From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 00:35:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA25904; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 00:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980601073115.21321.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.17] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Details Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 00:31:14 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"vlmFv2.0.fK6.XbbSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19397 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greg, Looking at the plans for this I assume you get a net height gain of 6mm, this is far more than the previous one. Or is it less than 6mm because of magnetic drag back. If you make the end drop say 3mm can you then get it to roll away using this small drop, giving you a net height gain of 3mm? Whats the minimum drop you require to get it to roll away..or to put it another way what is the max. height gain you can get from one ramp? I will have to get my magnets out again for this one....it looks very promising. I would love to get this running. I have all the bits to build a MK5, but my ball bearing was an old mouse ball with the rubber scrapped off so I need to get a new clean ball beraing from somewhere. Are the kits you sent out based on the MK5? >From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun May 31 22:12:26 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 > >Hi, > >You will find more details to allow the SMOT Mk5 to be replicated. > >-- >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 Mon Jun 1 01:34:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA07384; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 01:33:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 01:33:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 02:27:23 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Details In-Reply-To: <19980601073115.21321.qmail hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CVvk.0.Hp1.5TcSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19398 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Rob King wrote: -snip- Looking at the plans for this I assume you get a net height gain of 6mm, ------------------------ ------------------------ Good point Rob, I also didn't see the elevatation or lift myself. Greg, Welcome back, hope all is well, DMEC be D*mn -eh? ... grrreat! I'm off to tear up the older smot(s) on your recommendation, that older smot(s) will yeild working smot! :) actually it cheaper to just buy the $3.00 stick of channel and swap over the magnets from the ffsmot! :) --------------- I'm scratching my head though on this new 'reversal' of flux density. Note: I'm a 'reverser' by nature / "If you can't bring Mohamad to the mountain, bring the mountain to Mohaned" kind of guy. This Mk5 has done a 360 double-double reverse! *c_o_o_l*.. 1..now that the entry is stronger, do you suspect the steel bar backing is 'adding' to the flux? .. would a trianglar magnet be as good or better?? by your homepage, it looks like the steel is ending at the 'blue-hole'? 2... is steel bar backing really/even needed?? (I remember showing some people the smot effect with just two hand held magnets on an aluminum channel with mouse ball) [hand movement is what the critics gave for input energy] (sigh).. 'you got to feel & see it to believe it -eh?!!!' Anyway, 3.. will start checking out the 'design' ASAP, (inside out & upside down as it is now.. interesting.. (and it looks 'backwards!') to what was already amazing.. Last year, we were all purplexed by it takes LESS or less for the effect, counterintuative to the TIM TAYLOR (home improvemnt) mentality.. More power, More Power etc.. This is ~weird~ & exciting..(reverse on reverse - i mean) Will keep you posted on results, and post pics here! Good luck, -=se=- ekwall2 diac.com steve (if a 'plain joe' like me can do it, anyone can :) ekwall understood it's "low OUT put", BUT IT'S "OUT" on it's own. :) thanks again for the "Christmas Present" as it were. you're a good man! From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 05:57:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA08448; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 05:55:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 05:55:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005301bd8d5b$d7f2dd00$398cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Oxygenated Fuels and Aldehydes Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 06:49:39 -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: <"RW3HI3.0.t32.jIgSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19399 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Paul Brown's point about the use of Ethanol for motor fuel in Brazil producing dangerous levels of acetaldehyde is a good one. The switch from leaded to oxygenated fuel octane boosters might be a mixed blessing, especially if the engines are not properly designed-adjusted to minimize production of the aldehydes. I think the rash of respiratory illnesses since the switch to Methyl-Tert-Butyl-ether (MTBE) and Ethanol is connected. So it becomes a matter of lead and carbon monoxide poisoning versus "Asthma". The intent of using mehanol CH3OH as an easily transported motor fuel and hydrogen storage means: 3 H2 + CO2 ---> CH3OH + H2O means that you can reverse this reaction on demand in an onboard converter: H2O + CH3OH ---> 3 H2 + CO2 and burn it in a standard I.C. Engine or a fuel cell. Nothing environmentally benign comes without a price. On the other hand, it seems that the implementation of environmental protection requirements CREATES NEW JOBS AND INDUSTRIES. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 06:34:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA01630; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 06:33:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 06:33:13 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980601093653.009cb380 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 09:36:53 -0400 To: rmforall earthlink.net From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Britz: Miley's table top fusion machine 05/28/98 Cc: Vortex-L eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <356EEF3C.1BA earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"hcHtP.0.OP.OsgSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19400 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:24 PM 5/29/98 -0500, Rich Murray wrote: > Anyway, he hopes to boost the flux higher still. The whole thing is >said to be football-sized. Someone who knows all about this stuff had >better read that article. 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. The "problem" with the Farnsworth approach is low power density. Yes you get a very high neutron flux, but I once tried to design for engineering, not scientific, breakeven. You end up with an electrostatic confinement fusion device which produces neutrons and about 78 watts of total energy. Use those neutrons in subcritical fission, and you can turn the total output power into a megawatt without any enriched uranium. But obviously most of the energy you get is fission, and it is if anything, a little dirtier than standard light water reactors. So the Farnsworth device remains an interesting source of high-energy neutrons. 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 Jun 1 08:15:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA05298; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 08:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 08:12:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:06:08 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: News and a visit from Les Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806011108_MC2-3EC9-B8CA compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"cqLyx1.0.fI1.iJiSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19401 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 Les Case and Gene Mallove have both been very busy, and will be until next week, so I'll post a short report of their activities. I base this on a fax from Case and a conversation with Gene, who is rushing off to yet another assignment. Case was sidetracked from the task we hoped he would do. His agenda is not quite the same as ours. He spent some time trying to scale up rather than making a device to self sustain. Last Wednesday he visited Gene and delivered a bunch of spare parts, and suggested that Gene have a go at it. He included a gas tight cell like the one he used to achieve ~20 watts excess, which he hopes to fit inside a large Dewar to make a self sustaining cell. Unfortunately this cell also has a leak, so Gene is rushing off at this moment to have it repaired. Unfortunately for us, Case now has some personal business to attend to and he will not be able to perform experiments or assist us again until June 13. In the meanwhile we should be able to get some testing in, including calibration. We are fortunate in that M. Srinivasan will be visiting Gene for a few days while this is going on. He knows a lot about gas calorimetry. In a memo faxed to us, Case said that he tried two scaled up cells with G75D catalyst, and both "totally failed." He says "I ran into the same problems as Scott." He says he learned that it is a fatal mistake to pile up the catalyst deeply packed in a cylinder. It must be spread out evenly in a shallow layer. He writes: Anyone who modifies the procedure does so at his own peril!!!" In a conversation he said he thinks the catalyst might be permanently wrecked by piling up, presumably from local overheating. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 09:33:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA21211; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:29:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:29:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:28:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Test results-scalar waves transmitter In-Reply-To: <01BD8CC8.BB750C40 pm3-124.gpt.infi.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"jkFRl1.0.HB5.hRjSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19402 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 31 May 1998, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > 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, and 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. Would you please try attaching the cage to the most conveient cold water pipe with as short and as fat a cable available ,Kyle? "skin effect" (where impinging radiation would only be detectable on the OUTSIDE of your tin ) is only relevant at VHF according to my Radio Amateur's handbook (1985). Your test above seems to prove that this "faraday cage" won't even block normal RF , much less "scalar" waves. If you grounded this radiation it should less detectable inside OR out. It would be closer sim to operating the radio in a cave. Maybe I should try > using the 1/4 inch thick steel ammunition box I just happen to have as a > cage? If you ground THAT and the radio still picks up your transmitter , then you have something! Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 09:35:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02609; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:31:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:31:35 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01BD8CC8.BB750C40 pm3-124.gpt.infi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:32:43 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Test results-scalar waves transmitter Resent-Message-ID: <"O81bk3.0.he.bTjSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19403 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Kyle wrote: ...I used two cookie tins, each a little less than a millimeter thick... The cookie tins I am familiar with have a clear, laquer-like coating over the bare-looking metal. This is probably to keep it looking nice and shiny for a long time. However, the coating prevents good electrical contact between the lid and the box. Therefore, electric current induced on the outer surface of the box runs over the edge and on to the metal surface of the interior of the box. Even without the "laquer," cookie tin lids usually leave one or more narrow gaps along the straight sides, through which current can flow over the edge and to the interior. The narrowness of the gap does not matter. Anyone who has had to measure small electrical signals in the presence of large electromagnetic "noise" knows this effect. It can be mitigated. There is no "government secret" involved. In the present case the solution is very simple, because there are no wires to shield and filter. Just clean the contacting edges and solder the WHOLE seam shut. 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 Jun 1 09:54:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA24747; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980601114201.00c4b924 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 11:42:01 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: News and a visit from Les Case In-Reply-To: <199806011108_MC2-3EC9-B8CA compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"epbGa2.0.Z26.pejSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19404 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:06 6/1/98 -0400, Jed wrote: >In a memo faxed to us, Case said...it is a fatal mistake to pile up the >catalyst deeply packed in a cylinder. It must be spread out evenly in a shallow >layer. Most interesting. Temperature measurement errors cause by conduction of heat through the stem of the temperature probe, known as "stem effects", will tend to dominate when the probe is inserted into a shallow layer of catalyst. Brendon Hall asked about a microscope picture of the catalyst. I have examined a few catalyst flakes with a 30X binocular microscope with excellent image quality and depth of field but no camera attachment. The surface appears to be fine-grained and compact with little or no evidence of pockets. There could be some smaller structures that this microscope just misses. 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 Jun 1 10:11:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29819; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:07:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199805312051_MC2-3EBB-539E compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:05:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Resent-Message-ID: <"dytfM3.0.jH7.t-jSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19405 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed R. wrote: > "Dr. Farnsworth cut the applied power...but the needle remained in >place for thirty seconds or more as the reaction continued." However, sensitive radiation counters can take a long time to recover from overload. If Farnsworth knew about this, and also just to measure how many he was really producing, he should have moved the counter back far enough that it no longer saturated. He could then use the inverse r-squared law to estimate the neutron source intensity (assuming his counter was well calibrated and there were no neutron scatterers in the lab---the latter condition is usually not satisfied, however). 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 Jun 1 10:15:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA16174; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:11:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:11:38 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 18:11:39 +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: <"2bmtZ3.0.Xy3.83kSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19406 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 30 May 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > > > 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 > Yeah, yeah. Thanks. Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 10:35:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA03875; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:31:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 18:26:36 +0100 (BST) From: Cornwall RO X-Sender: remi exeter To: Vortex-L Subject: Re: Oxygenated Fuels and Aldehydes In-Reply-To: <005301bd8d5b$d7f2dd00$398cbfa8 default> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Ad1Yc2.0.Py.OLkSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19407 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > On the other hand, it seems that the implementation of environmental > protection requirements CREATES NEW JOBS AND INDUSTRIES. :-) > > Regards, Frederick > Why do you have to force people? Isn't it possible to appeal to their better nature, or have you given up? Or is the challenge of producing something cheaper and better to difficult? Or is there very powerful people interested in the status quo? Does regulation assume that the masses are dumb and the powerful are evil? Naively, Remi. