19339 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: sent the last without refs. Sorry. At 05:27 PM 5/29/98 -0400, Jed wrote: > Wharton, Swartz and others who dispute me here claim that >standard flow calorimetry techniques do not work. This is wrong. VERTICAL FLOW CALORIMETRY may produce errors at low flow IF there is Bernard instability, AND if the simplified equation is used without accounting for the other factor. [Also there is no substitute for thermal waveform reconstruction and other methods of calibration for such calorimeters.] The references are: Swartz, M.,1996, "Potential for Positional Variation in Flow Calorimetric Systems", Journal of New Energy, 1, 126-130 (1996) Swartz, M., 1996, "Improved Calculations involving Energy Release Using a Buoyancy Transport Correction", Journal of New Energy, 3, 219-221 (1996) Simple English, yes? Please stop stating incorrectly what is said, Jed, in those published papers. We have been through this enough times to avoid any disingenuous misstatement. Thank you for your consideration on this. Dr. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 03:37:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA05454; Sat, 30 May 1998 03:36:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 03:36:18 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805300903.CAA00727 Au.oro.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 00:35:29 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Wave propagation (was: Superluminal?) Resent-Message-ID: <"DLUwk.0.3L1.W4-Rr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19344 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Ross - > Transverse Waves on the ocean travel at about > a meter per second. we see them wash up on > shore. Sound, or compression waves, in water > travel at 1,500 m/s. If the universe is an > ocean of aether, and EM are transverse waves, > and if there exist compression waves or > longitudinal waves, then they should travel > much faster. What's the deal with the leading wave of a water wave train disappearing and then reappearing at the tail end? Does this happen with EM? Aether? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 07:09:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA28133; Sat, 30 May 1998 07:07:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 07:07:44 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8BA8.4D857380 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superluminal? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:50:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8BA8.4D857380" Resent-Message-ID: <"pC0IL1.0.Ut6.lA1Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19345 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BA8.4D857380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Ross Tessien[SMTP:tessien oro.net] Sent: Saturday, May 30, 1998 4:03 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal? >Transverse Waves on the ocean travel at about a meter per second. we = see >them wash up on shore. Sound, or compression waves, in water travel at >1,500 m/s. If the universe is an ocean of aether, and EM are = transverse >waves, and if there exist compression waves or longitudinal waves, then = they >should travel much faster. It is possible they will travel at just = sqrt(3) >faster, or it is possible they may travel very much faster. This would = be >known if we knew the properties of the aether more precisely. But to measure if we had something that could travel that fast, we'd = need to have a millisecond counter (for 200mi separation or transmitter = and reciever).=20 About the aether/ether/etc.: I find that it makes more sense (and fits = the experimental facts) to assume that an ether exists. The question is: = how do we prove it? Any ideas? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BA8.4D857380 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IigNAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABABIAAABSRTogU3Vw ZXJsdW1pbmFsPwAxBgEFgAMADgAAAM4HBQAeAAgAMgA2AAYAbgEBIIADAA4AAADOBwUAHgAIAC8A DgAGAEMBAQmAAQAhAAAAMzk4MUE3Nzk5QUY3RDExMUE3NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAAFAcBA5AGAHgF AAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAuAAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQDgDUT30Yu9 AR4AcAABAAAAEgAAAFJFOiBTdXBlcmx1bWluYWw/AAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2L0fc8pM1Xgvea EdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxk LmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQWIorbgMABxAsAwAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006Uk9T U1RFU1NJRU5TTVRQOlRFU1NJRU5AT1JPTkVUU0VOVDpTQVRVUkRBWSxNQVkzMCwxOTk4NDowM0FN VE86Vk9SVEVYLUxARVNLSU1PQ09NU1VCSgAAAAACAQkQAQAAAO0DAADpAwAAvwcAAExaRnWBlDj9 /wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV /3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7wZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMML WTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e5wqHHZsMMPUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIH8R0EEVQHkACQCfBbU01YVFA6HpAk E0AFsG/0Lm4SAF0fjyCdBmACMBchzyLbBhB0CHBkYXlGLAXQKkAgMzAqYDHAOTk4IDQ6GTATcGZN Jc8gnVRvKA8i23ZBFaFleC1sQAeQazcHcCVgBaBtK88m3nVibmoeoS3vItxlM2Ay8HDbBJAKQG0L gAdAPxrvG/NsMzYdZxo5PjftLUdyjQBxdgSQEfAgV2E64CMEIAIgIHRoOyBvY/plA5F0OqA64AMg KfA80PUG4HU88SAHgB6QBcA1oQYgEfAFoG5kLiAg9nc7IBHwZTD9OG85fzvCwm0+sGFzaCA1kDuS 60KwBbBlPpFTCGA+cCpg/wWxMMEeYCQCO6FCkDthKmB/C4BCgT2yPHc/L0A/OZ4xTCw1HGA9gC9z PpFJ9mY7w0PgaTrkBAA80AOgtTwUb0qgYRIAO+ByKmDhAHBkIEVNPNAWADxi/zrFRr9HzzmeRSVN AgaQO8L/TYEwAAQABUBEb0QiFZAZAHppKgBkNgJFFjvRO7N5z05fT285nkNBdWxNIDx15G11EbAg ZkKgPbFKYusFQEuRcCOxaQJgTZFWAU8+sAMQAyA8eGp1UuFz4nEAICgzKVY/V085nv9ahEQTVKBb Pz2AKpE8dTrhU2LxWktUaEuRd1lzYodOT18PYB9rbm93A6B/UiE+wWjgB9E70h5hNaF0/wiQO4FK pEyEPYBDYWohBZDzBAA8sHkuNs8dZxLyAdCTG0xmTyBCPUF0bz2Bv0KgCHBLcWlTEcBNIHMDcPtM kQuAZzvBPOEFoFmJcuP3WoIqYD7AJ00gJYAJgHDi/xHAOuA9YlxhbFE+UnMiAjDdPcEoAhAFwAHQ MDXwPiH/bvEp8ETiBbFNszXwAkA9wWtNAmwiZTrhKT6QNlxBSz0jaxgvfAZjLjNgSb9acAuAWaFy 8mHRAMBrB5Fva8MR8ACAOyAoTQIckHT/BCA70jAANaEHcQIwVQFagPkesHMpcOJCoHFQB4By1L8D kWtkUrNKUWTwOyBxClC/UuBE4gQAM2BDUAfgZHEArz7BHmF1oVSgPxNwbiqgTmkNsEKgNk1LeVvR Uvk+kE1jB0B2IT2xbsUVIQIAiOAAAAADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAHMGDJ63PRi70BQAAIMGDJ 63PRi70BHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAAHi0 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BA8.4D857380-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 07:30:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA31932; Sat, 30 May 1998 07:29:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 07:29:14 -0700 Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 10:24:39 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Britz: Miley's table top fusion machine Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805301027_MC2-3EA3-D558 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"JTuew3.0.qo7.vU1Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19346 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:rmforall earthlink.net; >INTERNET:britz@kemi.aau.dk Rich Murray cross posted comments by Dieter Britz regarding the Farnsworth Fusor: Someone named Philo Farnsworth apparently thought of something like this 40 years ago. He did not "think of" something "like this." He invented the device and built it. Farnsworth was a famous U.S. industrial scientist. He invented television, among other things. Working at ITT, he succeeded in making the fusor self-sustaining for short periods. That is: he made it over-unity, the holy grail of CF and hot fusion. His reward was predictable. His funding was cut off, he was forced out the company, harassed, and driven to an early death. This is one of the few well-documented examples of deliberate, cold-blooded suppression of a new energy technology. Cold fusion is another, although most of the suppression has been done by the people who invented it. G. Vassilatos wrote a superb article about this, "The Farnsworth Fusor: the Most Notably Forgotten Episode in 'Hot' Fusion History." I do not think he ever published it, but he might have incorporated it in a book. He describes the sickening end to the story, and the ignominious death of one America's greatest scientists: In quick successions, ITT asserted its complete ownership of all Fusor applications in the future. ITT warned Farnsworth that it would dominate all Fusor research forever...despite its "unfeasibility". ITT then cut all formal financial ties with Farnsworth and left him virtually bankrupt. ITT now holds the Farnsworth patents...and bears the social debt of responsibility for suppressing Fusor technology. In July 1969 Farnsworth built a small Fusor lab in a Brigham Young University cellar room. With purchased equipment from ITT he continued his research with generous University support. Creditors were crowding him on every side. During this time an offer came to him from SONY. He felt unable to continue. Physically ill for a long time and emotionally scarred, he died from pneumonia in 1971. Britz adds: What with all the commercial applications this device has, I don't see why Miley is fiddling with anything else, like transmutation, which is highly questionable, whereas this thing is real science/engineering. A despicable comment. Miley's transmutation and excess heat results are also real. Britz and his ilk have never found any real reason to doubt that. Miley's Farnsworth replication is valuable, but his CF excess heat and transmutation results are revolutionary. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 08:13:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08292; Sat, 30 May 1998 08:10:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:10:34 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: "Kyle R. Mcallister" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 09:14:35 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <01BD8BA8.4D857380 oemcomputer> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: RE: Superluminal? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"DU5Rw.0.Q12.e52Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19347 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister comments on Ross Tessien post Subject: Re: Superluminal? If you are interested in a proposed Aether structure again I suggest that you take a look at Dr. Harold Aspden's work. http://www.energyscience.co.uk/ ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 08:19:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA16404; Sat, 30 May 1998 08:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:17:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 16:14:57 +0100 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: magnetic shield In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Dmp-M2.0.704.pB2Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19348 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Fri, 29 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > None - except for eddy currents. I don't see how. It's travelling along an equipotential, it cuts no flux lines. How can current be induced in it. I shall check Maxwell's equations. > >Imagine now I have a radial magnetic field like between a loudspeaker's > >magnets and the voice coil. In the gap I insert a slotted shield like a > >'squirrel cage' of an induction motor and spin it. Forgetting friction > >etc. what stops it from turning - is their a magnetic braking effect? > > > It is practically imposible to create a field that is gradient free inside > the volume of the moving conductor. Therefore you get eddy currents which, > by Lenz, will oppose the motion of the fields creating them. This is > simply an efficiency problem. > A practical test, does a superconductor in a long solenoid experience a breaking force? The currents induced are parallel to the surface so that the counterfield is at rt. angs to it. How can it be doing work as it moves along an equipotential? > > > > >If not on the outside of the shield, the flux is being modulated... Insert > >a pickup coil... Where's the catch? > > The current generated in the pickup coil creates a magnetic field that > opposes the field change, and thus creates a force that opposes the motion > of the "shield", which itself is a magnet. Energy is conserved, as is the > second law - unless you can figure out one of those "pointed magnet > preferential heat exchange" schemes. 8^) > Right about the coil, wrong about it affecting the shield - how does it 'know' that the shield is there? I think the current induced in the pickup circuit would oppose field changes and so CofE still works, no? > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > Er, no more pointedness, unless I'm wound up. *Might* by able to email vo from work, if I can get out of the corporate LAN's firewall. Otherwise into college after hours. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 08:19:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA16610; Sat, 30 May 1998 08:18:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:18:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 10:15:40 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805301515.KAA18383 dfw-ix10.ix.netcom.com> From: rwall ix.netcom.com (Richard Wayne Wall) Subject: Re: Britz: Miley's table top fusion machine To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"rgQrD1.0.S34.uC2Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19349 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You wrote: > Someone named Philo Farnsworth apparently thought of something >like this 40 years ago. >He did not "think of" something "like this." He invented the device >and built it. Farnsworth was a famous U.S. industrial scientist. He >invented television, among other things. Working at ITT, he succeeded >in making the fusor self-sustaining for short periods. That is: he >made it over-unity, the >holy grail of CF and hot fusion. Totally untrue Jed. Inertial confinement fusors are far from overunity in Farnsworths time and today. They are around 0.1% efficent. Farnsworth never claimed they were O/U. Not only does Miley continue this research, but Bousard and Hull are actively engaged at current time. Richard Hull has produced an excellent two hour video on this type of fusion and Farnsworth. He has spent a great deal of time interviewing those on Farnsworth's team and his wife and has rendered an accurate and indepth historical account. Your accounting of ITT's role is also highly inaccurate. It fits the usual paranoia of business that some on this list espouse in knee jerk fashion. When Farnsworth went nuclear, ITT decided not to get into the nuclear energy business. They just backed away. They did not suppress Farnsworth. Farnsworth is the "Father of Television". David Sarnoff and CBS (not ITT) stole much of what Farnsworth had invented. Farnsworth was eventually vendicated by the courts, but at a huge toll on his health. He suffered many of the later years of his life from depression and alcoholism. All the experts here would do well to get a copy of Mrs. Farnsworth's book and Richard Hull's video. Also, there is a web site devoted to Farnsworth and fusors. RWW >His reward was predictable. His >funding was cut >off, he was forced out the company, harassed, and driven to an early death. >This is one of the few well-documented examples of deliberate, cold-blooded >suppression of a new energy technology. Cold fusion is another, although most >of the suppression has been done by the people who invented it. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 08:35:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA14578; Sat, 30 May 1998 08:33:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:33:41 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.16.19980530074739.223f7de4 ap.net> X-Sender: mjs ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (16) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 07:47:39 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Shambrook Subject: Non-Thermal Disruption Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_896539659==_" Resent-Message-ID: <"jPWGC2.0.iZ3.KR2Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19350 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_896539659==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Ken Shoulders has asked that we post the following attachment. Feel free to send it on to others who might be able to contribute to a meaningful discussion. Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc. --=====================_896539659==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="SHOULDER.S" Ken Shoulders has asked that we post the following on vortex. Feel free to send it on to others who might be able to contribute to a meaningful discussion. Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc. Non-Thermal Disruption Background: What is non-thermal disruption and why would a grown man get excited about it? I am excited because it represents an entirely different method for disconnecting the electronic bonds in condensed matter. Almost all other melting is thermally inspired, although there is high field desorption of a surface at low temperature. What we are talking about here is macroscopic quantities of high-melting-point material being turned into a very high mobility liquid without heat. Sure, the conditions are special and you cannot fill a bucket with cold, molten iron right now. There is always a beginning and this may be it for disruption. The first threads of experimental evidence showing the possibility of non-thermal disruption of matter have been found. As with most new findings, this subject lies off the main course of this authors' work and is not likely to be actively pursued for its sake alone. Yet, the subject is interesting and a decision has been made to open this discussion to public view instead of either dropping it entirely or submitting it to a peer-reviewed system. The web will be used and it is hoped that an active exchange of ideas results. In order to accommodate the organic nature of web communication, only a partial disclosure of pertinent results will be initially published. As time goes on, available material will be added as necessary. By using this method, it is hoped that the impression of a dogmatic viewpoint might be avoided and allow maximum flexibility for expansion of new thoughts. The work presented here represents another beginning where the important answers have not yet come in. For discussion participants, this is either a new chance to waste time or an opportunity to help formulate an exciting, new bit of physics. Fortunately, the experimental work is sufficiently easy to do so that almost anyone can duplicate what has been done and carry the work to a conclusion. Technical Brief: A spark from a 10-kilovolt induction coil is used in air to bore a hole in a refractory, dielectric material. With proper technique, it will be found that all of the material is expelled from the hole in just one direction, and that is away from the induction coil. This alone indicates the process was not a simple thermal explosion resulting from Joule heating of the channel. This expelled material is caught on a thin foil of aluminum held close to the exit of the bored hole. Under microscopic examination, it can be found that the liquid material expelled had low viscosity and did not harm low-melting-point materials catching it. In the example just cited, aluminum oxide, with a melting point of over 2,050 degrees centigrade, does not show any signs of melting a 6-micrometer thick foil of aluminum with a melting point of about 660 degrees centigrade. All holes bored by this method will be approximately 20 micrometers in diameter throughout the length of the borehole regardless of whether the material has a melting point as low as paraffin or as high as aluminum oxide. A wide range of materials, whether plastics, sulfur or glass can be bored with similar results. The depth of such boreholes is typically 1 millimeter. However, even though the holes are similar, some of the materials that are ejected from the hole turn to gas and do not show the liquid deposit mentioned above. The Extravagant Claim: Consistent with all new notions, an extravagant claim will now be made. The claim made here is that the material was not thermally bored, but rather, removed by an atomic dissociation or disruption process resulting from the large number of electrons contained in a charge cluster transiting the dielectric material. After liquefaction, this material acquired a momentum, imparted by the charge cluster, and is moved along the borehole in the direction of cluster travel. As a matter of fact, the impact mark of the charge cluster can be found on the aluminum foil under the deposited pile of dielectric material. Thus, the charge cluster ran ahead of the molten mass and transited virtually solid material in its process of disheveling it. Arguments Against The Claim: There is not enough temperature difference between the melting point of aluminum oxide and aluminum to claim that the depositing alumina was nearly cold. In addition, the thermal conductivity and specific heat of the aluminum are so high that the arriving heat to the foil would be dissipated and show no effect. Electric streamer theory and practice are sufficiently well known that it is extremely unlikely for charge to be concentrated enough to support the claims. In addition, no effects are known that would hold the physical size of the streamer to a constant value through a wide range of discharge currents and materials. Electron penetration depth in solids is well known, and for the stated 10-kilovolts used, the penetration depth is about 1 micrometer. The claim for 1-millimeter penetration is 1,000 times over that allowed for valid theory. Arguments Against The Arguments: As usual, most arguments arise from lack of sufficient data to one side or the other. Let me add some data for the case of an unusual boring mechanism. Although the aluminum foil may have a relatively high melting point, and thus partly obscure temperature measurements, low-melting-point material deposited on the foil showed no evidence of even 10 degrees centigrade rise in the vicinity of the large deposit of disrupted aluminum oxide. An addition to this observation is that when a thermally melted aluminum oxide particle from a vacuum evaporation process strikes such a surface, there is extensive melting and collateral damage to adjacent structures even though this thermal particle is much smaller than the deposit of disrupted material being discussed here. There is now a treasure house full of data accumulated on charge cluster behavior. Unfortunately, it is neither widely disseminated nor readily believed, largely because of its radical nature. Any number of simple observations in charge cluster technology accounts for the uniform diameter of the boreholes. At this time, however, there is still no known theory to cover the large penetration depth of charge clusters that are regularly seen. An additional piece of data, that is argumentative in nature, is the appearance of unusually low surface tension for the disrupted aluminum oxide when closely examined in condensed form with a scanning electron microscope. The disrupted material freely flows and runs to an almost atomically thin edge. This behavior is contrary to the usual behavior. Thermally melted aluminum oxide droplets usually remain on an oxidized aluminum surface as droplets with a moderately high contact angle. None of that is seen here. Beginning or End: This introduction to non-thermal disruption is designed to see if there is talent and vigor enough in the web world to warrant further communication effort on the part of the author. Let me know what you think. Ken Shoulders c/o Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc. (MPI) our e-mail address is: mjs ap.net Fax is 707 829-1002 --=====================_896539659==_-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 08:42:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA19896; Sat, 30 May 1998 08:40:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:40:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.16.19980530075223.21672dda ap.net> X-Sender: mjs ap.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (16) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 07:52:23 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Michael Shambrook Subject: revised non-thermal disruption Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_896539943==_" Resent-Message-ID: <"Xyah.0.ns4.JX2Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19351 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: --=====================_896539943==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" VO Please substitute this slightly modified version for the one sent a few moments ago. Thanks. Mark Goldes, MPI --=====================_896539943==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="SHOULDER.S" Non-Thermal Disruption Background: What is non-thermal disruption and why would a grown man get excited about it? I am excited because it represents an entirely different method for disconnecting the electronic bonds in condensed matter. Almost all other melting is thermally inspired, although there is high field desorption of a surface at low temperature. What we are talking about here is macroscopic quantities of high-melting-point material being turned into a very high mobility liquid without heat. Sure, the conditions are special and you cannot fill a bucket with cold, molten iron right now. There is always a beginning and this may be it for disruption. The first threads of experimental evidence showing the possibility of non-thermal disruption of matter have been found. As with most new findings, this subject lies off the main course of this authors' work and is not likely to be actively pursued for its sake alone. Yet, the subject is interesting and a decision has been made to open this discussion to public view instead of either dropping it entirely or submitting it to a peer-reviewed system. The web will be used and it is hoped that an active exchange of ideas results. In order to accommodate the organic nature of web communication, only a partial disclosure of pertinent results will be initially published. As time goes on, available material will be added as necessary. By using this method, it is hoped that the impression of a dogmatic viewpoint might be avoided and allow maximum flexibility for expansion of new thoughts. The work presented here represents another beginning where the important answers have not yet come in. For discussion participants, this is either a new chance to waste time or an opportunity to help formulate an exciting, new bit of physics. Fortunately, the experimental work is sufficiently easy to do so that almost anyone can duplicate what has been done and carry the work to a conclusion. Technical Brief: A spark from a 10-kilovolt induction coil is used in air to bore a hole in a refractory, dielectric material. With proper technique, it will be found that all of the material is expelled from the hole in just one direction, and that is away from the induction coil electrode. It should be noted that the fluidized material has momentum imparted to it in much the same way as in "Ampere Force" experiments, although the passage of a charge cluster is deemed to be the reason in this treatment. This alone indicates the process was not a simple thermal explosion resulting from Joule heating of the channel. This expelled material is caught on a thin foil of aluminum held close to the exit of the bored hole. Under microscopic examination, it can be found that the liquid material expelled had low viscosity and did not harm low-melting-point materials catching it. In the example just cited, aluminum oxide, with a melting point of over 2,050 degrees centigrade, does not show any signs of melting a 6-micrometer thick foil of aluminum with a melting point of about 660 degrees centigrade. All holes bored by this method will be approximately 20 micrometers in diameter throughout the length of the borehole regardless of whether the material has a melting point as low as paraffin or as high as aluminum oxide. A wide range of materials, whether plastics, sulfur or glass can be bored with similar results. The depth of such boreholes is typically 1 millimeter. However, even though the holes are similar, some of the materials that are ejected from the hole turn to gas and do not show the liquid deposit mentioned above. The Extravagant Claim: Consistent with all new notions, an extravagant claim will now be made. The claim made here is that the material was not thermally bored, but rather, removed by an atomic dissociation or disruption process resulting from the large number of electrons contained in a charge cluster transiting the dielectric material. After liquefaction, this material acquired a momentum, imparted by the charge cluster, and is moved along the borehole in the direction of cluster travel. As a matter of fact, the impact mark of the charge cluster can be found on the aluminum foil under the deposited pile of dielectric material. Thus, the charge cluster ran ahead of the molten mass and transited virtually solid material in its process of disheveling it. Arguments Against The Claim: There is not enough temperature difference between the melting point of aluminum oxide and aluminum to claim that the depositing alumina was nearly cold. In addition, the thermal conductivity and specific heat of the aluminum are so high that the arriving heat to the foil would be dissipated and show no effect. Electric streamer theory and practice are sufficiently well known that it is extremely unlikely for charge to be concentrated enough to support the claims. In addition, no effects are known that would hold the physical size of the streamer to a constant value through a wide range of discharge currents and materials. Electron