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 10:36:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA22585; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:31:48 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 10:31:48 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8D58.F0554340 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Test results-scalar waves transmitter Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:29:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8D58.F05E6B00" Resent-Message-ID: <"dc6fy3.0.hW5.2MkSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19408 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D58.F05E6B00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Jim Ostrowski[SMTP:jimostr ctainforms.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 1998 11:28 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Test results-scalar waves transmitter >Would you please try attaching the cage to the most conveient cold water >pipe with as short and as fat a cable available ,Kyle? "skin effect" >(where impinging radiation would only be detectable on the OUTSIDE of your >tin ) is only relevant at VHF according to my Radio Amateur's handbook >(1985). I'll try that. >If you ground THAT and the radio still picks up your transmitter , then >you have something! Bad news: it has a hole in the bottom, and its painted all over. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D58.F05E6B00 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IiQRAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACoAAABSRTogVGVz dCByZXN1bHRzLXNjYWxhciB3YXZlcyB0cmFuc21pdHRlcgCJDwEFgAMADgAAAM4HBgABAAwAHQAj AAEAKQEBIIADAA4AAADOBwYAAQAMABsALwABADMBAQmAAQAhAAAAQ0U1MDYxMEMyN0Y5RDExMUE3 NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAADwcBA5AGAPgEAAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAu AAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQCgP1rYgo29AR4AcAABAAAAKgAAAFJFOiBUZXN0IHJlc3VsdHMtc2Nh bGFyIHdhdmVzIHRyYW5zbWl0dGVyAAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2Ngtha68PjIvlIEdGnXujgCsEA AAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxkLmluZmkubmV0 AAADAAYQ/DI40AMABxAhAgAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006SklNT1NUUk9XU0tJ U01UUDpKSU1PU1RSQENUQUlORk9STVNDT01TRU5UOk1PTkRBWSxKVU5FMDEsMTk5ODExOjI4QU1U TzpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTQAAAAACAQkQAQAAAFgDAABUAwAAxwYAAExaRnX3RK2H/wAKAQ8CFQKk A+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV/3gyNTUCgAqB DbELYG7wZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMMLWTE2CqADYPZ0 BZAFQC0e5wqHHZsMMHUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIgQkoHcCBPc3QDYHcAc2tpW1NNVFDUOmoHcG8j8UAe sAtxIQIQcm1zLgWgbV2/H48gnQZgAjAhzyLbTQIgEGRheSwjkHVuZQggMDEqwDE5OTiRK2AxOjIr oEFNJk9ZIJ1UbyiPItt2FaFl8HgtbEAHkCRQBGAl8uMsTydedWJqHqEubyLbdFJlM+BUB5AFQBYA c+B1bHRzLQTwB0AKwTh3YXYHkSQAAHFtac8CQASQGu8b8zM2HWcaNbceZjheGd8+Oe8ehFcIYFBs ZCB5CGAgC1BlxmER8DeReSBhAkAA0GpoC4BnN5BoKxA24Gf9P9FvQMMk8kEAAiA3YAiQ/wIwQhE/ ETdAOCg8Pz1PHld+cAUgKxAD8EDQQCAEIHPeaBWhQCAqgEcSZkAwQCB/QQECYCsQN1ALcAtgSKIs xEt5P5A/ICIkQQOgOw3BHqEiO79Eb0V/KHf7QOAWACAHcEaAGQBAkjew8mQHMHRpAiA3MD7zAiD6 bEAQYisQDbAekkiTT3EBQNJPVVRTSURF/U/wZj8yQ19L30zvT1ADoP4pTlAEIFADFgA/kEjwQpHR SDFWSEZAIGMFoU8ga0CiQXBtQBBSTxFBcEH3AMAekAhwJwQgEcAqgAbgPG9rUp9Tr0z/K3A4NRwp LgqPGg9d0kknbD8DID/yQNBAMF2WXaU8c3kDAHA+OM853lt/OqlJHVIzIAnACGBHwVRIQf5UR6NA 0k8CQXAj8AMQAyDJRoBjawQgdXBSQzea+0lwQMJuWh9j7zpeP0IRwN83YEdAA3ASAECCIWIvHWdP EvIB0BtMau8gQk8QIP8rACQwM+A4AFmBBCBIYEdg/0ixSiFA0gbgAkADcCrAR7J/OAAEIHDwC4Ae kEfRYCFv3TdgcmDdSZIH8C4F0DbhLxwgI/A4NxUhAHlgAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzCAKTCY go29AUAACDCAKTCYgo29AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AAAdbw== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D58.F05E6B00-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 12:02:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA20529; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:52:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3572F33D.38C7 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 14:30:21 -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: Test results-scalar waves transmitter References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"a6LiS3.0.S05.FXlSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19410 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jim Ostrowski wrote: > Kyle said: > Maybe I should try > > using the 1/4 inch thick steel ammunition box I just happen to have as a > > cage? > > If you ground THAT and the radio still picks up your transmitter , then > you have something! > Jim Ostrowski Good suggestion, Jim. Also, Kyle, if the box has a rubber gasket, try to remove it and/or short it out with something like a multi'layer wad of aluminum foil. A closure with "occasional" contact is no good. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 12:49:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA28298; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35730075.2F59 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 15:26:45 -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: Britz: Miley's table top fusion machine 05/28/98 References: <3.0.1.32.19980601093653.009cb380 spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"R8aZe3.0.4w6.I9mSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19411 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > (snip) > The "problem" with the Farnsworth approach is low power density. Yes > you get a very high neutron flux, but I once tried to design for > engineering, not scientific, breakeven. You end up with an electrostatic > confinement fusion device which produces neutrons and about 78 watts of > total energy. Robert, do you know how a fusor would scale up in size? Would the old "area like r^2, volume like r^3" effect be of any help? I'm not clear on this but I guess you would need to adjust the vacuum level to maintain the correct mean-free-path? How does a 10-meter dia. fusor sound? Frank Stenger (an honorary Texan - where bigger is better!) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 13:18:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA07236; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:12:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:12:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:12:31 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor In-Reply-To: <199805312051_MC2-3EBB-539E compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hjVzD3.0.zm1.himSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19413 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 31 May 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote: > 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 I agree, this is starting to look like s.p.f. "speculative debunking", where the skeptics take potshots without backing up their counterclaims, or offering evidence, or at least saying "this is only speculative, but..." That said, take a look at Richard Hull's message from the Farnsworth Fusor web-BBS at http://www.songs.com/cgi-bin/discussion.pl/philomsgbd/ (Part of http://www.songs.com/philo/fusion/index.html) entitled "Skepticism? No.. Honesty!" A fragment of one message is attached below to attract those with interest. It sounds to me like "battling rumors" going on here, Vassilatos versus Hull. Myself, I refuse to believe that the fusor self-sustained... AND I refuse to believe that self-sustaining reaction was never achieved. I don't know enough, so I choose to withold judgement and live with indeterminate reality. To me, taking a stand here seems to be the "bead falling off the wire" error which cancels openmindedness. Part of our love of the unknown should be an ability to TOLERATE the unknown. This means that grey areas should be seen as they really are, and we should not choose sides simply to stroke our egos or to eliminate the uncertainty. In ENCYCLOPEDIA OF IGNORANCE, R. A. Lyttleton proposes that one's belief in a particular hypothesis is like a bead which slides along a wire. One end of the wire represents 100% disbelief, and the other shows 100% acceptance, and if we ever slide our beads to either 100% setting, the bead falls off and cannot be restored. We should adjust our beads to 50% belief in Fusor self-sustaining (or 10%, or 90%). Anyone who TOTALLY BELIEVES one way or another has fallen into an emotional trap. Their minds are closed, and they will react with hostility if they encounter contrary evidence. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 The Farnsworth Chronicles _________________________________________________________________ Fusion Message Board In this space, visitors are invited to post any comments, questions, or skeptical observations about Philo T. Farnsworth's contributions to the field of Nuclear Fusion research. Post a Response Subject: Skepticism? NO,.. honesty! Date: Jan 13, 4:15 pm Poster: Richard Hull On Jan 13, 4:15 pm, Richard Hull wrote: All, After re-checking my recent notes, tapes, etc from interviews with all the Farnsworth team members, I must conclude, due to emphatic, unilateral statements made by each and every team member that......... at no time, ever, during the entire period of fusor work by any team member (1959-1968 ITT - until 1972-end of BYU era), did any sustained or even suspected sustained fusion reaction occur! This is just a statement of fact, not a blanket of pessimism thrown at the work. Nor, is it any form of condemnation of the dreams or hopes of Farnsworth. I believe there is hope for finishing the dream. Before this can be done, some money must be spent to do the job at least as well as the original team. (probably in the millions)... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 13:20:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA06541; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:13:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:13:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 12:12:09 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Test results-scalar waves transmitter Resent-Message-ID: <"CvABk.0.zb1.2kmSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19412 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:32 AM 6/1/98, Schaffer gav.gat.com wrote: >Kyle wrote: > >...I used two cookie tins, each a little less than a millimeter thick... > >The cookie tins I am familiar with have a clear, laquer-like coating over >the bare-looking metal. This is probably to keep it looking nice and shiny >for a long time. However, the coating prevents good electrical contact >between the lid and the box. Therefore, electric current induced on the >outer surface of the box runs over the edge and on to the metal surface of >the interior of the box. Even without the "laquer," cookie tin lids usually >leave one or more narrow gaps along the straight sides, through which >current can flow over the edge and to the interior. The narrowness of the >gap does not matter. Anyone who has had to measure small electrical signals >in the presence of large electromagnetic "noise" knows this effect. There appears to be strong indication that in all cases, Naudin's, Mcallister's, and mine, that there is a simple case of leakage that is bridged with sufficient power. However, there is still a lack of conclusive proof. It would be good to have some means of solid proof, one way or the other. > >It can be mitigated. There is no "government secret" involved. In the >present case the solution is very simple, because there are no wires to >shield and filter. Just clean the contacting edges and solder the WHOLE >seam shut. This method is a bit impractical, due to the need to get inside to turn the radio off. In my case, I verified electrical contact between lid and tin using a continuity testor. There is a plastic over the lid, but it terminates at the rim. A piece of aluminum foil might help make higher pressure contact, but ridges in the foil would still make for gaps. How about the idea of layers of foil wrap? Layers of foil wrap separated by plastic wrap? I was under the impression that copper screen could be used for a Faraday cage, that an effective shield could be had if the mesh is sufficiently fine compared to the wavelength being shielded. Is this not true? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 13:44:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13435; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:31:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:31:49 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8D72.11163C60 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Test results-scalar waves transmitter Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:29:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8D72.11163C60" Resent-Message-ID: <"hdVe_.0.dH3.p-mSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19414 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D72.11163C60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Monday, June 01, 1998 3:12 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Test results-scalar waves transmitter >There appears to be strong indication that in all cases, Naudin's, >Mcallister's, and mine, that there is a simple case of leakage that is >bridged with sufficient power. However, there is still a lack of >conclusive proof. It would be good to have some means of solid proof, = one >way or the other. Wednesday, I'll be getting a fifty gallon barrel and a 30 gallon barrel, = each about 1/8th inch thick. I will retest using this. What about using = several layers of aluminum automotive repair tape for a seal? Kyle R. Mcallister P.S: I can tell you all one thing: I'm not convinced of my results until = I do MANY tests. > >It can be mitigated. There is no "government secret" involved. In the >present case the solution is very simple, because there are no wires to >shield and filter. Just clean the contacting edges and solder the WHOLE >seam shut. This method is a bit impractical, due to the need to get inside to turn = the radio off. In my case, I verified electrical contact between lid and = tin using a continuity testor. There is a plastic over the lid, but it terminates at the rim. A piece of aluminum foil might help make higher pressure contact, but ridges in the foil would still make for gaps. How about the idea of layers of foil wrap? Layers of foil wrap = separated by plastic wrap? I was under the impression that copper screen could be used for a = Faraday cage, that an effective shield could be had if the mesh is sufficiently fine compared to the wavelength being shielded. Is this not true? Regards, Horace Heffner =20 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D72.11163C60 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhwUAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACoAAABSRTogVGVz dCByZXN1bHRzLXNjYWxhciB3YXZlcyB0cmFuc21pdHRlcgCJDwEFgAMADgAAAM4HBgABAA8AHQAb AAEAJAEBIIADAA4AAADOBwYAAQAPABoAJgABACwBAQmAAQAhAAAARjc1MDYxMEMyN0Y5RDExMUE3 NUVFOEUwMEFDMTAwMDAABAcBA5AGALwHAAAUAAAACwAjAAAAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQAAAAAAAwAu AAAAAAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQDAOBv5m429AR4AcAABAAAAKgAAAFJFOiBUZXN0IHJlc3VsdHMtc2Nh bGFyIHdhdmVzIHRyYW5zbWl0dGVyAAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2Nm/kbszaWgvlkEdGnXujgCsEA AAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxkLmluZmkubmV0 AAADAAYQyg2NBgMABxBYBQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006SE9SQUNFSEVGRk5F UlNNVFA6SEhFRkZORVJAQ09SRUNPTU5FVFNFTlQ6TU9OREFZLEpVTkUwMSwxOTk4MzoxMlBNVE86 Vk9SVEVYLUxARVNLSU1PQwAAAAACAQkQAQAAABwGAAAYBgAA+QoAAExaRnXgbRmh/wAKAQ8CFQKk A+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV/3gyNTUCgAqB DbELYG7wZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMMLWTE2CqADYPZ0 BZAFQC0e5wqHHZsMMHUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIgtkgFsADQZSOQDcFuBJAAW1NNVFA6aGhNJCRABaEF kW0uJFB0fl0fjyCdBmACMCHPIttNAQIgZGF5LCBKdREkUCAwMSqwMTk5IDggMzoxEiBQTbMmPyCd VG8ofyLbdhWhoGV4LWxAB5BrB3Acby4lsSwvJ051YmqnHqEuTyLbUmUzwFQHkAMFQBYAc3VsdHMt RwTwB0AKwXdhdgeRdPMjwACAbWkCQASQGu8b8+wzNh1nGjk+Oc0tpyTwwRYAIGFwcGUR0TdweG8g YiPwNgADYBkAIMkLgGRpNsB0aQIgN3DvEcAFQAuAPMBsAyA2wBHwInMqsE5hdT5Abif/P9AxXTpP O18F0DbBHCA2AO8EkEBhPMAqcCA30CRQKrD/PtM+0DySBAA8wD2gB3ALUEMj8D+SIG9mIEZwYdhr YWcj8D7Uc0CfQa/1O35iBRBkR3BEsAPwPtA9PaB1DdA+UAiQAjAgcORvdwSQLiAjkUzQN0D+ckUS RaU2AAMQAyBGEAtgfGNrRuFIH0kvO34FoG7+YwpAAJA3QEygA2BG8E0BakkFQHcIYGxEsD2BZ99T MESwPVERwFLhcwNwI/D/B4AGIkbxVSAcIESwUxMqsL0CIGVPT1BfO343IHlG4O8FwEWBRuBFgi4K jxoPW2KWVwmAJFBzKoNJJz9h/1QiEgA+gD3xRhAckAGAWkD2Zz9RPqFiCsAWAE6RRKH5RhAzMF+8 KrA9ABGwPMDFBuB1BUAxLzhL0QuA12JBPtA+UGtNAElLoT9hvxYAHpA2AVKxPfFjgXNNAP5XPuJi dGTUEfBNcQdATsHueQSQVbMHQHVE0WfgPMC/YqADcB6AUtIWAFtgaVpxPzzQI/ACEAXARhE9AGw/ 6Tg8S3lGcVJNAEO4ODz4UC5TM8Bj8DbAPrFgcP0DIHkIYD9DVtFjchkAbYHaJ2gwbh6AUlJ2YzFL gf1G8W1aQDY1ZMACMAMRY/DCZD1gTUFOWW3xNgDfZWA4rzm+HmY4PD515lORt23CPYE30WlfwB6Q ZE0AZzx0ReFvwCAiVFBNcW7fB4BMgRHwBQASACI+ETAgtmw3QHgBST6yVvY+HmD/B5BMckajWpJW AWKgPpJF4f9NcVpARjQqsD2ANsBSsHxjfzyiPKF4wQPwNjE9QXXmc/9jkGBwYMFEoRyQNnBM4irQ /zYBUpBVgVqDUmEBkB6wXwJ/CYBHcEXxRKFWAQSBWoNX8EhPTEWAJz0AaDCAoP9ioFsmWzU8cEXh B4A+0FRx/UXjYjfgPhBGUCPBPoA2wf0qsGQKUD1CWpIkUEuBPVH/XsE+EQCQDbCJYwhweuojwP8+ QD1gRvBTUwOgcNE/kl4h/31yBpAIkESwYHAeoQUQNsH7grY9cXRM0AnwRxBWMUSS/17xWzVk1EYQ gsJoATfgWkB/ZIIFsE0BeDdGEAtRTlFj/0bgTXFag1YhfjFioTfgWzX/bEFE0XfRRfFFYzYgB3BN Af5BTKAIkCPhZ5oCEAMRN9DMZ2gFQCTwbHBEwEdA/yPwY5CZADgXe7I2UDyhgsX/lORLQwQgPyFa kpiTU8ROVPeZk2nCX8BwcsdbNU0xYmV/WpKK0UYQRvJnN5z0I8Bw+j9NEEyhP5lwEfBbYXfS/Vs1 YlpAk6aiEzg8Y/E/oP9xcYRGiGKa0T6XBaA84QXAfwTxj9IFoFPlfpGBMWnTRv+j8SqBWzU2wEdw RRUDkQ3B/x6hUtKApamHEcCHsUcAWpLvB4FjEU4xTBdsqyYckCrx/yWxW2GKBFqSNyJGcBkAS9H/ PYBmY4Czd/JTgDdhhyJvwv83gApQam01oF/ACyBAd59X/yPKTRC3xjg8cu8dZxLydM8KIBUhALyA AwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzAge6GUm429AUAACDAge6GUm429AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAA AAAAAwANNP03AAB0og== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D72.11163C60-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 13:57:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA12109; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:41:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:41:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:37:00 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"0kA8F3.0.xy2.V7nSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19415 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Experimenting and reporting has been hampered by a twisted left knee, and an earlier injured right ankle. It's getting tough to get around! BIFILAR COIL EXPERIMENT #2 To improve the Faraday shielding over The bifilar coil experiment #1, the tin containing the radio was placed inside a heavy steel cabinet. The cabinet, now contining a high voltage DC power supply (off), was formerly an IBM 3274 controller cabinet, about a 2' x 2' x 1.5' heavy guage steel cabinet. The cabinet doors, as manufactured, are both ground strapped, and have contact brushes and contact plates on the unhinged sides to ensure good signal shielding. The cabinet is grounded through use of the ground wire to a three pronged receptical. The tin was placed inside the power supply cabinet, at distance of about 2.5 feet from the coil, 3.5 feet from the oscillator, both of which were placed on a 2"x10"x2' platform outside the grounded cabinet, at the level of the tin. Morse code like signals were successfully sent to the reciever, even though it was totally enclosed in a grounded heavy steel cabintet, and inside the tin. The transmission was successful both with the interior tin insulated by bubble sheet packing material, and when grounded to the cabinet with an allegator clipped test lead. This time the voltage probe was placed at the oscillator output lead. The current sensing resisto was again placed right after the ground lead from the oscillator. With the coil in a normal bifilar configuration, the current sense voltage was 546 mV RMS, so the current was about 54.6 mA RMS. The output voltage was 5.45 Vrms. Call this the closed circuit configuration. To check the capacitive/inductive linkage in the coil, vs conductive linkage, the two sides of the twisted pair were disconnected at the far end of the coil, eliminating any conductive linkage. With the coil in a nonconductive configuration, the current sense voltage was 485 mV RMS, so the current was about 48.5 mA RMS. The output voltage was 5.75 Vrms. Call this the open circuit configuration. In the open configuration the current lead the voltage by about 30 degrees. In the closed onfiguration, current lagged voltage by about 60 degrees. The x-y plot of current vs voltage produced an ellipse with major/minor axis ratio of about 3, while, at the same settings, the ratio was about 1.7 for the closed configuration. Both the open closed configurations transmitted well. To check directionality again, the coil was left in position, and rotated through the three axes. There did not seem to be any change in volume based on the direction of the coil. It is therefore assumed the apparent directionality in experiment #1 was caused by moving the connecting leads about, or possibly an unintentional change in distance, or both. It was noticed that if my hand touched the lead being used for make/brake Morse code type sending, that the tone could be heard at a reduced volume. The coil was disconnected and removed from the vicinity of the experiment. By simply touching the live lead the tone was transmitted. The coil was returned. The live lead was repeatedly touched to a single lead of the coil, but no tone was heard. The live lead was touched to another cookie tin, but still no tranmission. Something about my body made a fair transmitter. CONCLUSION Though things are more interesting, the results are still far from conclusive. The signal was successfully sent though a double shield, one of which was commercially designed to prevent RF radiation. Both grounded and ungrounded shield configurations were tested. In this sense the experiment again successfully replicates Naudin's results, but with a bifilar configuration, and in the higher frequency AM band. The ability to penetrate the shields was not dependent upon either a Caducius coil not a bifilar coil as transmitter. Neither is it clear exactly what makes for a good antenna. The human body made a partially effective transmitter, when various metal objects, and lengthy test leads, failed as transmitters. CONFIGURATION INFORMATION REPEATED FROM #1 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 goes 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. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 14:23:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00988; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:17:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:17:30 -0700 Message-ID: <35731A06.1C27 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:15:50 -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: Test results-scalar waves transmitter References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ddFJU1.0.OE.WfnSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19417 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > (snip) > I was under the impression that copper screen could be used for a Faraday > cage, that an effective shield could be had if the mesh is sufficiently > fine compared to the wavelength being shielded. Is this not true? > Horace, years ago I worked in a small room-sized Faraday cage at NASA - Lewis. Very foggy memory but as I recall it had copper structural sections with copper screen over large openings - sort of like a screened-in porch. The doors had rf "weather stripping" using multiple "finger-stock" contacts all around the door. I wonder about the contact between the woven mesh wire - is contact needed? - copper oxide being a semiconductor helps but how much? Maybe if the wires are well attached to the framing, no contact is needed at the wire cross points. If you have much mercury on hand, I would think that a good can turned upside down on a ring-trough of mercury in a groove on the sealing metal lid might work well. Still messy but not so much as solder! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 14:28:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03477; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:22:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:22:27 -0700 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 17:19:31 -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: <199806011721_MC2-3ECB-ADEF compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Y2NJL3.0.6s.HknSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19418 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To: Vortex; >INTERNET:rwall ix.netcom.com Michael J. Schaffer writes: However, sensitive radiation counters can take a long time to recover from overload. If Farnsworth knew about this, and also just to measure how many he was really producing, he should have moved the counter back far enough that it no longer saturated. Well Mike . . . how do you know he didn't? Are you familiar with his work? I do not know the details of the Farnsworth experiments and I could not judge them in any case. I gather many details were lost when the project was abruptly shut down. But it seems highly unlikely to me that the man who invented many key technologies, some of them closely related to radiation detectors, would not be aware of issues like this. It is hard for me to judge, but the objection you raise sounds elementary. I suppose anyone would think of it and conduct an experiment to overcome it. This is kind of like wondering whether Fleischmann checked to see if his cell is well stirred. In any case, I am not sure about this, but I believe the Fusor produced a small visible incandescent point plasma ball, similar to ball lighting. Farnsworth called it a "Poissor." These things hung around much longer than they should have after power was turned off. You did not need a radiation counter to observe them; your own natural built-in radiation detector works. According to Vassilatos, they were first observed by Crooks, who put them aside. Farnsworth revisited and improved on them with a gadget he called the "multipactor," which led to the Fusor. Richard Wayne Wall continues to play 20 questions, asking me: Are you at all familiar with the injector system Farnsworth and team created for their fusor system and how it differs from modern fusors? No, I have not got the slightest idea what an injector system would be, or what role it might play in this discussion. Look here, Richard: if you wish to make a point, PLEASE MAKE IT. Stop asking me questions. Post a few paragraphs here explaining why the apparent run-on, self sustaining reactions either: 1. Did not happen; or 2. Were not what they looked like. Go ahead and refute Vassilatos with specific information. Quote Mrs. F. Please stop telling us only that Vassilatos is "unreliable;" give us a reason. I probably will not understand, but others like Schaffer and Carrell will. 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. Why don't you?!? You are making the argument, not me. And you are arguing with Vassilatos, not with me. Have you talked to these people? Have you read the book by Mrs. F? Tell us what it says about this issue. Summarize it, briefly. You would do well to educate yourself on the truth of these matters. Both are quite easy to do. Not easy for me, I am afraid. The technical details are over my head. If you want to debate the history of science or basic calorimetry I'm ready for you. If you want to discuss the nitty-gritty of a paper by Mizuno that I translated, I might be able to hang in there for a while. But I'll pass on the Fusor. I pointed out that Vassilatos and others say the thing was self-sustaining at times. I asked experts and they say that is virtually impossible unless the device was generating energy. That is as far as I am prepared to go. If you disagree with assertions made by Vassilatos you should say why. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 14:29:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03659; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:22:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:22:54 -0700 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 17:19:44 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Regulations and technology Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806011721_MC2-3ECB-ADF0 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"Fjct-1.0.su.iknSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19419 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Remi asks: Does regulation assume that the masses are dumb and the powerful are evil? Naively . . . That is not naive, but it does display an ignorance of history, I think. The answer goes way back before the scientific revolution, to the medieval guilds, and ancient Roman and Chinese laws. We have always had regulations, and I expect we always will. They serve a vital role. The answer is the opposite: regulation assumes the masses are smart enough to follow sensible rules once the rules are spelled out. It assumes that most professionals will followed rules because based on experience and good reasons. A few people are foolish or evil. They will build walls with the wrong kind of stone; dig trenches without enough supports; and undercook food. Without regulation, these people will undersell honest tradesmen. Their buildings will collapse, their customers will be poisoned. They will cause havoc and frighten away the public. People will no longer hire stonemasons to build houses, they'll go back to using wood. Responsible tradesmen must band together and have the government pass laws to prevent this. Regulations have always been written by industry experts. Regulations have also been used by guilds, industries, and unions to freeze out competition and stifle innovation. That's the downside. Regulations have increased tremendously in number and complexity because technology has become so complex and multifaceted. Capitalism would not survive without them, and it will not be born successfully in Russia unless regulations are introduced. Industries like air transport would collapse in a few months if airlines flaunted regulations the way Value Jet and Arrow Air did. They paid the inevitable price: passengers were killed, the companies went bankrupt. For a serious look at the history, purpose and meaning of industry regulation, read Samuel C. Florman, especially his essays about the voluntary standard setting organizations like ANSI, which create virtually all modern regulations. Remi asks: Why do you have to force people? Isn't it possible to appeal to their better nature, or have you given up? We *do* depend on people's better nature. We cannot force them. Regulations would not work on that basis. You could never hire enough inspectors to enforce the rules. 99.9% of professionals follow regulations because they know it is crazy not to. You only need to catch the 0.1% who are crooks and fools. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 15:11:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA28197; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:59:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:59:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199806011721_MC2-3ECB-ADEF compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:58:15 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Resent-Message-ID: <"P2TLd.0.Vu6.rGoSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19420 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Michael J. Schaffer writes: > > However, sensitive radiation counters can take a long time to recover > from overload. If Farnsworth knew about this, and also just to measure > how many he was really producing, he should have moved the counter back > far enough that it no longer saturated. Jed responded: >Well Mike . . . how do you know he didn't? Are you familiar with his work? I >do not know the details of the Farnsworth experiments and I could not judge >them in any case. I gather many details were lost when the project was >abruptly shut down. But it seems highly unlikely to me that the man who >invented many key technologies, some of them closely related to radiation >detectors, would not be aware of issues like this. It is hard for me to >judge, but the objection you raise sounds elementary. I suppose anyone >would think of it and conduct an experiment to overcome it.... Then why does the popular claim of OU rest on NOT moving the neutron detector to where it did not saturate? >In any case, I am not sure about this, but I believe the Fusor produced a >small visible incandescent point plasma ball, similar to ball lighting. >Farnsworth called it a "Poissor." These things hung around much longer than >they should have after power was turned off. You did not need a radiation >counter to observe them; your own natural built-in radiation detector works. >According to Vassilatos, they were first observed by Crooks, who put them >aside. Farnsworth revisited and improved on them with a gadget he called the >"multipactor," which led to the Fusor. I am in fact somewhat familiar with multipactoring and also with modern versions of electrostatic fusion. The latter are an outgrowth of Farnsworth's original ideas. I don't know of any secret or undiscovered effects. I suspect that the stories have simply gotten exagerated in nearly 30 years of telling. 