penetration depth in solids is well known, and for the stated 10-kilovolts used, the penetration depth is about 1 micrometer. The claim for 1-millimeter penetration is 1,000 times over that allowed for valid theory. Arguments Against The Arguments: As usual, most arguments arise from lack of sufficient data to one side or the other. Let me add some data for the case of an unusual boring mechanism. Although the aluminum foil may have a relatively high melting point, and thus partly obscure temperature measurements, low-melting-point material deposited on the foil showed no evidence of even 10 degrees centigrade rise in the vicinity of the large deposit of disrupted aluminum oxide. An addition to this observation is that when a thermally melted aluminum oxide particle from a vacuum evaporation process strikes such a surface, there is extensive melting and collateral damage to adjacent structures even though this thermal particle is much smaller than the deposit of disrupted material being discussed here. There is now a treasure house full of data accumulated on charge cluster behavior. Unfortunately, it is neither widely disseminated nor readily believed, largely because of its radical nature. Any number of simple observations in charge cluster technology accounts for the uniform diameter of the boreholes. At this time, however, there is still no known theory to cover the large penetration depth of charge clusters that are regularly seen. An additional piece of data, that is argumentative in nature, is the appearance of unusually low surface tension for the disrupted aluminum oxide when closely examined in condensed form with a scanning electron microscope. The disrupted material freely flows and runs to an almost atomically thin edge. This behavior is contrary to the usual behavior. Thermally melted aluminum oxide droplets usually remain on an oxidized aluminum surface as droplets with a moderately high contact angle. None of that is seen here. Beginning or End: This introduction to non-thermal disruption is designed to see if there is talent and vigor enough in the web world to warrant further communication effort on the part of the author. Let me know what you think. Ken Shoulders c/o Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc. (MPI) our e-mail address is: mjs ap.net Fax is 707 829-1002 --=====================_896539943==_-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 09:32:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA28581; Sat, 30 May 1998 09:30:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 09:30:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 08:27:25 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: revised non-thermal disruption Resent-Message-ID: <"_VTKO2.0.Q-6.hG3Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19352 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Non-Thermal Disruption Background: What is non-thermal disruption and why would a grown man get excited about it? I am excited because it represents an entirely different method for disconnecting the electronic bonds in condensed matter. Almost all other melting is thermally inspired, although there is high field desorption of a surface at low temperature. What we are talking about here is macroscopic quantities of high-melting-point material being turned into a very high mobility liquid without heat. Sure, the conditions are special and you cannot fill a bucket with cold, molten iron right now. There is always a beginning and this may be it for disruption. The first threads of experimental evidence showing the possibility of non-thermal disruption of matter have been found. As with most new findings, this subject lies off the main course of this authors' work and is not likely to be actively pursued for its sake alone. Yet, the subject is interesting and a decision has been made to open this discussion to public view instead of either dropping it entirely or submitting it to a peer-reviewed system. The web will be used and it is hoped that an active exchange of ideas results. In order to accommodate the organic nature of web communication, only a partial disclosure of pertinent results will be initially published. As time goes on, available material will be added as necessary. By using this method, it is hoped that the impression of a dogmatic viewpoint might be avoided and allow maximum flexibility for expansion of new thoughts. The work presented here represents another beginning where the important answers have not yet come in. For discussion participants, this is either a new chance to waste time or an opportunity to help formulate an exciting, new bit of physics. Fortunately, the experimental work is sufficiently easy to do so that almost anyone can duplicate what has been done and carry the work to a conclusion. Technical Brief: A spark from a 10-kilovolt induction coil is used in air to bore a hole in a refractory, dielectric material. With proper technique, it will be found that all of the material is expelled from the hole in just one direction, and that is away from the induction coil. This alone indicates the process was not a simple thermal explosion resulting from Joule heating of the channel. This expelled material is caught on a thin foil of aluminum held close to the exit of the bored hole. Under microscopic examination, it can be found that the liquid material expelled had low viscosity and did not harm low-melting-point materials catching it. In the example just cited, aluminum oxide, with a melting point of over 2,050 degrees centigrade, does not show any signs of melting a 6-micrometer thick foil of aluminum with a melting point of about 660 degrees centigrade. All holes bored by this method will be approximately 20 micrometers in diameter throughout the length of the borehole regardless of whether the material has a melting point as low as paraffin or as high as aluminum oxide. A wide range of materials, whether plastics, sulfur or glass can be bored with similar results. The depth of such boreholes is typically 1 millimeter. However, even though the holes are similar, some of the materials that are ejected from the hole turn to gas and do not show the liquid deposit mentioned above. The Extravagant Claim: Consistent with all new notions, an extravagant claim will now be made. The claim made here is that the material was not thermally bored, but rather, removed by an atomic dissociation or disruption process resulting from the large number of electrons contained in a charge cluster transiting the dielectric material. After liquefaction, this material acquired a momentum, imparted by the charge cluster, and is moved along the borehole in the direction of cluster travel. As a matter of fact, the impact mark of the charge cluster can be found on the aluminum foil under the deposited pile of dielectric material. Thus, the charge cluster ran ahead of the molten mass and transited virtually solid material in its process of disheveling it. Arguments Against The Claim: There is not enough temperature difference between the melting point of aluminum oxide and aluminum to claim that the depositing alumina was nearly cold. In addition, the thermal conductivity and specific heat of the aluminum are so high that the arriving heat to the foil would be dissipated and show no effect. Electric streamer theory and practice are sufficiently well known that it is extremely unlikely for charge to be concentrated enough to support the claims. In addition, no effects are known that would hold the physical size of the streamer to a constant value through a wide range of discharge currents and materials. Electron penetration depth in solids is well known, and for the stated 10-kilovolts used, the penetration depth is about 1 micrometer. The claim for 1-millimeter penetration is 1,000 times over that allowed for valid theory. Arguments Against The Arguments: As usual, most arguments arise from lack of sufficient data to one side or the other. Let me add some data for the case of an unusual boring mechanism. Although the aluminum foil may have a relatively high melting point, and thus partly obscure temperature measurements, low-melting-point material deposited on the foil showed no evidence of even 10 degrees centigrade rise in the vicinity of the large deposit of disrupted aluminum oxide. An addition to this observation is that when a thermally melted aluminum oxide particle from a vacuum evaporation process strikes such a surface, there is extensive melting and collateral damage to adjacent structures even though this thermal particle is much smaller than the deposit of disrupted material being discussed here. There is now a treasure house full of data accumulated on charge cluster behavior. Unfortunately, it is neither widely disseminated nor readily believed, largely because of its radical nature. Any number of simple observations in charge cluster technology accounts for the uniform diameter of the boreholes. At this time, however, there is still no known theory to cover the large penetration depth of charge clusters that are regularly seen. An additional piece of data, that is argumentative in nature, is the appearance of unusually low surface tension for the disrupted aluminum oxide when closely examined in condensed form with a scanning electron microscope. The disrupted material freely flows and runs to an almost atomically thin edge. This behavior is contrary to the usual behavior. Thermally melted aluminum oxide droplets usually remain on an oxidized aluminum surface as droplets with a moderately high contact angle. None of that is seen here. Beginning or End: This introduction to non-thermal disruption is designed to see if there is talent and vigor enough in the web world to warrant further communication effort on the part of the author. Let me know what you think. Ken Shoulders c/o Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc. (MPI) our e-mail address is: mjs ap.net Fax is 707 829-1002 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 10:04:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA07271; Sat, 30 May 1998 10:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 10:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 12:49:01 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Farnsworth Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"wqmJe2.0.Wn1.Sj3Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19353 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There is a good book "Tube" by Franklin and Franklin about the development of TV. Basically there is no one person. Farnsworth's major... and I do mean MAJOR .. contributions are raster scanning... wich struck him as he was plowing a field at age 14 .... and primary work on an all electronic camera. He had the first all electronic TV system... This is a fair book, fair meaning pretty good, on history and ethics of science. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 10:32:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA14420; Sat, 30 May 1998 10:30:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 10:30:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 09:27:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: magnetic shield Resent-Message-ID: <"wOAaS1.0.DX3.494Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19354 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 4:14 PM 5/30/98, Cornwall RO wrote: [snip stuff that needs drawings to discuss] >> The current generated in the pickup coil creates a magnetic field that >> opposes the field change, and thus creates a force that opposes the motion >> of the "shield", which itself is a magnet. Energy is conserved, as is the >> second law - unless you can figure out one of those "pointed magnet >> preferential heat exchange" schemes. 8^) >> >Right about the coil, wrong about it affecting the shield - how does it >'know' that the shield is there? I think the current induced in the pickup >circuit would oppose field changes and so CofE still works, no? To be a "shield" the shield must become a magnet. The motion of field lines that induce a voltage in the coil is due to the motion of the shield, to which the moving field lines are directly attached, or indirectly connected via magnetic pressure between field lines. Force on a field line results in force on the body generating it, and force on adjacent field lines. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 11:07:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22021; Sat, 30 May 1998 11:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 11:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35704346.78E5 skylink.net> Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 10:35:02 -0700 From: Robert Stirniman X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal? References: <01BD8BA8.4D857380 oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mNFxl.0.-N5.of4Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19355 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: !Speculation Alert! Phipps, Graneau, et al have long been proponents of the idea that longitudinal field propagate at speeds greater than c. They actually believe that longitudinal fields result in instantaneous action at a distance. Some of their arguments seem to be fairly compelling, but I have never been able to accept the idea. A scalar EM photon has the bizarre characteristic of being a one dimensional object. While, a circularly polarized photon is a wave packet with a 3 dimensional spacial structure, as well as a time dimension (AC field components). When two of these photons are combined, of which one has a spacial phase rotated by 180 degrees, all of the three dimensional wave characteristics vanish, as do all of the time varying parts of the wave. We are left with only the DC longitudinal field components (E and B) which superpose constructively. In this sense the scalar EM photon particle exists out of space and time. It is a purely one dimensional thing -- a true scalar, but not a scalar in the same sense that the word is used in the context of a 4-D field. How fast would something like this propagate? Is the concept of propagation a sensical thing for a 1-D object? Do Maxwells equations apply? Let's assume so. In the laboratory frame, the 2nd and 4th equations relating to induction are satisfied for any velocity, because here is no apparent induction. Something odd results from application of Maxwells 1st and 3rd equations. In order to satisfy the divergence equations in free space with a purely one-dimensional object -- if a field exists at all, it must extend to infinity or until it finds a source or sink. And this extension must have occurred instantaneously. Another odd thing is that if this kind of wave exists, it becomes impossible to differentiate between the generator (source) and the receiver (sink) -- unless you arbitrarily define one or the other as left or right handedness, or arbitrarily assign a polarity to the potential difference which exists between them. The stress energy tensor of the scalar field also results in some bizarre physical interpretations. But still. Instantaneous propagation? I don't believe it. But maybe very fast. Some say that Tesla measured the speed of a scalar wave, and determined that it is at least 50 times light speed. But you know, people say a lot of strange things about Tesla. One thing they say is that all his papers relating to scalar fields were confiscated. It is unfortunate that something you hardly ever hear about him anymore, is his most useful invention of 3-phase AC power for motors and transmission systems. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 11:47:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA00552; Sat, 30 May 1998 11:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 11:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 11:24:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal? In-Reply-To: <35704346.78E5 skylink.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"AEUtq2.0.T8.VE5Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19356 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 30 May 1998, Robert Stirniman wrote: > !Speculation Alert! > > Phipps, Graneau, et al have long been proponents of the idea > that longitudinal field propagate at speeds greater than c. > They actually believe that longitudinal fields result in > instantaneous action at a distance. Some of their arguments > seem to be fairly compelling, but I have never been able > to accept the idea. [snip] > Some say that Tesla measured the > speed of a scalar wave, and determined that it is at > least 50 times light speed. But you know, people say > a lot of strange things about Tesla. One thing they say > is that all his papers relating to scalar fields were > confiscated. It is unfortunate that something you hardly > ever hear about him anymore, Margaret Cheney's biography of Nikola Tesla , entitled "Tesla - Man out of Time " is , for the most part, an engaging account of her attempts to solve the mystery about what happened to the bulk of Tesla's notes and papers after he died in his New York apartment in 1943. The ending is totally anti-climactic and disappointing , to say the least. The reader "strung along" through out the entirety of this book as she gives an account of these attempts , but in the end must be satisified with Ms. Cheney's assurances that the US gov't is in possesion of the notes and papers , that these notes and papers contain truly startling conclusions about fundamental principles of physics , and because of this what is contained in them must remain secret for reasons of "National Security". It is very remarkable to me that the most productive period in Tesla's career was no less than 100 YEARS AGO , in Colorado Springs. He enjoyed, at the time , the best and most powerfull equipment available , such that very likely it was the best he would ever see for the remainder of his career. So even if the government only found out about what Tesla might have discovered after cleaning out his apartment in 1943 , that puts the rest of us behind the 8 ball by no less than 55 years ! So while I sift through the various posts about Cold Fusion , SMOT, over unity and so on that come through the vortex listserver into my PC , in the back of my mind is this picture of a fellow in a nice cubicle somewhere in some top secret government scientific installation monitoring all this as well . Perhaps he's even contributing comments or suggestions pertinent to the various undertakings of this group in order to stay "on top" of what we are up to. If there is anything I could say to such a fellow it would be this: " HI THERE ! What's OLD ?" Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 12:52:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA06235; Sat, 30 May 1998 12:48:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 12:48:17 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8BD0.E689F060 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superluminal? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 13:43:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8BD0.E6919180" Resent-Message-ID: <"joUuu1.0.1X1.-96Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19357 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BD0.E6919180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Robert Stirniman[SMTP:robert skylink.net] Sent: Saturday, May 30, 1998 12:35 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Superluminal? >But still. Instantaneous propagation? I don't believe it.=20 >But maybe very fast. Some say that Tesla measured the >speed of a scalar wave, and determined that it is at >least 50 times light speed. But you know, people say=20 >a lot of strange things about Tesla. One thing they say=20 >is that all his papers relating to scalar fields were=20 >confiscated. It is unfortunate that something you hardly=20 >ever hear about him anymore, is his most useful invention=20 >of 3-phase AC power for motors and transmission systems.=20 I am currently constructing a replication of Jean-Louis Naudin's "Scalar = Waves Transmitter" http://members.aol.com/overunity4/html/sclxmtr.htm to perform some experiments. If this thing really works, how could I = measure the propagation speed of the waves (from transmitter to = reciever)? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BD0.E6919180 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhESAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABABIAAABSRTogU3Vw ZXJsdW1pbmFsPwAxBgEFgAMADgAAAM4HBQAeAA0AKwAQAAYARgEBIIADAA4AAADOBwUAHgANACcA CwAGAD0BAQmAAQAhAAAANzY4MUE3Nzk5QUY3RDExMUE3NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAAFQcBA5AGALQF AAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAuAAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQCgH7jO+ou9 AR4AcAABAAAAEgAAAFJFOiBTdXBlcmx1bWluYWw/AAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2L+s64YLlgYvfD EdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxk LmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQfAe1JgMABxAaAwAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006Uk9C RVJUU1RJUk5JTUFOU01UUDpST0JFUlRAU0tZTElOS05FVFNFTlQ6U0FUVVJEQVksTUFZMzAsMTk5 ODEyOjM1UE1UTzpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTQAAAAACAQkQAQAAACsEAAAnBAAA8wcAAExaRnWXIjJ8 /wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV /3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7wZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMML WTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e5wqHHZsMMPUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIH8cZiBJAFQFN0aQSgB3CBAHBbU01U UDoDYCEjwkBza3kcIG5r9C5uEgBdH48gnQZgAjAXIc8i2wYQdAhwZGF5RiwF0CqwIDMwKtAxCDk5 OCtgMjozNZggUE0mPyCdVG8ofwUi23YVoWV4LWxApQeQawdwby4FoG0sT3EnTnViah6hLm8i3GXb M+AzcHAEkApAbQuAB0BmPxrvG/MzNh1nGjk+UzhtHmZCdQVAcyQgbPBsLiBJAIABkAIwAHBeZQhg BCAeYQqwZypgaaUCID87sCBkAiAnBUADI8AcIGV2ZSBpdL87oDF9OO85/zsDAMB5I8BnMDAEkCsQ ZmE7UDugU+sDcD5QcysBdBHALiEHkHsLYEIAZULQCHAJgEOhZTc+vz/PQN5zNiBEwW9mniBEQATw B0AKwXdhPkDfKtAAcETQDbAekHI2cUTD/0PRPnA+YAQgKmBFL0Y/QN7mbERxBUA1MEOgB3McIFxn aEglO6A7EnkIYCDwa25vdyrQNiA8wE6g/0NjS49Mn0DeREAVkAVASKG9O1ByGPE+UEOwC4BnS0Hv BuA7IUQDO6BPJfBWFETi/ysQUb9Sz1PfHrFLMUOzB0D3AyBWMDyBYTYhBCAWAAtguyQgV9JvSOYc kD4AZAQgfncEkD5QWJ9Zr0DeBaBurxyQSPEekFAxSUsTdWJQ7xWhY2BioUOkc0MxV6RQorkRwWRs WH9gD2EfID4x3wXARQAKwVaUVjBtSbEGwP8FsEmRSzFccgRgTtE8cA3A/nUDIAuAPkACMD0hZb9m z+Nn30ihMy1wEcAR8BNw/kM8kFEAaQFjgWsRXbBc8TtJwlWyczZwBBBsQnN58TtQZW1zPpk33xLy AdDXG0xtDz1hYWoAYwhwFgDvAjBlkWIxVaF1HrBXwkRAuxYAC1BpYpFsQkihSkRwGG4tTAhgSzFO YXVKZAuAJwQgIlNJBFe7SXEEIFRx5AJABJAiXGDhAkBwOi8vB4AG0FzhzC5hBvAxMi9vQnFjYBE+ cHk0L0/AbWwv0QTwbHhtVbAufxF1Rb9dsTYhY4FqAGRyaNB4NiH3B3ECMHMBSUiwViFbwlfClxYA XDErEHcFsGtzKtD+aFEAYiFrsETQPXBEZUTi3zyaSDiFUkliBCAoA1Jxxpd8kl2iFgBjPiJyKTbN 1kslkD5QUjugTUkBHCAtcsFydUUVIQCMIAADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAHMIBk3zz6i70BQAAI MIBk3zz6i70BHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAAPG6 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BD0.E6919180-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 13:55:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA01741; Sat, 30 May 1998 13:54:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 13:54:11 -0700 Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 13:54:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superluminal? In-Reply-To: <01BD8BD0.E689F060 oemcomputer> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"csgv_3.0.2R.o77Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19358 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 30 May 1998, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > I am currently > constructing a replication of Jean-Louis Naudin's "Scalar Waves > Transmitter" http://members.aol.com/overunity4/html/sclxmtr.htm to > perform some experiments. If this thing really works, how could I > measure >the propagation speed of the waves (from transmitter to reciever)? Kyle R. Mcallister Michael Shaffer of this list has a lot to say about that . One important thing is "group velocity" as I recall him saying. He also said that you must use a single pulse , but I'm not sure how you derive group velocity from a single pulse. This is all involved with information theory too. It is alleged that no "signal" can travel faster than c. But the theorists are still arguing about "what is a signal" . This would have to be included in the discussion of your setup and whether you are dealing with an exact replication of the "signal" or a pre- agreed upon correlation. Good luck! Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 15:17:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10639; Sat, 30 May 1998 15:15:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 15:15:12 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8BEE.32FA8C80 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superluminal? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 17:12:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-NqpF2.0.9c2.lJ8Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19359 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Saturday, May 30, 1998 1:50 PM To: Kyle R. Mcallister Subject: RE: Superluminal? >Hi, >The junk attachment you are sending may be your signature block in >Microsoft rich text format (instead of ascii). >Regards, >Horace Heffner Its still got that darned attachment? I thought I had got it to stop. I think its time for a new email program... Kyle R. Mcallister From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 16:15:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA10456; Sat, 30 May 1998 16:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 16:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 15:12:12 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal? Resent-Message-ID: <"Had7M3.0.HZ2.hA9Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19360 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >---------- >From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] >Sent: Saturday, May 30, 1998 1:50 PM >To: Kyle R. Mcallister >Subject: RE: Superluminal? > >>Hi, > >>The junk attachment you are sending may be your signature block in >>Microsoft rich text format (instead of ascii). > >>Regards, > >>Horace Heffner > >Its still got that darned attachment? I thought I had got it to stop. I >think its time for a new email program... > >Kyle R. Mcallister Hmmmm - I didn't get an appended file with this (private) message. Did you suppress your signature block? Something strange going on! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 16:28:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA12776; Sat, 30 May 1998 16:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 16:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 19:19:52 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Farnsworth Fusor Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805301923_MC2-3EA3-E364 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Y7V202.0.X73.UM9Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19361 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I mentioned that Farnsworth made his Fusor self sustaining for short periods. Richard Wayne Wall disagrees: Totally untrue Jed. Inertial confinement fusors are far from overunity in Farnsworths time and today. They are around 0.1% efficent. Farnsworth never claimed they were O/U. According to Vassilatos and others, Farnsworth did claim they were o/u, and he demonstrated the effect. From the Vassilatos account: SUSTAINED FUSION REACTION Dr. Farnsworth reported that his team achieved a self-sustaining reaction on several occasions...and could repeat the effect. He once invited his wife to watch a test-run of this feat. As power was applied to the Fusor the neutron-reading meter achieved a steady threshold and there remained...until a slight increment of power was applied. Then the needle went off the scale. Dr. Farnsworth cut the applied power...but the needle remained in place for thirty seconds or more as the reaction continued. Someone told me that Vassilatos' account can be found at: http://www.songs.com/philo/fusion/vassilatos.html - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 17:01:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA19793; Sat, 30 May 1998 16:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 16:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD8BFC.83D907E0 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: Is there an attachment here? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 18:55:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"EvD371.0.7r4.tr9Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19362 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace: Check this one. Is there an attachment? Kyle R. mcallister Email: stk sunherald.infi.net Phone: 228-875-0629 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 17:06:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA20820; Sat, 30 May 1998 17:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 17:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD8BFC.68403620 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superluminal? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 18:54:42 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8BFC.6847D740" Resent-Message-ID: <"XLg_x.0.C55.zv9Sr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19363 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BFC.6847D740 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Saturday, May 30, 1998 6:12 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Superluminal? >Hmmmm - I didn't get an appended file with this (private) message. Did you >suppress your signature block? Something strange going on! >Regards, >Horace Heffner No, I didn't do anything. Agreed, this is strange. See my test post in a few minutes, let me know if there's an attachment. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BFC.6847D740 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IisXAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABABIAAABSRTogU3Vw ZXJsdW1pbmFsPwAxBgEFgAMADgAAAM4HBQAeABIANgAqAAYAcAEBIIADAA4AAADOBwUAHgASADUA FgAGAFsBAQmAAQAhAAAAOUI4MUE3Nzk5QUY3RDExMUE3NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAAIwcBA5AGABQE AAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAuAAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQCAnF1QJoy9 AR4AcAABAAAAEgAAAFJFOiBTdXBlcmx1bWluYWw/AAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2MJlBdZ6WEQvfv EdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxk LmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQZymK8wMABxBvAQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006SE9S QUNFSEVGRk5FUlNNVFA6SEhFRkZORVJAQ09SRUNPTU5FVFNFTlQ6U0FUVVJEQVksTUFZMzAsMTk5 ODY6MTJQTVRPOlZPUlRFWC1MQEVTS0lNTwAAAAACAQkQAQAAAIsCAACHAgAAUAUAAExaRnXzOGIc /wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV /3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7wZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMML WTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e5wqHHZsMMHUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIgtkgFsADQZSOQDcFuBJAAW1NNVFA6 aGhNJCRABaEFkW0uJFB0/l0fjyCdBmACMCHPItsGEMJ0CHBkYXksBdAqsAggMzAq0DE5OTiQIDY6 MRIgUE0mP1kgnVRvKH8i23YVoWVQeC1sQAeQawdwb44uJbEsPydOdWJqHqGzLl8i21JFM9AzYHAE kG0KQG0LgAdAPxrvG/MzNjYdZxo5PjhdHmZIbQM7ER7QIEkgZGlkVG4nBUBnEgAgA5FhSnA2EG4N sGQgHJBsYyPwA/B0aCA9gAQAIBIoHmBpdipgZSkgCQeBc2E8EC4gIER5O7AgeQhgMW043znvIH5z NgAeYD6xP3IFwACQZw82gCpxI/ACYG9jaz99PyBTA3ASAD3AGQBCwHRnI8AZACPwZ29FMgIgIY82 zkBPQV8edVJlZwsR/HMsRo9Hn0ivOqUjuz8gz08GCo8aD0/STm8q0DuHtGRvPEF5RRM/EEEJwv5k KtA9sz3RRXU/EAZgI/CObSsQHpBFcCBwb1XB3wuAPEA9AAfRNmF1VaEq0Ic9MAVAB4Aga25vB+Dn BpA9oQSQZScEIDxSAkAtANBoB4ACMC42zEt55T0xUj8QTWMHQBwgRXD/BJA3PzhOHmY2z1xeEvJd nwogFSEAYfAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzAgJO0gJoy9AUAACDAgJO0gJoy9AR4APQABAAAA BQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AABTFg== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8BFC.6847D740-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 17:23:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA24879; Sat, 30 May 1998 17:21:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 17:21:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 19:19:06 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199805310019.TAA26370 dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com> From: rwall ix.netcom.com (Richard Wayne Wall) Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"xtpmf.0.d46.LAASr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19364 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: JED wrote: > SUSTAINED FUSION REACTION > > Dr. Farnsworth reported that his team achieved a self-sustaining > reaction on several occasions...and could repeat the effect. He once > invited his wife to watch a test-run of this feat. As power was applied > to the Fusor the neutron-reading meter achieved a steady threshold and > there remained...until a slight increment of power was applied. Then the > needle went off the scale. Dr. Farnsworth cut the applied power...but > the needle remained in place for thirty seconds or more as the reaction > continued. Jed, is a needle going off scale in a neutron detector the NEW definition of overunity? >Someone told me that Vassilatos' account can be found at: > > http://www.songs.com/philo/fusion/vassilatos.html This is the web site I referred to in my last post. Mrs. Farnsworth's book on her late husband and R. Hull's video on the history of Farnsworth's fusor are crucial in understanding the truth in these matters. Caveat: Always be careful of Vassilatos' accounts on anything. RWW From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 19:45:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA15774; Sat, 30 May 1998 19:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 19:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <000001bd8c3d$42442da0$2446d3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Farnsworth Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 15:21:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"X4TNA2.0.Ns3.YECSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19366 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Farnsworth well deserves the credit for inventing electronic raster scanning, and getting the first television systems with reasonable image quality on the air. It is also true that Sarnoff, every reluctant to license, made earnest efforts to defeat the Farnsworth patents. He won, but the intervention of WW 2 delayed the implementation of commercial television and his patents ran out before he was able to realize the deserved royalty. Less obvious is that the Farnsworth image dissector camera tube would have failed commercially in competition with Zworykin's (RCA) Iconoscope. The former had no inherent storage properties, which meant that the set had to be intensely illuminated, or in sunlight. The Iconoscope had charge storage capability, which meant that reasonable lighting could be used on a set. The Image Orthicon camera tube later developed by RCA incorporated an electron multiplier to boost its sensitivity. Later generations of image dissectors included photomultipliers, but this was many years in the future, and the Farnsworth image dissector is a niche application. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 20:07:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17950; Sat, 30 May 1998 19:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 19:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:49:59 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth In-Reply-To: <000001bd8c3d$42442da0$2446d3d0 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"L1MfP3.0.OO4.RTCSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19367 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The electron multiplier was Farnsworth's invention.... one of the high end uses of it is the microchannel image intensifier tubes used in 'night vision' and particle detectors. On Sat, 30 May 1998, Mike Carrell wrote: > Farnsworth well deserves the credit for inventing electronic raster > scanning, and getting the first television systems with reasonable image > quality on the air. It is also true that Sarnoff, every reluctant to > license, made earnest efforts to defeat the Farnsworth patents. He won, but > the intervention of WW 2 delayed the implementation of commercial television > and his patents ran out before he was able to realize the deserved royalty. > > Less obvious is that the Farnsworth image dissector camera tube would have > failed commercially in competition with Zworykin's (RCA) Iconoscope. The > former had no inherent storage properties, which meant that the set had to > be intensely illuminated, or in sunlight. The Iconoscope had charge storage > capability, which meant that reasonable lighting could be used on a set. The > Image Orthicon camera tube later developed by RCA incorporated an electron > multiplier to boost its sensitivity. Later generations of image dissectors > included photomultipliers, but this was many years in the future, and the > Farnsworth image dissector is a niche application. > > Mike Carrell > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 21:38:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA03965; Sat, 30 May 1998 21:36:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 21:36:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 21:34:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't In-Reply-To: <01BD8BFC.68403620 oemcomputer> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nDIe43.0.nz.FvDSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19368 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: If there is any one thing that can be called "evil" in this world, it is surely government. I speak of government as an entity of and by itself, not necessarily of the individuals holding the millions of various jobs and positions within government, inasmuch as they are constrained by the limitations put upon them from the top levels down. There was posted to usenet a very long article (about 122kb , ascii) by the "Reverend" A.J. Teal quite some time ago, Mar 3-4 1993 , detailing the various usurpations of power by the US government against the People (in the 10th amendment sense of that word) down through the last 200 years or so. This was done for the most part in each instance by taking the People's wealth , in the form of gold and real estate, and replacing it with PAPER . The most egregious incidence of this kind occurred in 1933. Below I quote Mr. Teal: " The Gold Reserve Act was enforced under the Police Powers of the United States by the Internal Revenue Service, and Those who failed to relinquish, or refused to tender Their Gold to the Federal Government in exchange for Its Paper, were faced with the confiscation of Their Property, Arrest, Trial, Fines, penalties, and/or Imprisonment." Overall , the text though somewhat long , is a very good read , providing as I mentioned a thumbnail sketch of US history , proof of the the current ongoing status of the "national emergency" created by the undeclared bankruptcy of the United States , and also provides a nice overview of the tactics one can use in court in order to make the judge anxious to get rid of you immediately (by dismissing the govts case against you , say a traffic ticket. Although, having his bailiff shoot you in open court would be another possible option that has as of yet ,never been taken , to the best of my knowledge). I have personally used some of these tactics in order to get myself out from under the govt's rather oppressive thumb on a number of occasions. They work . If you would like a copy of this document which I have carefully preserved in the 2 or 3 computer systems I've owned since 1993 , email me . I am: Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 22:03:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA09349; Sat, 30 May 1998 22:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:01:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003901bd8c50$834ee520$348cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: , "Jim Ostrowski" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:56:27 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"kw91_.0.yH2.IGESr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19369 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 30, 1998 10:36 PM Subject: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't What are you, Jim? Some kind of Libertarian or what? :-) What you like to renounce your citizenship and try Saudi Arabia for a bit, where they lop off your head for such brazen outbursts? :-) Regards, Frederick > > > If there is any one thing that can be called "evil" in this > world, it is surely government. I speak of government as an > entity of and by itself, not necessarily of the individuals > holding the millions of various jobs and positions within > government, inasmuch as they are constrained by the limitations > put upon them from the top levels down. > > There was posted to usenet a very long article (about 122kb , > ascii) by the "Reverend" A.J. Teal quite some time ago, Mar 3-4 > 1993 , detailing the various usurpations of power by the US > government against the People (in the 10th amendment sense of that > word) down through the last 200 years or so. > > This was done for the most part in each instance by taking the > People's wealth , in the form of gold and real estate, and > replacing it with PAPER . > > The most egregious incidence of this kind occurred in 1933. > Below I quote Mr. Teal: > > " The Gold Reserve Act was enforced under the Police Powers of > the United States by the Internal Revenue Service, and Those who > failed to relinquish, or refused to tender Their Gold to the > Federal Government in exchange for Its Paper, were faced with the > confiscation of Their Property, Arrest, Trial, Fines, penalties, > and/or Imprisonment." > > Overall , the text though somewhat long , is a very good read , > providing as I mentioned a thumbnail sketch of US history , proof > of the the current ongoing status of the "national emergency" > created by the undeclared bankruptcy of the United States , and > also provides a nice overview of the tactics one can use in court > in order to make the judge anxious to get rid of you immediately > (by dismissing the govts case against you , say a traffic ticket. > Although, having his bailiff shoot you in open court would be > another possible option that has as of yet ,never been taken , to > the best of my knowledge). > > I have personally used some of these tactics in order to get > myself out from under the govt's rather oppressive thumb on a > number of occasions. They work . > > If you would like a copy of this document which I have carefully > preserved in the 2 or 3 computer systems I've owned since 1993 , > email me . I am: > > Jim Ostrowski > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat May 30 22:58:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA22135; Sat, 30 May 1998 22:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:56:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <004501bd8c58$283c67e0$348cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: A Solar Environmentally Benign Syn-fuels Iteration Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 23:50:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"hmS0r.0.mP5.P4FSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19370 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex An Exercise. Phase I Take ALL Hydroelectric Power Plants (SOLAR-Gravity) off-line from producing power for non-essential loads, and put them to electrolyzing water to produce hydrogen at 25 kw-hr/pound, and kilning limestone (CaCO3) to CaO + CO2. The CaO will absorb the CO2 from the atmosphere in air-blown fluidized beds and revert to CaCO3, in effect acting like biomass. Then: 3 H2 + CO2 ---> CH3OH (methanol) + H2O 6 lbs 44 lbs 32 lbs 18 lbs The Methanol can be used as a transportation fuel, or using Mobil's ZSM-5 Catalyst "upgraded" to Jet Fuel and petrochemical feedstocks.(which can also be made from biomass as "value-added" chemicals). :-) With Photo-Voltaics and storage batteries replacing the "Off-Peak" power generation that is lighting up city streets and freeway intersections 300 miles from nowhere at 3:00 AM we could be energy independent and environmentally benign by next week. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 00:32:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05128; Sat, 30 May 1998 18:26:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 18:26:49 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00c901bd8c32$daf9cf60$3c8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hot or Cold Fusion, How do you do it better than the Sun? Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 19:23:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"EkMzu3.0.1G1.N7BSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19365 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex "Old Sol" that 870,000 mile diameter,"Yellow Dwarf" sets out there putting out 3.86E26 Watts. The Nuclear Reaction Zone (NRZ) is about 3.05E5 miles in diameter or a volume of 5.0E26 meters^3, which means that for the whole NRZ the average energy output at >> 8.4E24 atoms/cm^3 >> 14 grams/cm^3 and >> 1.3 gigajoules/cm^3 (11E6 K) can muster about 0.75 MICROWATTS/CM^3! So you squeeze the volume down by a factor of a million and get 0.75 watts/cm^3? :-) BTW, Jed, Farnsworth put in nearly 12 Kilowatts and got about 10.0 milliwatts out, IOW he was about a factor of a million away from wall-socket break-even, self-sustaining or not.He would need an improvement factor of about three million for self-sustaining power generation. Cockcroft and Walton did that good, bombarding Boron with "Hydrogen" in 1927. (they hadn't discovered deuterium yet). The Sun puts 12,000 Quads/Day on the Earth at about 1.2 kilowatts/meter^2,stacked against 1.0 Quad/Day World Total Energy Production and Use. I would say that Hot or Cold Fusion have a ways to go before the energy companies have to "conspire to suppress it". :-) I'll put my money on Sun-Solar Energy Technology, SUNSET any day. :-) That is why I lost my butt spending the last 25 years on biomass conversion, which is now producing about 8% of the World's energy needs. When OPEC puts a $25.00/bbl price on oil, biomass can start competitively producing over 25% of the World need,practically overnight. Photo-Voltaics can handle most of the rest. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 00:40:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA13287; Sun, 31 May 1998 00:38:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:38:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:36:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: "Frederick J. Sparber" cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, George Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't In-Reply-To: <003901bd8c50$834ee520$348cbfa8 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zwuBW.0.XF3.qZGSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19371 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 30 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > What are you, Jim? Some kind of Libertarian or what? :-) Hmmm ... Let me check this 8 x 10 placard hanging around my neck , let's see it says : "Militia Sympathiser" Is that the same thing as a Libertarian? > > What you like to renounce your citizenship and try Saudi Arabia for a bit, > where they lop off your head for such brazen outbursts? Here they just run your car off the road and make it look like an accident. :-) Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 00:47:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA14913; Sun, 31 May 1998 00:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 01:38:56 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: "Frederick J. Sparber" cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, Jim Ostrowski , George Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't In-Reply-To: <003901bd8c50$834ee520$348cbfa8 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"P5QgG.0.oe3.mfGSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19372 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: No snips (sorry) too important an issue, albeit a bit off track and direction of the vortex list. Great minds, go where they go! :) I'm assuming this 'blurb' is in a saddened response to the late (sigh) Barry Goldwater Death, and the of last "Freedom" and "America" is touching citizens in the know, "US". "..renouncing citizenship" and going to where-ever threat...we'll/ they'll cut your head OFF, is *NOT* an option. While this direction is not the intent of vortex-l group (AND I'll no longer reply to save band width).. Rules are/ Rules!) hummmmmm.. If those resluts (err, 'results' i meant to say:), were of a smot experiment, I'd have to agree that TOO MUCH extra data(?) was being force into a SIMPLE idea. Like Molasses into a fan blade. Control that experiment! You/I can write this "Today" on the internet, can/will you write this "Tomorrow"??.. God Bless America & Bill Gates, (man, I hate winDOZExx though) (yuck).. but, watching India's response to Pakistan's BLAST.. Back on [OFF] topic, BTW: "It's only Paper!" Let's Keep this / were it needs to be! -=se=- On Sat, 30 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:56:27 -0600 From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Jim Ostrowski Cc: George Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:01:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com -----Original Message----- From: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Saturday, May 30, 1998 10:36 PM Subject: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't What are you, Jim? Some kind of Libertarian or what? :-) What you like to renounce your citizenship and try Saudi Arabia for a bit, where they lop off your head for such brazen outbursts? :-) Regards, Frederick > > > If there is any one thing that can be called "evil" in this > world, it is surely government. I speak of government as an > entity of and by itself, not necessarily of the individuals > holding the millions of various jobs and positions within > government, inasmuch as they are constrained by the limitations > put upon them from the top levels down. > > There was posted to usenet a very long article (about 122kb , > ascii) by the "Reverend" A.J. Teal quite some time ago, Mar 3-4 > 1993 , detailing the various usurpations of power by the US > government against the People (in the 10th amendment sense of that > word) down through the last 200 years or so. > > This was done for the most part in each instance by taking the > People's wealth , in the form of gold and real estate, and > replacing it with PAPER . > > The most egregious incidence of this kind occurred in 1933. > Below I quote Mr. Teal: > > " The Gold Reserve Act was enforced under the Police Powers of > the United States by the Internal Revenue Service, and Those who > failed to relinquish, or refused to tender Their Gold to the > Federal Government in exchange for Its Paper, were faced with the > confiscation of Their Property, Arrest, Trial, Fines, penalties, > and/or Imprisonment." > > Overall , the text though somewhat long , is a very good read , > providing as I mentioned a thumbnail sketch of US history , proof > of the the current ongoing status of the "national emergency" > created by the undeclared bankruptcy of the United States , and > also provides a nice overview of the tactics one can use in court > in order to make the judge anxious to get rid of you immediately > (by dismissing the govts case against you , say a traffic ticket. > Although, having his bailiff shoot you in open court would be > another possible option that has as of yet ,never been taken , to > the best of my knowledge). > > I have personally used some of these tactics in order to get > myself out from under the govt's rather oppressive thumb on a > number of occasions. They work . > > If you would like a copy of this document which I have carefully > preserved in the 2 or 3 computer systems I've owned since 1993 , > email me . I am: > > Jim Ostrowski > > > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 00:49:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA15402; Sun, 31 May 1998 00:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:46:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Is there an attachment here? Resent-Message-ID: <"VJg1A2.0.Xm3.ogGSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19373 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:55 PM 5/30/98, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: >Horace: > >Check this one. Is there an attachment? > >Kyle R. mcallister >Email: stk sunherald.infi.net >Phone: 228-875-0629 >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257 No attachment here. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 00:49:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA15731; Sun, 31 May 1998 00:46:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:46:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:46:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Superluminal? Resent-Message-ID: <"1TzGs3.0.Xr3.KhGSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19374 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:54 PM 5/30/98, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: >---------- >From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] >Sent: Saturday, May 30, 1998 6:12 PM >To: vortex-l eskimo.com >Subject: RE: Superluminal? > >>Hmmmm - I didn't get an appended file with this (private) message. Did you >>suppress your signature block? Something strange going on! > >>Regards, > >>Horace Heffner > >No, I didn't do anything. Agreed, this is strange. See my test post in a >few minutes, let me know if there's an attachment. > >Kyle R. Mcallister > > > >Content-Type: application/ms-tnef > >Attachment converted: Hard Disk:RE- Superluminal? 2 (????/----) (0000CC53) There was an attachment on this one. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 01:44:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA00542; Sun, 31 May 1998 01:38:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 01:38:31 -0700 Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 22:38:54 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Farnsworth Fusor Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805302241_MC2-3EA3-E7B7 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"-AGX3.0.y7.4SHSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19375 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Richard Wayne Wall asks: Jed, is a needle going off scale in a neutron detector the NEW definition of overunity? No, of course not. Over unity is indicated in the next sentence: "Dr. Farnsworth cut the applied power...but the needle remained in place for thirty seconds or more as the reaction continued." - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 01:49:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA23624; Sun, 31 May 1998 01:44:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 01:44:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:42:16 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Experiment report - scalar waves Resent-Message-ID: <"AWFtT1.0.2n5.MXHSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19376 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This brief experiment is related to Jean-Louis Naudin's "Scalar Waves Transmitter" Naudin's experiment uses a Caduceus coil to transmit to a portable radio inside a metal Faraday shield. The purpose of this experiment is determine if a bifilar coil exhibits similar properities. A spool of antique twisted pair 20 ga. cotton insulated wire was used. The wire was labeled "LENZ ELECTRIC MFG. CO.", "RADIO AND SWITCHBOARD WIRE." The steel spool was 6.5" dia., 6" high with 2" inner dia. hollow steel core. It is estimated that there were appx. 750 turns of twisted pair, 1500 turns total. The spool was driven by a signal generator generating 548 kHz sin wave. The wavelegth was about 547 meters. The receiver was a battery powered portable radio tuned to 540 kHz, a local radio station. The frequency from 540 - 550 was swept and 548 was found to produce the most audible reponse. The radio was placed inside a cookie tin. The radio went silent when placed inside the tin with the lid on. A 10 ohm current sensing resistor was used on the powered end of the coil, and a voltage probe placed on the opposing end of the coil. It was determined, by moving the tin about, that the best reception, with the tin closed, was on the coil axis. The tin was placed under the table holding the spool, a distance of about 2.5 feet. Morse code like signals were successfully sent to the reciever, even though it was totally enclosed in a metal container. With the coil in a bifilar configuration, the current sense voltage was about 600 mV pk-pk, so the current was about 42 mA RMS. The voltage was about 20 V pk-pk. To rule out ordinary wave transmission the coil was configure in various ways. First the wire ends were connected to make a normal 1500 turn coil. This produced the worst results, and the lowest power through the coil due to the much higher inductance. However, the sound of the code pulse could clearly be heard. Next current was passed through a single leg of the coil. This produced better power, but still, the sound of the radio was not as loud as with the bifilar coil arrangement. Last, the two ends of the coil were connected to the oscillator, but the circuit not closed. Surprisingly, this produced a good tranmission with less current than the main bifilar configuration. It appears this happened due mainly to the capacitive coupling between the two wires of the twisted pair set. It appears Naudin's main results, transmission to a radio enclosed in a Farady cage, were achieved. The results are inconclusive because the various control experiments also gave positive results. This could be due to the fact that the capacitive coupling of the twisted pair wires partially converts the coil into a bifialar coil even in the control runs, and thus causes scalar waves to be transmitted. The positive control results could also be due to the fact more shielding is needed. There could be a problem with the degree of shielding. Lastly, the wavetype used was not EM radiation, most likely, but direct magnetic fields. One fact of use to US experimenters was obtained: this experiment works in the USA AM band. Experiments in this low wavelength present difficulties in measuring their "speed of light". A single oscillation takes 1.8 microseconds. With a wavelength of 547 meters, a speed of light test would require tranmission over long distances. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 04:19:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA04645; Sun, 31 May 1998 04:15:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 04:15:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001101bd8c84$caeddd80$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 05:10:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"lPEe32.0.V81.BlJSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19377 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Jim Ostrowski To: Frederick J. Sparber Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com ; George Date: Sunday, May 31, 1998 1:37 AM Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC - $# %^!! Gov't > > >On Sat, 30 May 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > >> >> What are you, Jim? Some kind of Libertarian or what? :-) > >Hmmm ... Let me check this 8 x 10 placard hanging around my neck , let's >see it says : > >"Militia Sympathiser" > >Is that the same thing as a Libertarian? > >> >> What you like to renounce your citizenship and try Saudi Arabia for a bit, >> where they lop off your head for such brazen outbursts? > >Here they just run your car off the road and make it look like an >accident. :-) That wasn't the Government Jim, that was my mother-in-law's Road Rage. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Jim O. > > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 05:58:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA14880; Sun, 31 May 1998 05:54:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 05:54:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Geosas aol.com Message-ID: <58af6032.35715274 aol.com> Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 08:52:02 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: superluminal? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.i for Windows sub 164 Resent-Message-ID: <"QNCEE2.0.Pe3.SCLSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19378 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Somebody said that they thought that Nikola Tesla's papers had been lost. I believe that a lot of them are in a Tesla museum in Croatia, which country claims him as a native. The Japanese Aum sect which released nerve gas on the Tokyo subway were over in Croatia and copied a lot of the papers, leaving their photocopier behind as payment. The object was to discover if Tesla's ideas could be used to find a means of blowing up the planet. Best, George. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 06:12:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA17316; Sun, 31 May 1998 06:11:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 06:11:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003901bd8c94$f43e1640$6e8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Off Topic, Unusual Gift? Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 07:06:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"LlOcY3.0.RE4.mRLSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19379 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex My oldest granddaughter is celebrating her 13th Birthday tomorrow. She has been pestering me to buy her a horse. However, horses are rather expensive to support aside from the initial investment. So, I informed her that she needs to start an enterprise so that she can raise the capital to feed this "hayburner". As a kid I did quite well during the summer selling live bait to the sportsmen that infected the Northwestern Pennsylvania Lakes and streams. So, while going through the sporting goods section of the local Wal-Mart superstore I came across, Do-it-yourself Worm Farms that you can get you started in the worm business for $10.03 including tax, 1/2 ft^3 ventilated-insulated box, organic material, cereal grain food, And 24 big fat worms! Stay tuned for her reaction to this awesome entrepreneurial start in the world of high finance. Look out, Bill Gates, and also ask your fast food vendor to provide you with a list of ingredients, especially if they are pushing "organically grown" products. :-) For those of you with a delicate bent, you might consider this to be a Gag Gift. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 06:13:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA17332; Sun, 31 May 1998 06:11:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 06:11:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD8C6B.1401E620 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Superluminal? Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 08:05:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8C6B.1401E620" Resent-Message-ID: <"OzOfN1.0.iE4.qRLSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19380 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8C6B.1401E620 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Sunday, May 31, 1998 1:46 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Superluminal? >There was an attachment on this one. >Regards, >Horace Heffner This is getting really unusual... I turned my sig block off on this one. I think I'm going to get a new mail program... Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8C6B.1401E620 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjgNAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABABIAAABSRTogU3Vw ZXJsdW1pbmFsPwAxBgEFgAMADgAAAM4HBQAfAAgABQAXAAAAHQEBIIADAA4AAADOBwUAHwAIAAMA OAAAADwBAQmAAQAhAAAAQzVFOEU4ODg1Q0Y4RDExMUE3NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAAOAcBA5AGAKwD AAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAuAAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQDgjLXFlIy9 AR4AcAABAAAAEgAAAFJFOiBTdXBlcmx1bWluYWw/AAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2MlMW11XK4Q/hc EdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxk LmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQ2iz7ZgMABxAWAQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006SE9S QUNFSEVGRk5FUlNNVFA6SEhFRkZORVJAQ09SRUNPTU5FVFNFTlQ6U1VOREFZLE1BWTMxLDE5OTgx OjQ2QU1UTzpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU9DTwAAAAACAQkQAQAAACECAAAdAgAAtgQAAExaRnVv3gIN /wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV /3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7wZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMML WTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e5wqHHZsMMHUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIgtkgFsADQZSOQDcFuBJAAW1NNVFA6 aGhNJCRABaEFkW0uJFB0fl0fjyCdBmACMCHPIttTwHVuZGF5LAXQKpAIIDMxKrAxOTk40StAOjQ2 E3BNJj8gnSxUbyh/Itt2FaFleCgtbEAHkGsHcG8uxyWxLB8nTnViah6hLj/ZIttSRTOwKlBwBJAK QDZtC4AHQD8a7xvzMzZ7HWcaOT44PS2XJPAWACBsd2EEIAORYQJAANBoiweAAjAgAiAgdGgEAHk8 UWUuNq44XzlvHnVS5GVnCxFzLD0vPj8/T/sehCOsIEWnCo8aD0ZyOuArPLE8sWcSAHQLgGcgGxYA B0BsKvAqYHVzdeUHQC5KgCBJPIAIcCRQeGQgbSrwAJBJgAJgb3xjazxQDdA8W0qyPKBuUUwASSdt SRBvSWJ09m9JEjtwICRQB+AAwAMROx5hCcBhJdBKgDasS3nKbCPwUkqgTWNJwQQA/R6QcjcfOC4e ZjavUr4S8hVT/yAVIQBYUAAAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABAAAcwoGugkZSMvQFAAAgwoGugkZSM vQEeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABSRTogAAAAAAMADTT9NwAA1/g= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8C6B.1401E620-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 06:44:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA22259; Sun, 31 May 1998 06:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 06:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980531052903.00801e50 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 05:29:03 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor In-Reply-To: <199805302241_MC2-3EA3-E7B7 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"EDpw71.0.cR5.WvLSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19381 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:38 PM 5/30/98 -0400, Jed wrote: >Richard Wayne Wall asks: > > Jed, is a needle going off scale in a neutron detector the NEW > definition of overunity? > >No, of course not. Over unity is indicated in the next sentence: "Dr. >Farnsworth cut the applied power...but the needle remained in place for thirty >seconds or more as the reaction continued." No. sorry, that is not evidence of overunity. Differential diagnosis includes stored energy, stuck meter, or errors including delary, charging, and integration errors in any of a number of sites. Overunity and breakeven have specific definitions which are not necessarily proven by a meter reading, or a reaction extending beyond the input. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 13:26:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA07746; Sun, 31 May 1998 13:17:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 13:17:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 12:11:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report - scalar waves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"uqWBR1.0.ju1.LhRSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19382 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 31 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > This brief experiment is related to Jean-Louis Naudin's "Scalar Waves > Transmitter" > > Naudin's experiment uses a Caduceus coil to transmit to a portable radio > inside a metal Faraday shield. [snip] Horace, I thought Faraday cages were supposed to be earth grounded , and this experiment does not specify wither the tin containing the radio was grounded or not. Wouldn't an ungrounded tin behave somewhat like an antenna since whatever fields it encounters the metal will react according to Lenz' Law (impinging fields give rise to opposing currents). Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 13:28:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA07826; Sun, 31 May 1998 13:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 13:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3571AEAF.258 interlaced.net> Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 15:25:35 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Off Topic, Unusual Gift? References: <003901bd8c94$f43e1640$6e8cbfa8 default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uOgLv.0.6w1.ehRSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19383 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > > To: Vortex > I > came across, Do-it-yourself Worm Farms that you can get you started in the > worm business for $10.03 including tax, 1/2 ft^3 ventilated-insulated box, > organic material, cereal grain food, And 24 big fat worms! > Fred, as a "born free" tree-hugger and all around "animal whisperer", I oppose such endevors! Worms were meant to wriggle free and unfettered through their subterranean Shangri-La - surfacing only after a gentle spring rain to 69 with another worm from an adjacent hole. If you persist in promoting this viscious form of animal degradation, I'm afraid I must terminate our embryonic cyber-friendship! ||||||| / _____ \ O| O O |O | O | \ / \ / \___/ Francis (of Assisi) Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 14:25:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA22414; Sun, 31 May 1998 14:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 14:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3570762B.AA8C9927 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 00:12:11 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report - scalar waves References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"P7k2X.0.3U5.8aSSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19384 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Naudin's experiments are always left uncompleted. Additional experiments to prove the claim are never done. It is unfortunate that such efforts loose their scientific values and become simply interesting web pages. Instead very simple additional experimen t could be performed within hours could offer the scientific value. positive result - negative result, they have both scientifically valuable. BTW, never see negative result claims on Naudin's exps. Regards, hamdi ucar Jim Ostrowski wrote: > > On Sun, 31 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > > > This brief experiment is related to Jean-Louis Naudin's "Scalar Waves > > Transmitter" > > > > Naudin's experiment uses a Caduceus coil to transmit to a portable radio > > inside a metal Faraday shield. > > [snip] > > Horace, > > I thought Faraday cages were supposed to be earth grounded , and this > experiment does not specify wither the tin containing the radio was > grounded or not. Wouldn't an ungrounded tin behave somewhat like an > antenna since whatever fields it encounters the metal will react according > to Lenz' Law (impinging fields give rise to opposing currents). > > Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 14:35:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26365; Sun, 31 May 1998 14:31:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 14:31:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 14:29:35 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report - scalar waves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hmrQo1.0.qR6.zmSSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19385 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 31 May 1998, Jim Ostrowski wrote: > I thought Faraday cages were supposed to be earth grounded , and this > experiment does not specify wither the tin containing the radio was > grounded or not. Wouldn't an ungrounded tin behave somewhat like an > antenna since whatever fields it encounters the metal will react according > to Lenz' Law (impinging fields give rise to opposing currents). Nope, the inside of a Faraday cage provides a virtual ground as long as there are no wires leading outside. However, a thin Faraday cage does not provide a 100% shield for AC if the skin depth for that material and for that frequency is about the same as the thickness of the sheild. To guarantee shielding, the shield thickness must be much, much greater than the skin depth. What's the skin depth for steel at 540KHz? Dunno. A quick way to check for leakage problems would be to double the shield thickness (use two tins, a smaller one within a larger one), and see if it cuts down the effect. It would probably be a good idea to somehow disable the automatic gain control in the radio, or it might crank up the gain even though the signal was actually reduced. If you remove the shield, does the signal on the radio become much stronger? If so, then the coils are emitting a considerable amount of conventional EM, the bifilar geometry is imperfect somehow. That this works with sheet metal is not totally unexpected (it could possibly be stray emission from the coils, and leakage thru the thin metal,) but if the coils in fact emit almost no conventional fields, and if adding successive layers of sheilding does not decrease the signal, then you really have something. Watch out for radio AGC though, it can screw up even the crudest measurement. My congratulations on getting some positive results! You're doing actual work, unlike I who am taking potshots from the peanut gallery. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 May 31 15:51:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA15061; Sun, 31 May 1998 15:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 15:48:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 12:23:55 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Experiment report - scalar waves Resent-Message-ID: <"6wBRf2.0.Eh3.ZuTSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19386 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace - This is the kind of ambiguity I got from those Hodowanec things. I'd believe the results from them if they were both: a) operated in an undersea cave (I have convenient caves like this very near my house) b) run in a tank of LN2 so I know I'm not just listening to thermal jitter. Here is the problem for the typical low-budget amateur. It's easy to get "results" like Jean-Louis can so consistently. But it's very hard to eliminate noise, and thus ambiguity, from those results. So we are left wondering, which is what we were doing before the experiment in the first place. About all that can be said is that doing the experiments is fun and make one deserving of beer, and the results also make interesting filler content for somebody's personal web site that would otherwise have nothing on it but a picture of themselves and a list of their hobbies. Of course it remains that you might be able to find some clever way to trap out the desired effect without lots of expensive gear. Nice when it happens. Rare that it does. I'm still waiting for JLN to do this on something I hope for personally like the BB effect. I think Bob Shannon did a series of experiments like this and tried all sorts of heavy shielding and still got somewhat ambiguous results. It does tend to look like it works though, I must admit. Have a beer, Horace. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 16:18:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA22145; Sun, 31 May 1998 16:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 16:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <003601bd8ce6$be07f080$a141d3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: Experiment report - scalar waves Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 18:51:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Resent-Message-ID: <"nKTCF3.0.uP5.OIUSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19387 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bill said: >On Sun, 31 May 1998, Jim Ostrowski wrote: >Watch out for radio AGC though, it can screw up even the crudest >measurement. Bill's right. Further, a can has to have metallic gaskets or be soldered at all points before can be said to be a shield. One has no idea how hard it is to shield against EM transmission to a high gain receiver until you try it. Governments spend carefully uncounted sums in the game of electronic intelligence, sniffing for signals leaking out of electronic equipment. The radio-in-the-can is just the inverse case. What it takes to contain RF emissions against sniffing is, not suprisingly, a classified subject referred to by a code name. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 17:23:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA07674; Sun, 31 May 1998 17:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 17:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD8CC8.BB750C40 pm3-124.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'freenrg-l eskimo.com'" Cc: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: Test results-scalar waves transmitter Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 19:17:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id RAA07628 Resent-Message-ID: <"Snx343.0.dt1.OGVSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19388 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hello all: I have sucessfully tested J-L Naudin's "Scalar Waves Transmitter". My results are inconclusive. I used two cookie tins, each a little less than a millimeter thick, with a radio tuned to 204kHZ. I tested with the transmitter hooked up to a caduceus coil, a nd heard the tone through the cage. I then hooked the leads from the transmitter together, without the cad coil, and still heard the tone through the cage. Maybe I should try using the 1/4 inch thick steel ammunition box I just happen to have as a cage? Jean-Louis: how thick was your cage? Kyle R. mcallister Email: stk sunherald.infi.net Phone: 228-875-0629 http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 17:55:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA14968; Sun, 31 May 1998 17:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 17:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 20:47:22 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Farnsworth Fusor Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199805312051_MC2-3EBB-539E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"3RsWN1.0.of3.ukVSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19389 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To: Vortex Mitchell Swartz wrote: No. sorry, that [40 seconds of stand-alone operation] is not evidence of overunity. Differential diagnosis includes stored energy, stuck meter, or errors including delary, charging, and integration errors in any of a number of sites. . . . Yes, of course, but Farnsworth and his staff understood all that. He was one of the greatest hands-on scientists and inventors in history. It is hardly likely that he said to his wife, "Darling, why don't you drop by the lab to see this amazing capacitor discharge." I have sent that passage to experts, and they assure me that no stored energy phenomenon could produce 30 to 40 seconds of operation after the power is cut off. Not even 3 or 4 seconds. Criticism like this is a waste of time. Why does someone like Richard Wall pretend that I was talking about the neutron detector going off scale when the paragraph clearly stated that the effect continued without input? Why does Fred Sparber talk about the input to output ratio when input is zero? The ratio is infinite. Mitchell Swartz knows as well as anyone that no stored energy phenomenon can account for this, so why bring that up? If you people have real criticisms of the Farnsworth experiments, or you think the published reports of extended self-sustained reactions are in error, you should say so. Give us facts and figures and references to back up your claims. Stop wasting our time with irrelevant stuff, and stop playing 20 questions with me. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 18:01:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA16500; Sun, 31 May 1998 17:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 17:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3571FCC7.CB232EB2 microtronics.com.au> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 10:28:47 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: SMOT Mk5 Design Up Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JjtiX2.0.g14.8pVSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19390 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI All, The SMOT Mk5 design is now available. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 18:38:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA23758; Sun, 31 May 1998 18:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 18:35:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980531213226.007b6e60 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 21:32:26 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor In-Reply-To: <199805312051_MC2-3EBB-539E compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"lTaI51.0.4p5.pLWSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19391 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:47 PM 5/31/98 -0400, Jed wrote: >Mitchell Swartz wrote: > No. sorry, that [40 seconds of stand-alone operation] is not evidence of > overunity. > > Differential diagnosis includes stored energy, stuck meter, or errors > including delary, charging, and integration errors in any of a number of > sites. . . . > ............. > Mitchell Swartz knows as well as anyone that no stored >energy phenomenon can account for this, so why bring that up? If you people >have real criticisms of the Farnsworth experiments, or you think the published >reports of extended self-sustained reactions are in error, you should say so. >Give us facts and figures and references to back up your claims. Stop wasting >our time with irrelevant stuff, and stop playing 20 questions with me. Jed altered my post, which simply said, "that is not evidence of overunity". In any case, my criticism was not of the Farsworth experiment but of Mr. Rothwell's claim that a "needle remained in place for thirty seconds or more" necessarily implies over-unity. It does not. As posted, overunity and breakeven have specific definitions which are not necessarily proven by a meter reading, or a reaction extending beyond the input. Many energy storage, dissipative, and other mechanisms might account and must be rigorously ruled out. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 20:04:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA13003; Sun, 31 May 1998 20:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 20:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 20:30:26 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199806010130.UAA18952 dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com> From: rwall ix.netcom.com (Richard Wayne Wall) Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"5vupx2.0.zA3.ccXSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19392 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote: > >Criticism like this is a waste of time. Why does someone like Richard Wall >pretend that I was talking about the neutron detector going off scale when the >paragraph clearly stated that the effect continued without input? Why does >Fred Sparber talk about the input to output ratio when input is zero? The >ratio is infinite. Mitchell Swartz knows as well as anyone that no stored >energy phenomenon can account for this, so why bring that up? If you people >have real criticisms of the Farnsworth experiments, or you think the published >reports of extended self-sustained reactions are in error, you should say so. >Give us facts and figures and references to back up your claims. Stop wasting >our time with irrelevant stuff, and stop playing 20 questions with me. > >- Jed > > Please Jed, not so much emotion. Are you at all familiar with the injector system Farnsworth and team created for their fusor system and how it differs from modern fusors? Rather than take the unreliable word of a writer who wasn't even there, why don't you contact the living two or three of the five man team that were there working on the fusor with Farnsworth. Richard Hull did. Or, read Mrs. Farnsworth's book. You would do well to educate yourself on the truth of these matters. Both are quite easy to do. End of thread on my behalf. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 20:09:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA14678; Sun, 31 May 1998 20:06:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 20:06:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:36:32 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: List FreeNrg Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Design Up In-Reply-To: <3571FCC7.CB232EB2 microtronics.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"lo-eS3.0.Fb3.pgXSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19393 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Greg Watson wrote: > HI All, > > The SMOT Mk5 design is now available. > > -- OK, this looks like fun. I'll have another go. Just off to JayCar to buy some more magnets. Cheers. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 21:26:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA01534; Sun, 31 May 1998 21:24:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 21:24:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 20:51:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: superluminal? In-Reply-To: <58af6032.35715274 aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"gKr_a3.0.pN.opYSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19394 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 31 May 1998 Geosas aol.com wrote: > Somebody said that they thought that Nikola Tesla's papers > had been lost. Not lost. Unavailable for public review. > > I believe that a lot of them are in a Tesla museum in Croatia, which > country claims him as a native. > Are there any descriptions of "death rays" in this collection? > The Japanese Aum sect which released nerve gas on the Tokyo > subway were over in Croatia and copied a lot of the papers, leaving > their photocopier behind as payment. Glad you're on top of the news , George. The object was to discover if > Tesla's ideas could be used to find a means of blowing up the planet. > Tesla's apartment vibrator , said to have created small earthquake. But Cheney acknowledges Croatia got sme of them. Buy the book if you still can. May become some kind of classic. > Best, George. Best WHAT George? Jim Ostrowski > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 22:14:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA10874; Sun, 31 May 1998 22:12:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 22:12:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3572384C.484690E2 microtronics.com.au> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 14:42:44 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: SMOT Mk5 Details Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PKZga2.0.bf2.6XZSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19395 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, You will find more details to allow the SMOT Mk5 to be replicated. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 22:37:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA10405; Sun, 31 May 1998 22:35:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 22:35:53 -0700 From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Case: Self sustainer Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:30:41 +1000 Message-ID: <000001bd8d20$976fd340$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"fVeDO3.0.VY2.usZSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19396 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vorts Reading Mallove's commentary in Infinite Energy, I saw the line, concerning the Case experiment "It appears to be a nearly optimal embodiment of the Fleischmann-Pons process." Why? The Fleischmann-Pons process requires electricity to obtain the high loading levels. Where is the electricity? Further thinking made me see that it may be there in the form of an applied voltage due to temperature gradients. This would mean that the surface of the catalyst would be of great interest because that is where the greatest temperature gradient is. There is also the possibility of numerous conductive micro-pockets that would need the temperature gradient in order to sustain a current as they are unconnected to any macro electrical route. Gene or Scott, is it possible to put a microscope (or electron microscope) picture of the surface and of a slice of the catalyst material onto the web so all can see? One consequence of this is that the self sustainer may not work at all, even if CF was happening. (Or to put it another way, CF is not disproved by the failure of a self sustainer, as there is a reasonable thermo-mechanical reason for the conditions of the self sustainer not meeting those necessary for the F-P process.) Once the temperature gradient is reduced, there will no longer be sufficient electrical current produced to create the F-P effect. Brendan Hall