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 Jun 1 15:13:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08103; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:08:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:08:43 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <01BD8D75.D5E0A000 oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:09:51 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"leWj3.0.J-1.ePoSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19421 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Replying to Horace, Kyle said: >This is most unusual. What is being produced that can get through the >shield? >Is it the coil that makes whatever it is, or the other components? Most likely it is bad shielding. Stenger posted: >Horace, years ago I worked in a small room-sized Faraday cage at NASA - >Lewis. Very foggy memory but as I recall it had copper structural >sections with copper screen over large openings - sort of like a >screened-in porch. The doors had rf "weather stripping" using multiple >"finger-stock" contacts all around the door. I wonder about the contact >between the woven mesh wire - is contact needed? - copper oxide being >a semiconductor helps but how much? Maybe if the wires are well >attached to the framing, no contact is needed at the wire cross points. Yes copper makes amazingly good contact. Also, the screen room probably nad at least two layers of Cu screening. Cracks and slits let in much more EM than small holes. You might be able to get the cookie tin sealed by screwing the lid to the box with lots of small self tapping screws. I would propose no more than 1 cm spacing, and even this close together doesn't convince me. I just suggest it, because it is an attainable spacing to start with. >If you have much mercury on hand, I would think that a good can turned >upside down on a ring-trough of mercury in a groove on the sealing >metal lid might work well. This idea of Frank ought to shield well. 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 Jun 1 15:25:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10675; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:17:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:17:29 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:17:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor In-Reply-To: <199806011721_MC2-3ECB-ADEF compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BFc1S3.0.Jc2.qXoSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19422 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The "ion multilayers and sheaths" mentioned below sound very much like phenomena seen when groups of atoms are confined to a "single-atom trap" device. Ions had unexpected behavior in these devices, they would "condense" into multiple layers of spherical concentric shells. This was in the news years ago, I wonder if anyone has figured out why they do that. SOme kind of emergent phenomenon, I would think. One explanation of ball lightning holds that BL is an onion, it is composed of alternating spherical layers of positive and negative ions. If this is really true, then it sounds like Farnsworth was actually playing with the long-sought "ball-lightning fusion generator" originally pursued by Robert Golka. I was wondering how the Fusor could self-sustain once the electrode fields were shut down. After all, it's not a thermal reactor, and if we remove the confinement, everything should instantly stop. See below! The article claims that emissions of charged particles tended to increase the applied DC fields. Fusion-electric power supply? If true, then the thing would keep running once the high voltage supply was disconnected. Scary. If the same thing could be done with an aneutronic reaction... But then there is one report of people becoming ill after being near a Ball Lightning, and the illness resembled radiation sickness. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Linkname: The Farnsworth Fusor URL: http://www.songs.com/philo/fusion/vassilatos.html Notably discovered in 1936, the poissor phenomenon made a new breed of electron power tubes and plasma devices possible. The existence of these mysterious suspended plasmoids stimulated Farnsworth's research toward the refined use of electron optics. His refinement and use of the newly manifested phenomena produced remarkable performance efficiencies in UHF and SHF applications. In their unprecedented spherical geometries the Farnsworth tubes proved incredibly efficient and long lasting. Virtual electrodes could influence electron behavior in power tubes. Ions could be bound in small plasma points (poissors) exhibiting stability in ionic multilayers and sheaths. Poissors could absorb and store energy: an aspect which deeply impressed Dr. Farnsworth. With developed potentials of sufficiently high magnitude the fusion reaction can be sustained and controlled at will. Furthermore, fusion energy produces powerfully escaping nuclei which perform work against the anode field. This ionic pressure augments the applied field and appearing as a dramatic surge in field strength: one that may be directly harnessed and used in external loads as electrical power. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 15:44:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA02609; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:32:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:32:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <001201bd8dac$6c0685a0$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hot Fusion Too Hot, Cold Fusion Cool? Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:26:36 -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: <"r6Gq53.0.de.6moSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19423 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex When you see the Sun limit out to about 6 microwatts/cm^3 of heat generation in the "nuclear reaction zone" or at the surface where the 6,000 K (~1/2 ev) energy flux is about 7.0 Kilowatts/cm^2 it gives one pause to wonder if the "quantum mechanical tunneling" is more favorable at much lower temperatures, and if the D-D reaction pathways favor D + D = He4 more than D + D = P + T or D + D = n + He3. The measured reaction cross-sections are predicated on particle bombardment which can create a lot more favorable Cold Fusion reactions at higher bombarding particle energy. The recent consensus that neutrinos have a rest mass-energy of around 0.5 to 1.7 ev says that if they are formed as a neutrino-antineutrino pair in the CF mechanism by way of electron-proton collisions: dE = hbar/dt or dx = v*dt and these form the "magic tunneling particle)too high an energy could suppress this until you get up to high Kev or Mev collisions where "resonance energies" for higher mass-energy leptons (electron-positron or neutrino-antineutrino) pairs are formed as in a neutron star or a Supernova. Thoughts? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 15:55:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22429; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:51:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:51:32 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002901bd8daf$5a511b60$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:48:03 -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: <"cGwRQ3.0.wT5.k1pSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19424 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Monday, June 01, 1998 4:20 PM Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Bill Beaty wrote: >The "ion multilayers and sheaths" mentioned below sound very much like >phenomena seen when groups of atoms are confined to a "single-atom trap" >device. Ions had unexpected behavior in these devices, they would >"condense" into multiple layers of spherical concentric shells. This was >in the news years ago, I wonder if anyone has figured out why they do >that. SOme kind of emergent phenomenon, I would think. > >One explanation of ball lightning holds that BL is an onion, it is >composed of alternating spherical layers of positive and negative ions. >If this is really true, then it sounds like Farnsworth was actually >playing with the long-sought "ball-lightning fusion generator" originally >pursued by Robert Golka. Interesting connection to my post on Hot Fusion Too Hot, Cold Fusion Cool, Bill. The Ball Lightning plasma probably isn't over a fraction of an ev in temperature, and is probably very tenuous at atmospheric pressure, which would favor a decent Mean Free Path for the electron-proton or electron-deuteron collisions. Robert Eachus claims that "Stripping" of the neutrons from deuterons (which should require 2.3 Mev) occur readily in plasmas od 1.0 ev or less, indicating that the "proton end" of the deuteron might be interacting with an electron and forming a neutral particle,in which case the neutron sloughs off, but there should be a healthy energy release as kinetic energy of the neutron and the neutral entity. > >I was wondering how the Fusor could self-sustain once the electrode fields >were shut down. After all, it's not a thermal reactor, and if we remove >the confinement, everything should instantly stop. See below! The >article claims that emissions of charged particles tended to increase the >applied DC fields. Fusion-electric power supply? If true, then the thing >would keep running once the high voltage supply was disconnected. Scary. >If the same thing could be done with an aneutronic reaction... But then >there is one report of people becoming ill after being near a Ball >Lightning, and the illness resembled radiation sickness. Based on the above speculation (mine), I could see why. :-) Regards, Frederick > >((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 > > > Linkname: The Farnsworth Fusor > URL: http://www.songs.com/philo/fusion/vassilatos.html > > > Notably discovered in 1936, the poissor phenomenon made a new breed of > electron power tubes and plasma devices possible. The existence of > these mysterious suspended plasmoids stimulated Farnsworth's research > toward the refined use of electron optics. His refinement and use of > the newly manifested phenomena produced remarkable performance > efficiencies in UHF and SHF applications. In their unprecedented > spherical geometries the Farnsworth tubes proved incredibly efficient > and long lasting. > > Virtual electrodes could influence electron behavior in power tubes. > Ions could be bound in small plasma points (poissors) exhibiting > stability in ionic multilayers and sheaths. Poissors could absorb and > store energy: an aspect which deeply impressed Dr. Farnsworth. > > > > With developed potentials of sufficiently high magnitude the fusion > reaction can be sustained and controlled at will. Furthermore, fusion > energy produces powerfully escaping nuclei which perform work against > the anode field. This ionic pressure augments the applied field and > appearing as a dramatic surge in field strength: one that may be > directly harnessed and used in external loads as electrical power. > > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 16:10:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA00516; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:06:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:06:35 -0700 Message-ID: <3573347F.F1B17357 microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:38:47 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Details References: <3572384C.484690E2 microtronics.com.au> <357311A9.5F6D2015@harti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"gw7r5.0.u7.vFpSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19428 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Stefan Hartmann wrote: > > Greg Watson wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > You will find more details to allow the SMOT Mk5 to be replicated. > > > > -- > > Best Regards, > > Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson > > Thanks for posting the info on the MK5 array. > > But will you now finally ship anything to all SMOT buyers ? > What will we get for our money finally, already paid almost one year > ago? > > Regards, Stefan. Hi Stephan, I am attempting to get control of the Mk4 units. If I can't, I will ship the new Mk5 units. > -- > Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann > Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany > Tel: ++ 49 30-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 49 30-345 00 498 > email: harti harti.com Web site: http://www.harti.com > Use our automatic creditcard billing at: http://ccard.net -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 16:14:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09744; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3573339A.C090A35E microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:34:58 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Details References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9XbUI3.0.-N2.mFpSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19427 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Steve Ekwall wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Rob King wrote: > -snip- > Looking at the plans for this I assume you get a net height gain of 6mm, > ------------------------ > ------------------------ > Good point Rob, I also didn't see the elevatation or lift myself. The lift height is not too important with the Mk5. You can increase the height with close magnet spacing, but then centre line balancing becomes more critical. > Greg, > Welcome back, hope all is well, DMEC be D*mn -eh? ... grrreat! > I'm off to tear up the older smot(s) on your recommendation, that older > smot(s) will yeild working smot! :) actually it cheaper to just buy the > $3.00 stick of channel and swap over the magnets from the ffsmot! :) > --------------- > I'm scratching my head though on this new 'reversal' of flux density. > Note: I'm a 'reverser' by nature / "If you can't bring Mohamad to the > mountain, bring the mountain to Mohaned" kind of guy. This Mk5 has done a > 360 double-double reverse! *c_o_o_l*.. The reverse effect has always been in the data. Remember the differential loss testing? > 1..now that the entry is stronger, do you suspect the steel bar backing is > 'adding' to the flux? .. would a trianglar magnet be as good or better?? The overheight backing strip improves flux density at the entrance. Makes the slingshot effect stronger. > by your homepage, it looks like the steel is ending at the 'blue-hole'? At the drop point. > 2... is steel bar backing really/even needed?? Helps funnel the return flux above the ball and creates a easier release. > (I remember showing some people the smot effect with just two hand > held magnets on an aluminum channel with mouse ball) [hand movement is > what the critics gave for input energy] (sigh).. 'you got to feel & see it > to believe it -eh?!!!' > Anyway, > 3.. will start checking out the 'design' ASAP, (inside out & upside down > as it is now.. interesting.. (and it looks 'backwards!') to what was > already amazing.. > Last year, we were all purplexed by it takes LESS or less for the effect, > counterintuative to the TIM TAYLOR (home improvemnt) mentality.. > More power, More Power etc.. > This is ~weird~ & exciting..(reverse on reverse - i mean) > Will keep you posted on results, and post pics here! > > Good luck, > -=se=- > ekwall2 diac.com > > steve (if a 'plain joe' like me can do it, anyone can :) ekwall > > understood it's "low OUT put", BUT IT'S "OUT" on it's own. :) > thanks again for the "Christmas Present" as it were. you're a good man! HI Steve, Will post some adjustment hints. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 16:14:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09153; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 2 (High) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:02:04 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"G9xuB3.0.vE2.QDpSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19426 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: BIFILAR COIL EXPERIMENT #3 The purpose of this experiment was to evaluate the importance of broadcast intensity and to evaluate foil wrapping as a shielding material. First the oscillator amplitude was adjusted so that when the radio was placed in the cabinet at its test location, without the tin, and with the doors open, the volume of the radio station could be heard at about the same intensity as the signal beep. With the oscillator held on, the conversation on the radio could be understood. This is a very cheap portable radio obtained for free as a marketing incentive. The signal current was 5.4 mA RMS, the voltage 521 mV, the broadcast distance about 2.5 feet. Using cos(30 deg.) as power factor, gives 1.4 mW broadcast power. The plastic radio was placed in the center of the tin on a 1/2" foam board. When the lid was placed on the cookie tin, the radio station was blacked out, but the code beep could be clearly heard. This was also true when both the tin was in place and grounded (or not) and sealed in the grounded cabinet. Next the tin was wrapped in two layers of tin foil. It took two pieces to make one layer of foil, one wrapped top to bottom to top, another wrapped around the sides. With two layers, the code beep could not be heard, even when the tin was by itself, outside the cabinet. It could not be heard regardless of the means of transmission. The code beep was finally heard when the tin was placed directly upon the bifilar coil and the transmission amplitude turned up. CONCLUSION This, to me, is fairly conclusive proof that, as the shielding gets better, the effect goes away. It is still a curiosity that the signal penetrated the shielding much better than an ordinary AM radio broadcast of the same intensity. It is notable that the shielding that was penetrated was primarily composed of iron, so the penetration may be magnetically based. Also of interest is the illogical premise of this experiment. The scalar waves are thought to penetrate conductive shielding, to be impervious to it, due to a lack of EM force interactions. However, to receive the waves, the scalar waves, having gone through the shielding and thus stripped of any EM components, must affect the receiver antenna, so the receiver antenna itself must interact with the scalar waves. There is no basis to think that the antenna will interact with scalar waves when the shielding will not. CONFIGURATION INFORMATION REPEATED FROM PRIOR EXPERIMENTS 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 goes 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. To improve the Faraday shielding over The bifilar coil experiment #1, the tin containing the radio was placed inside a heavy steel cabinet. The cabinet, now containing a high voltage DC power supply (off), was formerly an IBM 3274 controller cabinet, about a 2' x 2' x 1.5' heavy guage steel cabinet. The cabinet doors, as manufactured, are both ground strapped, and have contact brushes and contact plates on the unhinged sides to ensure good signal shielding. The cabinet is grounded through use of the ground wire to a three pronged receptical. The tin was placed inside the power supply cabinet, at distance of about 2.5 feet from the coil, 3.5 feet from the oscillator, both of which were placed on a 2"x10"x2' platform outside the grounded cabinet, at the level of the tin. The voltage probe was placed at the oscillator output lead. The current sensing resistor was placed right after the ground lead from the oscillator. With the coil in a normal bifilar configuration, the current sense voltage was 546 mV RMS, so the current was about 54.6 mA RMS. The output voltage was 5.45 Vrms. Call this the closed circuit configuration. To check the capacitive/inductive linkage in the coil, vs conductive linkage, the two sides of the twisted pair were disconnected at the far end of the coil, eliminating any conductive linkage. With the coil in a nonconductive configuration, the current sense voltage was 485 mV RMS, so the current was about 48.5 mA RMS. The output voltage was 5.75 Vrms. Call this the open circuit configuration. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 19:54:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00577; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:51:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:51:29 -0700 Message-ID: <35736943.A9A4BD14 microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 12:23:55 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: (Off Topic) Growing Young Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Rg6BW3.0.u8.lYsSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19429 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI, I have updated my site with more online references about APGL & Growth Hormone. There are Alta Vista links to many papers, suppliers & information. I would like any feedback sent to me directly. If there is enough interest, I will create a mail group. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 21:45:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA10361; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:39:23 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa eisa.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 03:10:42 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <35776b68.158792406 mail.eisa.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: 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: <"dmq8Y3.0.mX2.s7uSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19432 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:02:04 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >Also of interest is the illogical premise of this experiment. The scalar >waves are thought to penetrate conductive shielding, to be impervious to >it, due to a lack of EM force interactions. However, to receive the waves, >the scalar waves, having gone through the shielding and thus stripped of >any EM components, must affect the receiver antenna, so the receiver >antenna itself must interact with the scalar waves. There is no basis to >think that the antenna will interact with scalar waves when the shielding >will not. [snip] Horace, I agree with your comment. I believe that you have now found an effective means of shielding normal EM radiation. According to Wittaker (sp?), two superimposed scalar waves should create an EM wave(do I have this right?), so perhaps if you could get a second spool setup with the receiver at the cross point of the axes of the two spools, you might be able to detect an EM wave built up within the shielding from the scalar waves generated by the spools? If so, you will now know that it is real, as you have an effective means of shielding against normal EM. Also, one spool alone should not be able to produce a tone from the receiver, but two superimposed may. 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 Mon Jun 1 21:45:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA00820; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:43:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:43:58 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 00:37:03 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: Horace Heffner cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"OgiBQ.0.fC.CCuSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19433 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Do your experiment with the entire apparatus in shielded wrapper, both non ferrous for EM and ferrous for magnetic. Built battery operated generator to do this. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 21:49:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA10309; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:39:12 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa eisa.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Re: Hot Fusion Too Hot, Cold Fusion Cool? Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 03:10:39 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3576692b.158218650 mail.eisa.net.au> References: <001201bd8dac$6c0685a0$4f8cbfa8 default> In-Reply-To: <001201bd8dac$6c0685a0$4f8cbfa8 default> 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: <"hbvje3.0.zW2.h7uSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19431 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998 16:26:36 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >The recent consensus that neutrinos have a rest >mass-energy of around 0.5 to 1.7 ev says that [snip] Frederick, when you originally posted the quote from which this was taken, I got the impression that the figure of .5 - 1.7 eV was given as a maximum that the mass could be, (with the range indicating a precision for the measurement), if there was any mass at all. Ever since then you have continued to post this figure as though the .5 eV represents a minimum mass for the neutrino. Could you perhaps re-post the original quote, so I can understand where I have gone wrong? 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 Mon Jun 1 22:06:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA16108; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:38:43 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980602094159.2effb670 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: Re: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"W5Gj61.0.Qx3.LPuSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19434 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace: Try same configuration antenna for transmit/receive, perhaps ? I've got an FM transmitter I'll try here and let you know about, just as soon as I settle on how I want to make a 'scalar' antenna. I will use the same type antenna for the transmitter as I use on the receiver. What would be even more conclusive would be a microwave version. I just can't quite see how to make an antenna for that, though.... (Pulling apart the old pizza nuker would be fun, though !) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 22:06:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA16680; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 17:57:06 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"hR2Wo3.0.944.6RuSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19435 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:56 PM 6/1/98, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: >---------- >From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] [SNIP] >>The ability to penetrate the shields was not dependent upon either a >>Caducius coil not a bifilar coil as transmitter. Neither is it clear >>exactly what makes for a good antenna. The human body made a partially >>effective transmitter, when various metal objects, and lengthy test leads, >>failed as transmitters. > >This is most unusual. What is being produced that can get through the >shield? Is it the coil that makes whatever it is, or the other components? > >Kyle R. Mcallister >Content-Type: application/ms-tnef > >Attachment converted: Hard Disk:RE- Experiment report #2 - bifi >(????/----) (0000CCAF) I don't understand why the signals get though the steel shields when the radio station does not. At this point it seems to be *both* a matter of the shielding material and the antenna. One thing is for sure, aluminum foil makes for a great shield at the 540 kHz frequency tested. It was aluminum foil, not *tin* foil as I accidentally typed. It wasn't taped or otherwise held in place. In experiment #3, the 4 sheets were wrapped on, and none of the 4 sheets covered the whole tin. It was so effective I thought a wire had come lose, or I had damaged the oscillator. I checked it over and over, scope readings, wires, etc. Turned up the gain. Finally moved the cookie tin right on top of the coil before getting a beep. It was flat amazing. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 22:08:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA16708; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 17:57:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Resent-Message-ID: <"YCOjG1.0.q44.BRuSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19436 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 3:17 PM 6/1/98, William Beaty wrote: [snip] The >article claims that emissions of charged particles tended to increase the >applied DC fields. Fusion-electric power supply? If true, then the thing >would keep running once the high voltage supply was disconnected. Scary. [snip] > Furthermore, fusion > energy produces powerfully escaping nuclei which perform work against > the anode field. This ionic pressure augments the applied field and > appearing as a dramatic surge in field strength: one that may be > directly harnessed and used in external loads as electrical power. > The above looks misleading. It does not appear the ionic pressure increases a DC field. The energy for the field increase occurs when the sphere (cage) is positive, i.e. an anode. The fusor is an AC device. When the cage is negative the fusion causing collisions are taking place inside the cage. The ions are accelerated to the cage boundary, and then continue inwards by momentum once inside. The inside of the cage is neutral. The anode phase is an ion decompression phase. If, due to fusion, high energy ions are created during the cage's cathode cycle, assuming the gas density is adequate, they increase the average ion heat by collision, thus increase the magnitude of the decompressive phase, and the ion pulse, when the cage goes neutral then posative. The decompressive phase, when the cage is positive and the wall negative, gets a boost from the added ion momentum. Obviously, the trick to making all this work is getting the resonant frequency right. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 22:14:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA11206; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:10:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:10:34 -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, 1 Jun 1998 15:11:25 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"yyxjM1.0.Hk2.3buSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19437 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - > Something about my body made a fair > transmitter. We are "ugly bags of mostly water". Good dielectric transmitters, I'd guess. > The human body made a partially effective > transmitter, when various metal objects, and > lengthy test leads, failed as transmitters. More suggestion that it's pure dielectric stress waves (or something like that) that's carrying the signal. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 22:44:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA26372; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:40:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"g2cZu.0.zR6.23vSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19438 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Horace - > > > Something about my body made a fair > > transmitter. > > We are "ugly bags of mostly water". Good dielectric transmitters, I'd guess. Depending on one's electrolyte level we are very leaky capacitors to low frequency AC. There may be some self inductance and we are probably very noisy re-radiators in that range . Don't forget all the neural conductive pathways which respond to lenz's law generating opposing (180 deg) fields. It might be somewaht directional , too . The "solar plexus" is radial array shaped , for sensing other beings at close range (hugs) . Another theory is that with practice on can sense impending appraoches of danger (premonition) with this "antenna". "gut feelings"? > > > The human body made a partially effective > > transmitter, when various metal objects, and > > lengthy test leads, failed as transmitters. > > More suggestion that it's pure dielectric stress waves (or something like > that) that's carrying the signal. > Aren't those the waves that get generated when we get "temporally phase displaced" by the Biefield - Brown Effect ? Happens to me all the time. Jim Ostrowski > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 23:06:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA27850; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:38:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <199806020538.WAA02249 joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Rollaway SMOT testing Resent-Message-ID: <"NF2f91.0.zo6.OLvSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19439 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >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. Greg: I accept your condition, to the extent possible (I will be in and out of town se veral times starting June 8) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 23:34:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01579; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:32:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:32:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:31:23 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"Z3yRt.0.bO.MovSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19440 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:37 AM 6/2/98, John Schnurer wrote: > Do your experiment with the entire apparatus in shielded wrapper, >both non ferrous for EM and ferrous for magnetic. Built battery operated >generator to do this. I have achieved isolation in experiment #3. I assume there is no further reason to do this. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 23:37:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA12067; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:36:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:36:23 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:37:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"Ntios.0.Fy2.crvSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19441 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 3:11 PM 6/1/98, Rick Monteverde wrote: >We are "ugly bags of mostly water". Good dielectric transmitters, I'd guess. A "giant ugly bag of mostly water" in this case. 8^) > > > The human body made a partially effective > > transmitter, when various metal objects, and > > lengthy test leads, failed as transmitters. > >More suggestion that it's pure dielectric stress waves (or something like >that) that's carrying the signal. Could be purely magnetic as well. Need to increase range. Also can test various things up to 20 MHz with present signal generator. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 1 23:54:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA00755; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:53:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:53:01 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 22:53:37 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"fTrNw1.0.WB.C5wSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19442 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 7:10 PM 6/1/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >On Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:02:04 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >>Also of interest is the illogical premise of this experiment. The scalar >>waves are thought to penetrate conductive shielding, to be impervious to >>it, due to a lack of EM force interactions. However, to receive the waves, >>the scalar waves, having gone through the shielding and thus stripped of >>any EM components, must affect the receiver antenna, so the receiver >>antenna itself must interact with the scalar waves. There is no basis to >>think that the antenna will interact with scalar waves when the shielding >>will not. >[snip] >Horace, I agree with your comment. I believe that you have now found >an effective means of shielding normal EM radiation. According to >Wittaker (sp?), two superimposed scalar waves should create an EM >wave(do I have this right?), As far as I know it is the superposition of two cancelling EM waves that makes a scalar wave. The superposition of two scalar waves should be another scalar wave. Once a scalar wave always a scalar? That's the problem - how do you decode the scalar waves? A nonlinear anisotropic receiver would be the ticket. You supposedly have two vector fields of equal magnitude but opposite direction. A coil of wire around a ferrite rod at near saturation might be a good receiver. Possibly some of the iron shields I used are aleady near saturation from all the big magnets I've had on them and in them in the past. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 00:28:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA09110; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 00:26:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 00:26:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 23:25:22 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts Resent-Message-ID: <"4HJL31.0.FE2.yawSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19443 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I am possibly interested in building a Caduceus coil. Would like to test initially starting at 540 kHz, then push upward. Can go to 20 MHz, sine, sawtooth, or square wave. Lose definition near 20 MHz. Possibly, with square wave, could push some harmonics into the FM band, which starts around 88 MHz. I take it the feedback coil at the base of Nauden's coil is for driving his oscillator only, and is not required for tranmission? There seems to be nothing special about his dimensions, nor about his chosen frequency. Is this true? A matched ferrite core Caduceus antenna/receiver set might be interesting. Would have to tune the secondary by gradually saturating it with a permanent magnetic field. At 20 MHz the wavelength is about 14 meters, so speed of light measurement starts looking more feasible with the present equipment. I have a number of other live projects, and personal obligations, though, so don't really want to go much further with this unless there appears to be something important to be learned. Is this going anywhere with regard to energy? Let's see. Scalar waves supposedly require no energy to generate. So, a means of decoding them would be getting something for nothing, right? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 02:08:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA17607; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:06:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00c601bd8e05$29e07b00$4f8cbfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Hot Fusion Too Hot, Cold Fusion Cool? Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 03:01:49 -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: <"-Ut3N.0.zI4.j2ySr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19444 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > I was given the impression that the figure of >.5 - 1.7 ev was given as a maximum that the >(neutrino) mass could be. Yes, that is correct Robin, according to the First IGEX 76Ge Double Beta Decay Results. Which implies that neutrino-antineutrino pair production from an electron-proton or deuteron collision, dE = hbar/dt or dx = v*dt has to be less than (0.5 - 1.5 ev) thus giving more reason to believe that the low energy "CF window" is somewhere in/below this energy range. Going by that, the next window could be at least two orders of magnitude higher or more, where you get into H-Bomb explosions and Supernovas, which are 50 million K or more. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 02:09:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA20233; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:08:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:08:50 -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, 1 Jun 1998 23:08:04 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"7r5tG3.0.wx4.X4ySr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19445 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace - > That's the problem - how do you decode the > scalar waves? Hodowanecs. (?) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 02:19:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA18743; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:17:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:17:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3573C181.D0A1DC03 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 12:10:25 +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: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2Z24V3.0.na4.tCySr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19446 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi all, Maybe I had missed all details of the experiment or other postings which point the same issue, but I wonder how the circuit is powered and how is shielded the power source. I think the ultimate solution to prevent signal leak from power connection is pow ering the circuit with batteries and enclose the battery in the cage together with the circuit. Otherwise, it will very hard or not possible to attenuate the oscillator signal below receiver sensitivity levels. May another effective shielding method (depending on frequency) is putting everything in a plastic sealed box (may a good transparent refrigerator box can do this job) and submerge the box in a conductive liquid. H2O + NaCl or another salt could give an e ffective conductivity and seamless shielding. If the radio will cease in this method, question to be answered should be whether scalar waves had also attenuated by the liquid. Of course, everything on these experiment is based to assumption that AM radio could detect scalar waves. Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 04:14:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA01799; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 04:12:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 04:12:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000101bd8e16$bc110a60$649b85ce default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Hot Fusion Too Hot, Cold Fusion Cool? Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 05:07:23 -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: <"hQu1A1.0._R.duzSr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19447 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Assuming Case's Pd Carbon Cut-Off temperature of 250 C is connected to over-temp for forming the neutrino-antineutrino "magic particle" D2O liquid or low pressure vapor at around 190 C or so, Might show O/U effects. An evacuated chamber (or pipe) containing a small quantity of D2 or D2O where temperatures of 500 K at pressures of a few Torr,might show some interesting heat effects. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 06:11:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA17843; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 06:09:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 06:09:04 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980602091247.00b5aba0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 09:12:47 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Britz: Miley's table top fusion machine 05/28/98 In-Reply-To: <35730075.2F59 interlaced.net> References: <3.0.1.32.19980601093653.009cb380 spectre.mitre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ykkeX2.0.dM4.lb_Sr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19448 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:26 PM 6/1/98 -0400, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Robert I. Eachus wrote: >Robert, do you know how a fusor would scale up in size? Would the old >"area like r^2, volume like r^3" effect be of any help? I'm not clear >on this but I guess you would need to adjust the vacuum level to >maintain the correct mean-free-path? How does a 10-meter dia. fusor >sound? It doesn't scale. In fact the smaller the interaction area, the higher the power. I guess I could come up with a scaling rule for some particular version, but the main determinant of how many interacting charged particles you can have is just that, charge. Now if you get a Fusor working, you have (this is my understanding of the effect, not everyones) an arc filament with D+ and D- ions interacting. Others think that the interacting particles are D+ with higher Z contaminants. In any case, the tighter the filament, the more collisions you get. Farnsworth believed that he had intersecting paths, but I can't get the math to make his assumptions stable. The magnetic field from particles moving parallel is going to cause the particles to attract each other, and all of the described behavior seems to say that there was a threshold effect. In any case, the only way to get higher power out is to compress the filaments to get higher reaction cross-sections. But that takes more power, not more space. The big thing that Farnsworth had going for him, and it should not be lost in the shuffle, was that he had a STABLE electromagnetic confinement. You can't do confinement with magnetic fields alone, but Farnsworth and others who followed him knew that non-linear electric fields can also contribute to confinement. 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 Jun 2 06:56:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA29475; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 06:54:14 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 06:54:14 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8E03.71E94140 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:48:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8E03.71F0E260" Resent-Message-ID: <"kv0ON2.0.GC7.3G0Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19449 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E03.71F0E260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Monday, June 01, 1998 8:57 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil >>Kyle R. Mcallister >>Content-Type: application/ms-tnef >> >>Attachment converted: Hard Disk:RE- Experiment report #2 - bifi >>(????/----) (0000CCAF) Ah, the attachment has returned. Great. >Finally moved the cookie tin >right on top of the coil before getting a beep. It was flat amazing. Maybe the transmitter isn't producing scalar waves if it is being shielded. Or maybe we just don't know how to detect scalar waves. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E03.71F0E260 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IggNAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACgAAABSRTogRXhw ZXJpbWVudCByZXBvcnQgIzIgLSBiaWZpbGFyIGNvaWwAUA0BBYADAA4AAADOBwYAAgAIADAAFgAC AC0BASCAAwAOAAAAzgcGAAIACAAuACcAAgA8AQEJgAEAIQAAADc3RDBDRThERjVGOUQxMTFBNzVF RThFMDBBQzEwMDAwAEAHAQOQBgCkBAAAFAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAA AAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAoHGPGy2OvQEeAHAAAQAAACgAAABSRTogRXhwZXJpbWVudCByZXBvcnQg IzIgLSBiaWZpbGFyIGNvaWwAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2OLRuP2jiU4vn1EdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAe DAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxkLmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQ c4KVwgMABxDvAQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006SE9SQUNFSEVGRk5FUlNNVFA6 SEhFRkZORVJAQ09SRUNPTU5FVFNFTlQ6TU9OREFZLEpVTkUwMSwxOTk4ODo1N1BNVE86Vk9SVEVY LUxARVNLSU1PQwAAAAACAQkQAQAAAAYDAAACAwAAigYAAExaRnUXmGs5/wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKD AFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV/3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7w ZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMMLWTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e 5wqHHZsMMHUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIgtkgFsADQZSOQDcFuBJAAW1NNVFA6aGhNJCRABaEFkW0uJFB0 fl0fjyCdBmACMCHPIttNAQIgZGF5LCBKdREkUCAwMSqwMTk5ADggODo1NyBQZk0mPyCdVG8ofyLb dkEVoWV4LWxAB5BrOQdwby4lsSwvJ051Yk5qHqEuTyLbUkUzwEVceHAGcQeAAjAgFgBwiRWhICMS IC0gYgaQPwMQCsEFoAMQGu8b8zM2Gx1nGjk+Oa0eZj5LedJsI/BSLgXQYwdAHCD6cx6QcjFdOi87 Pz8QCFBjAjAoQS1UeTYAM8BhSnALUGk88HRpAiAv0G1zLXQkUGY9jz6fbz+vQs9D30TvQQJAANBo szZDBaBudgSQHpBkM8CSSAsRIEQEAGs6NaA/NzA17zb4Rf9HD0gfKD/FUFEvHuIpICgcYBxg4END QUYpTR8L4htM602fE3BoKrB0JPBBgEk4txHABCAWAHQIcCRQZDzA9kcWAEHwLjgfOS9OH08v5kYL gD0BeSAEYEoASrC7VTIFoG8w0CPwQgBuUa/nWZ9PPgUQZ2gFQAIgVSC0b3Bg0GZcdQMRYg3A2SWB IGcSAF0xZ0GAYgHTNqA8wCBJBUB3VjEY0fUFQGEAwHpiwVdWUh9TL90aKk0qkGIQVSN0I8AAgCxt aQJABJAgBABuJ+MFQB5hZHVjYsIE8AdA/wrBY8BKAAQgBpBpcAVABABrYgFqQ2gIkGwNsFbRT5cF wADAaEJ3I/BqdT1AjCBkAiBpsWtubwfg/mhucWEQbeASAB6iaopXXX88bz14WG8S8jupZjUVIQAB dZAAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABAAAcwYMVe3iyOvQFAAAgwYMVe3iyOvQEeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABS RTogAAAAAAMADTT9NwAAc0k= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E03.71F0E260-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 07:07:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA26567; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD8E04.94B8E300 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:58:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.94B8E300" Resent-Message-ID: <"bz3IH2.0.1V6.zN0Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19450 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.94B8E300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 2:25 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts >At 20 MHz the wavelength is about 14 meters, so speed of light = measurement >starts looking more feasible with the present equipment. I have a = number >of other live projects, and personal obligations, though, so don't = really >want to go much further with this unless there appears to be something >important to be learned. If (big if) you tested the transmission speed to be greater than the = speed of light, that would definately be important. I would definately = try it. >Is this going anywhere with regard to energy? Let's see. Scalar waves >supposedly require no energy to generate. So, a means of decoding them >would be getting something for nothing, right? I don't know; the energy has to be coming from some source, whether it = is "zero-point-energy", an "ether" or something else entirely. But who = knows? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.94B8E300 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhANAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACYAAABSRTogQ2Fk dWNldXMgY29pbCBxdWVzdGlvbnMsIHRob3VnaHRzALINAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcGAAIACAA6AA4AAgAv AQEggAMADgAAAM4HBgACAAgANwASAAIAMAEBCYABACEAAAA5MUQwQ0U4REY1RjlEMTExQTc1RUU4 RTAwQUMxMDAwMAA8BwEDkAYArAUAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAA AAMANgAAAAAAQAA5AECoznwujr0BHgBwAAEAAAAmAAAAUkU6IENhZHVjZXVzIGNvaWwgcXVlc3Rp b25zLCB0aG91Z2h0cwAAAAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG9ji58zto4lOP59RHRp17o4ArBAAAAAB4AHgwB AAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAfDAEAAAAXAAAAc3RrQHN1bmhlcmFsZC5pbmZpLm5ldAAAAwAGEDGX 4n8DAAcQLQMAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAC0tLS0tLS0tLS1GUk9NOkhPUkFDRUhFRkZORVJTTVRQOkhI RUZGTkVSQENPUkVDT01ORVRTRU5UOlRVRVNEQVksSlVORTAyLDE5OTgyOjI1QU1UTzpWT1JURVgt TEBFU0tJTU8AAAAAAgEJEAEAAAAPBAAACwQAAB4IAABMWkZ1wPabbv8ACgEPAhUCpAPkBesCgwBQ EwNUAgBjaArAc2V07jIGAAbDAoMyA8YHEwKDujMTDX0KgAjPCdk7Ff94MjU1AoAKgQ2xC2Bu8Gcx MDMUIAsKFCIMARpjAEAgCoUKi2xpMQQ4MALRaS0xNDTPDfAM0BzDC1kxNgqgA2D2dAWQBUAtHucK hx2bDDB1HmZGA2E6H+4eZgyCILZIBbAA0GUjkA3BbgSQAFtTTVRQOmhoTSQkQAWhBZFtLiRQdH5d H48gnQZgAjAhzyLbVAEKUHNkYXksIEoidSRQIDAyKsAxOWA5OCAyOhgwE3BNsyY/IJ1Ubyh/Itt2 FaGgZXgtbEAHkGsHcBxvLiWxLD8nTnViaoceoS5fIttDYWR1I+AudQQgBaADEXEqYXRpJQIgcyrA dGgIYGdozHRzGu8b8zM2HWcaOXY+OV0eZkEFQAHQBdBIBno3MSPwd2F2ZWzVCfBnN0AgBAAgAaAI YHsFQBzAIAeAHpAR4CrAcwpvPsBwCeBkIG9mTiAcIDeBPkFhcwhwZf8HgAIwMW053zrvPsABkAAg ewQgFZBvMOAZAD5AJYEg2mZAAWkCYDzBaT1hPKLnHmAHkChBIGU2kAUgQGLgLiAgSSARwD0APbD4 IG51BtAEkECvQb87Dv8/YR6AJPAFwBwgR6EeYTOS/zcRAHA/QD8QEeACIAdAP1BbAmA/oGE22z6z ZAIgJ+cFQBYAB0BseUhfSW87Dqs84EZxdD7gZz7gbTXg/T1wZghwS7NFlT2RKvA9IPcEEUuyR7Fw PxAR0VNiSCD/PsE+UVUAGQBQD1EfOw4HcH5wFaFTNVbBPSAKwCRQZH4uV48L4htMWA9HUD9wKIZi P6A9gGYpIHkIYG83MDaxPzE8onQjwACAbf8EATbhPvVWlAnBThBL0TdAfwORPKI/DDciThA80Ahg bP8/QA2xC4Bi4U/gVrJap0cw/0dgZR9hIGYARaBcFjg/OU/7WP87aElVkj2RU6BEcgBw/Hl3VcNF kxYATgALIFNiownwBJBneT9HQEwSAJYnBCAR8GVHMVNjB0C/CsE84je2aj9rT0M4dVYgem8R8GRl 8RYARrFE0W7fbyZTY29CYuFwYm9M0T/i9wYxP2EFgmREcjyhMV5yT/9zX2cVYoISADbQRIFW90Tw vwWxdaBXMyrABRA3gT9pH78dZxLyXV95f0dgT0RrdaD8dzs8k3XVEcBWdiWxfXP/A2FW4z7BCHAj 4CrAbfFLs5NFoD2CInoEkG8tWsDpC4B0LW9EIkzSh3CGw/4iP1AFwH0YPRAR8G8xNtD3FgBP4Ecw Qj3xbfA+4INipnN+1oD1S3lFYVJHML5NcKEcIGCRSEYVIQCO0AADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAH MKAtUxMujr0BQAAIMKAtUxMujr0BHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAALG8 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.94B8E300-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 07:06:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA31961; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:02:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:02:16 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8E04.D88EEA20 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:00:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.D88EEA20" Resent-Message-ID: <"w-NdW3.0.Jp7.dN0Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19451 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.D88EEA20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Rick Monteverde[SMTP:monteverde worldnet.att.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 4:08 AM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Horace - > > That's the problem - how do you decode the > > scalar waves? >Hodowanecs. (?) Since I just happen to be building one...maybe I should test it near my = "Scalar Waves Transmitter"? Hey, at least we're doing some experiments. Kyle R. Mcallister P.S.: Anyone have any thoughts about JL Naudin's "Curl Free-A = Transmitter/reciever?" ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.D88EEA20 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IgoOAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACgAAABSRTogRXhw ZXJpbWVudCByZXBvcnQgIzMgLSBiaWZpbGFyIGNvaWwAUQ0BBYADAA4AAADOBwYAAgAJAAAACAAC APAAASCAAwAOAAAAzgcGAAIACAA6ABkAAgA6AQEJgAEAIQAAADk4RDBDRThERjVGOUQxMTFBNzVF RThFMDBBQzEwMDAwAEMHAQOQBgBoBAAAFAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAA AAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAwCijwC6OvQEeAHAAAQAAACgAAABSRTogRXhwZXJpbWVudCByZXBvcnQg IzMgLSBiaWZpbGFyIGNvaWwAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2OLsCj2jiU5Pn1EdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAe DAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxkLmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQ /PcM5wMABxChAQAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006UklDS01PTlRFVkVSREVTTVRQ Ok1PTlRFVkVSREVAV09STERORVRBVFRORVRTRU5UOlRVRVNEQVksSlVORTAyLDE5OTg0OjA4QU1U TzpWT1JURVgtTAAAAAACAQkQAQAAAMwCAADIAgAAZAUAAExaRnVvUJ+1/wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKD AFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV/3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7w ZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMMLWTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e 5wqHHZsMMPUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIH8JhpY2sF0AIhZXYEkIENsFtTTVRQOgRgiSQWQHcFsGxkbhIA 1C5hAkAuJfFdH48gnS8GYAIwIc8i21QKUHNkQGF5LCBKdSXwIAQwMitAMTk5OCDINDowLCBBTSa/ IJ0sVG8o/yLbdhWhZXgoLWxAB5BrB3BvLo0FoG0svyfOdWJqHqGLLt8i3GU0UEV4cAZxKweAAjAg FgBwFaEgI/IzHtAgYgaQAxAKwQWg5wMQGu8b8zM2HWcaNR5mfkgFsADQK5AfdjHtGjk+Vzo/HoQ/ oT4/oFQRwHRyJwQgdGgrkB5hAmBlEm03sWhvB+BkbyD+eQhgQZAFkQ2wQHI8nz2vnz6/P8ME8AdA CsF3YSRA/HM/PC9DX0RvO0ZBoEagESXwY3MuP6EoPyn/R38L4jkPOhgS8kzeR/8GAIMLgDvhSSBq dXMFQK0RwHA2kAOgdEGwYiuQlGJ1AxBkC4BnIAIgbGUuU2AAwHlScVFgc71BYHUl0EBwB5AFQGkF QIMl8ArBbXkgIlNGRN5XRrIqwDvAAIBtVNAekGhyIj87kGUrMSYwIMVBAGFRoXdlJxYAQZH9UvJz A3ArkDDwNpZLIDis3Et5QQAH8EswTUZBHCCHUaAEkDisUC5TLjRQ/EFuQdArgRHAJEBXgF1Ac0Bx CGBnaFnAV4AG4HXJBUBKTAewYXVS4UBRPCJDCHADICGACeAtQTVWWi8WAGMIkCRBPyILOKwVIQBj MAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABAAAcwgKhBgy6OvQFAAAgwgKhBgy6OvQEeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABSRTog AAAAAAMADTT9NwAALEM= ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8E04.D88EEA20-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 09:02:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA15976; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980602154345.7508.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 08:43:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Details To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"Xtjnt1.0.Tv3.m_1Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19452 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Greg/All, Did some Quickfields of the Mk5 array design yesterday...but it's only 2D, so the wider sidebars are not correctly simulated. Will try to post today for the rest of the group to look at as well....time permitting. Have some stills of Flux and Strength as well as some X-Y stuff. Quick summary -- It does appear that the magnetic gradient at the entrance of the array is much sharper/quicker than the gradient towards the end of the steel plate area...Don't see a real noticeable 'blue-hole area though. [even though QF is only 2D...I wonder how the section of steel plate above the array is interacting...Greg?] Wonder if the Push-Pull configuration could be used here as well? It should decrease the exit forces even more than the Mk5 config.....Oh well.. Must finish other projects first before messing with magnets again ;) Anton Rager Denver, CO a_rager yahoo.com ---Greg Watson wrote: > > > The overheight backing strip improves flux density at the entrance. > Makes the slingshot effect stronger. > > > by your homepage, it looks like the steel is ending at the 'blue-hole'? > > At the drop point. > > > 2... is steel bar backing really/even needed?? > > Helps funnel the return flux above the ball and creates a easier > release. > > > Will post some adjustment hints. > > -- > Best Regards, > Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 10:07:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02210; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:59:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:59:57 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 12:54:48 -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: <199806021258_MC2-3EEA-440E compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"uPlT91.0.NY.C-2Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19454 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Michael J. Schaffer writes: Then why does the popular claim of OU rest on NOT moving the neutron detector to where it did not saturate? The popular claim I quoted does not have this level of technical detail. It does not say whether he did or did not solve the saturation problem. Knowing Farnsworth's work and reputation, I find it unthinkable that he did not address this elementary problem after years of research. The purpose of the ITT project was to build a nuclear fusion reactor, not just a neutron generator like the one Miley has developed. (I am not suggesting the neutron generator has no value.) They must have devised careful tests to determine whether they were making progress towards that goal. Someone here wrote that ITT dropped the project because this was a new, unexpected departure and they decided they were not interested in energy. It was not serendipitous. They began the project with this goal in mind. For some reason they changed their minds after initial success. I don't know of any secret or undiscovered effects. If they are secret or undiscovered, how would you know about them? :-} I suspect that the stories have simply gotten exaggerated in nearly 30 years of telling. Based on people's reaction to the discussion here and my experience with cold fusion, I suspect the opposite. I suspect Farnsworth made extraordinary progress and the world might now be run by hot fusion energy from Farnsworth generators, but vested interests crushed him, and prevented the development of this energy source. I have no proof, but I see evidence for that in the Vassilatos report and elsewhere. Richard Wall disagrees, but he will not give us any technical reasons, quotes or other evidence. All he says is "Vassilatos is not credible" -- mere opinion. Vassilatos does not give much technical detail either but at least he provides a picture of what he thinks happened in a carefully written report with footnotes. I do not believe in conspiracy theories but I do believe that powerful, entrenched companies will take drastic measures to protect markets. They sometimes act in an unethical or self-destructive manner. I have been employed in large companies, I have seen it happen. I can well believe that ITT passed up an opportunity to make a trillion dollars and control the world's energy supply. IBM, Hewlett Packard and others passed up the opportunity to sell personal computers years before Apple was founded, and later they stood by and let Microsoft take over the software business. ITT was a notorious company in the 60s and 70s. It was mixed up in Nixon's payola scandals and it had a reputation in the telecom industry as a hardball player. The board of directors at large established companies back then was often an old boy's club. Directors had substantial interests in other industries including oil, gas and electricity. This kind of conflict of interest was brought out during the IBM anti-trust saga, in testimony describing how directors would steer corporate data processing purchases towards IBM. I have no idea what the corporate culture at ITT is like today. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 10:31:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA04398; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:26:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35743562.6F78 interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 13:24:50 -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: Britz: Miley's table top fusion machine 05/28/98 References: <3.0.1.32.19980601093653.009cb380 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980602091247.00b5aba0@spectre.mitre.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Pl5Mn2.0.N41._M3Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19455 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert I. Eachus wrote: > (big snips) > It doesn't scale. In fact the smaller the interaction area, the higher > the power. Thanks for the input, Robert. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 10:36:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA12835; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:29:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:29:50 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:29:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Bifilar coil notes Resent-Message-ID: <"9Uupp3.0.P83.CQ3Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19456 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Some clarifying comments about the configuration being used for the Bifilar coil experiments: (1) There has been no attempt to shield the transmitter side, only the battery powered radio used as a receiver. The shield for the radio has been both grounded and not grounded, without change to the results. The bifilar coil *is* partially shielded in that it is wound on a steel reel, however, orientration of the coil seemed to have no effect. (2) A commercial signal generator was used, a BK Precison model 4040, for transmitter power. It provides a digital frequency meter and good control over frequency, waveform and attenuation. (3) Other than being based upon the basic *assertions* made in Naudin's experiment, i.e. that scalar waves can be transmitted to a radio in a Faraday cage, the experiment bears no resemblance to Naudin's experiment. This is meant to be a quick look at the experimental results and assumptions to see what's going on with the experiment. (4) The power levels being used appear to be vastly lower than Naudin's. (5) Calibration of the transmission power used was achieved by varying the gain so the recieved audio volume was similar to a radio station on the same frequency, when no shielding was involved. This is a very casual calibration method, appropriate to the degree of rigor being applied. All that is being measued is a yes/no result. The only thing noticed in a quantitative way was the fact that the human body acted as a successful transmitter with about half the audible volume genberated from the reciever. A good quantitative test would probably involve fiber optics, etc. (6) The importance of the role of the transmitting antenna is established by the fact that the signal transmitted is Morse code like. The make and break of the connection to the transmitter is key. 8^) This was especially true in the human body tranmission test, due to the fact there was no conductive closed circuit involved. (7) The important things learned so far: (a) Naudin's principle result, tranmission of a signal to a Faraday caged radio, when a radio signal on the same frequency is totally supressed, was achieved, though the mechanism of transmission used was different. (b) A bifilar coil produced good results. The human body produced about half the effect when used as a transmitter, without a circuit being completed to ground. Other metallic items, including the bifilar coil itself, did not work in this mode. (c) A bifilar coil of the size used, due to the strong capacitive linkage, works even without a conductive connection of the twisted pair. The power draw from the oscillator was almost unchanged. (d) Multiple layers of shield made of steel did not suppress the "scalar" signal, while it did totally suppress the 540 kHz AM signal. (e) A layer of steel covered with two layers of aluminum foil provided total shielding at the power level used. It is now known how to get good shielding of the radio, by using layers of aliminum foil, two sheets to a layer, one wrapped radially, the other around the circumference. This experiment indicates that whatever the means of communication that occurred in the experiments above, scalar, longitudinal, etc., that a good receiving antenna might consist of an aluminum receiver enclosed in a ferrous compartment, possibly a spherical ferrous compartment, and that the best transmitter might match, though the interior conductive component might be made of copper. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 11:11:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA13044; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0952 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Farnsworth Fusor Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 10:37:57 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"K9phL2.0.jB3.ry3Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19457 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace There is a very readable book on EM theory for Engineers, "Fields and Waves in Modern Radio" by Ramo (of TRW fame) and Whinnery (former dean at Berkeley). The first chapter starts with a good explanation of transmission lines, and then goes on with the vector math of Maxwell's equations. I suspect you would find it easy going and interesting, and would increase your familiarity with these subjects. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Monday, June 01, 1998 6:57 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor > > At 3:17 PM 6/1/98, William Beaty wrote: > > [snip] The > >article claims that emissions of charged particles tended to increase > the > >applied DC fields. Fusion-electric power supply? If true, then the > thing > >would keep running once the high voltage supply was disconnected. > Scary. > [snip] > > Furthermore, fusion > > energy produces powerfully escaping nuclei which perform work > against > > the anode field. This ionic pressure augments the applied field > and > > appearing as a dramatic surge in field strength: one that may be > > directly harnessed and used in external loads as electrical power. > > > > > The above looks misleading. It does not appear the ionic pressure > increases a DC field. The energy for the field increase occurs when > the > sphere (cage) is positive, i.e. an anode. The fusor is an AC device. > When > the cage is negative the fusion causing collisions are taking place > inside > the cage. The ions are accelerated to the cage boundary, and then > continue > inwards by momentum once inside. The inside of the cage is neutral. > The > anode phase is an ion decompression phase. If, due to fusion, high > energy > ions are created during the cage's cathode cycle, assuming the gas > density > is adequate, they increase the average ion heat by collision, thus > increase > the magnitude of the decompressive phase, and the ion pulse, when the > cage > goes neutral then posative. The decompressive phase, when the cage is > positive and the wall negative, gets a boost from the added ion > momentum. > Obviously, the trick to making all this work is getting the resonant > frequency right. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 11:36:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA16404; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:24:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:24:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <35741312.ECB334F4 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:58:26 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: Induced Gravity in Superfluid 3He (eprint:cond-mat/9806010) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zdUsQ2.0.A04.tD4Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19458 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Very, very intersting paper. Available from xxx.lanl.gov. hamdi ucar cond-mat/9806010 From: volovik boojum.hut.fi (Grigori Volovik) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:23:32 GMT (82kb) Induced Gravity in Superfluid 3He Author: G.E. Volovik Comments: invited talk at Symposium on Quantum Fluids and Solids, QFS-98, Amherst, June 8-14, style of J. Low Temp. Phys., 14 pages, 2 figures The gapless fermionic excitations in superfluid 3He-A have the "relativistic" spectrum close to the gap nodes. This allowed us to model the modern cosmological scenaria of baryogenesis and magnetogenesis. The same massless fermions induce another low-energy property of the quantum vacuum -- the gravitation. The effective metric of the space, in which the free quasiparticles move along geodesics, is not generally flat. Different order parameter textures correspond to curved effective space and produce many different exotic metrics, which are theoretically discussed in quantum gravity and cosmology. This includes the condensed matter analog of the black hole and event horizon, which can be realized in the moving soliton. This will allow us to simulate and thus experimentally investigate such quantum phenomena as the Hawking radiation from the horizon, the Bekenstein entropy of the black hole, and the structure of the quantum vacuum behind the horizon. One can also simulate the conical singularities produced by cosmic strings and monopoles; inflation; temperature dependence of the cosmological and Newton constants, etc. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 14:02:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA00637; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:57:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:57:57 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 13:58:03 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"6fyiJ2.0.p9.JT6Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19459 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > The above looks misleading. It does not appear the ionic pressure > increases a DC field. The energy for the field increase occurs when the > sphere (cage) is positive, i.e. an anode. The fusor is an AC device. The Fusor described by Richard Hull and appearing in The BELL JAR is a DC device. If I recall, the outer cage is positive, and positive ions are accelerated inwards by the concentric fields between the two cages. There was an earlier Farnsworth tube which took the form of two dish-shaped electrodes facing each other, and with RF high voltage applied to them. At least that's how I remember the article. I was suprised when I learned that the Fusor was DC. I don't quite understand how it works. The inner cage would act like a Faraday box, and any ions within it would see it as ground. But if positive ions are blasting inwards in all directions, where do they go after they've built up to maximum? Perhaps the voltage between the clot of positive ions in the center and the inner cage electrode is fairly small, so any ions which leak away from the center will tend to be pushed to the cage, and be attracted to its wires, and neutralized there. Any slow ions which wandered out into the high-field region between the two cage-electrodes would probably be sucked into the wires of the inner cage. If there are a few microamperes worth of positive ions flooding into the central point, then there must be a few microamperes of leakage between the central point and the inner cage electrode. Any charge which is emitted by the outer cage electrode must eventually end up being collected by the inner cage electrode. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 2 14:38:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23039; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 14:35:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 14:35:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980602173941.00757ea0 cnct.com> X-Sender: knagel cnct.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:39:45 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Keith Nagel Subject: SCR specs needed! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"VNJYd.0.vd5.R07Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19460 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Vorts: I found a bunch of SCR's at the Rochester Hamfest; part number 37-152 X3 made by international rectifier. For the life of me, I can't find this part number at IR's site. Help me out please! K. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 15:08:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA03419; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:05:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:05:52 -0700 Message-ID: <35747803.F05ED59A crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 00:09:07 +0200 From: "Jean - Paul Bibérian" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Looking for info References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uFGzP2.0.9r.xS7Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19461 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Dear Vorts, I believe it was on Vortex that there was a message mentionning that NASA, for satellites orbits calculations had to assume infinite speed for the propagation of the gravitational field from the sun to the satellite. Has someone the reference? Jean-Paul Biberian From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 15:11:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA29643; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3574787D.685DAB11 crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 00:11:09 +0200 From: "Jean - Paul Bibérian" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: hydrogen question References: <3.0.1.32.19980602110828.00c28ad0 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7DuIQ2.0.0F7.kV7Tr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19462 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, atomic hydrogen is very reactive, and I believe that at 1 atm pressure you won't be able to do it anyway, and if by miracle you do it, recombination will be instantaneous. Jean-Paul Scott Little wrote: > If you fill a vessel with atomic hydrogen gas at 1 atm pressure, how > rapidly will it recombine into molecular hydrogen? Specifically what is > the time constant for this recombination? > > (any hints, suggestions, or references would be greatly appreciated) > > 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) -- ĐĎࡱá From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 16:20:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05013; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 16:17:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 16:17:10 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980602181534.00c48680 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 18:15:34 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: hydrogen question In-Reply-To: <3574787D.685DAB11 crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> References: <3.0.1.32.19980602110828.00c28ad0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8nKj81.0.uD1.iV8Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19463 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 00:11 6/3/98 +0200, Jean-Paul wrote: >atomic hydrogen is very reactive, and I believe that at 1 atm pressure you >won't be able to do it anyway, and if by miracle you do it, recombination >will be instantaneous. Thanks, Jean-Paul. That fits with a piece of info I got from the Britannica which said that the lifetime of atomic hydrogen is about 0.3 seconds at 0.5 mmHg pressure. 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 Jun 2 19:04:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17366; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:02:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 18:54:59 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Looking for info In-Reply-To: <35747803.F05ED59A crmc2.univ-mrs.fr> Message-ID: 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 TAA17301 Resent-Message-ID: <"2H5_k1.0.CF4.gwATr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19464 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Jean - Paul Bibérian wrote: > I believe it was on Vortex that there was a message mentionning that > NASA, for satellites orbits calculations had to assume infinite speed > for the propagation of the gravitational field from the sun to the > satellite. I'm convinced that this is some sort of urban legend. The sun's gravity field does not change with time, so propagation velocity of changes in gravity would not apply. The propagation velocity might become significant if the sun was replaced by a pair of neutron stars. If the period of revolution of the neutron stars was a multiple of the orbital period of a planet, would the planet experience resonant pumping as with saturn's ring gaps, and be deviated from a simple orbit? But even in this situation the phase relationship is far less important than the frequency match, therefor the velocity of gravity still would not have an effect. I think... ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 2 19:27:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA20755; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:18:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:18:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:00:05 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: ion question Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-IAiY.0.245.g9BTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19465 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Perhaps somebody here would know: if we mix positive N2 ions with negative N2 ions at STP, they probably seek each other out, but do they stick together in an ionic bond, or do they exchange an electron and fly apart again? I'm wondering if it is possible to create something like "solid air" by allowing + and - ion wind to come together! This is in reference to the "invisible wall" mentioned on the Phenomena Reports page. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 2 20:02:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA28401; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 19:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 18:51:37 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Resent-Message-ID: <"0GmvT2.0.fx6.IlBTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19466 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 1:58 PM 6/2/98, William Beaty wrote: >On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> The above looks misleading. It does not appear the ionic pressure >> increases a DC field. The energy for the field increase occurs when the >> sphere (cage) is positive, i.e. an anode. The fusor is an AC device. > >The Fusor described by Richard Hull and appearing in The BELL JAR is a DC >device. If I recall, the outer cage is positive, and positive ions are >accelerated inwards by the concentric fields between the two cages. > >There was an earlier Farnsworth tube which took the form of two >dish-shaped electrodes facing each other, and with RF high voltage applied >to them. At least that's how I remember the article. I was suprised when >I learned that the Fusor was DC. I don't quite understand how it works. >The inner cage would act like a Faraday box, and any ions within it would >see it as ground. But if positive ions are blasting inwards in all >directions, where do they go after they've built up to maximum? Straight on through towards the middle, then out the other side, if the mean free path (MFP) is long enough to allow. It seems to me that if electrical energy is to be directly obtained there must at least be an AC component applied to the central cage. The fusion "heat pulse" would then add momentum to ions as they escape, only to be turned back into the cage on the next cycle. The added oomph to the pulse could then be siphened off for power. A device that worked on this heat pulse idea would have to have a much more dense gas than something that creates an ion clump at the focal point of the cage. The idea seems a bit ludicrous to me, because to produce useful heat for the heat pulse there would be a *huge* neutron flux. Maybe a very dense gas full of lithium would absorb the neutrons? Would practically have to be liquid! I just don't see how that could be made to work. In DC mode, with a sparse gas, the *individual* fusion product ions would have MeV energy which would shoot the + ions right out of the cage, but again, the neutron flux from a current even slightly observable would be horrendous. Maybe if the MFP is right there would be lots of collisions on the way out and a large net + pulse would result? However, if you have a short MFP then there would be energy dissipating events at a short distance *into* the cage, i.e. no penetration, thus there could not be lots of collisions on the way out. I just don't see how there could be useful or even detectable electrical power from either DC or AC devices. Oh well, there's lots of things I don't see. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 20:14:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA01393; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:11:43 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" Subject: Radio Power Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:15:43 +1000 Message-ID: <001101bd8e9d$e5196ba0$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: <"AiauD2.0.gL.ixBTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19467 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments such as computers? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 21:54:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA09500; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 21:49:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 21:49:32 -0700 Message-ID: <3574C803.5D24 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 22:50:27 -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: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash spring, 1998 email version Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"e1qVF3.0.UJ2.DNDTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19468 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: June 2, 1998 I'm including my paper for you to freely retransmit. Please cite that this work was presented at the 1998 International Cold Fusion Conference VII, in Vancouver, BC, Canada, April 1998. The Conference Proceedings are available for $50. from Eneco in Salt Lake City, UT at 801-583-2000. Thanks for your interest! Larry [Dr. Lawrence P.G. Forsley] Analyzing Nuclear Ash from the Electrocatalytic Reduction of Radioactivity in Uranium and Thorium Lawrence Forsley, Robert August, Jacob Jorne, Jay Khim, Fred Mis; and Gary Phillips 1 JWK International Corporation, Suite 800, 7617 Little River Turnpike, Annandale, VA 22003 USA LForsley jwk.com Abstract A proprietary electrolytic system for the reduction of radioactivity in uranium and thorium was evaluated from June through December 1996. An exhaustive analysis of reaction materials taken before, during and after the experiments was carried out. These tests involved trace metals analysis via Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA), Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray (EDAX) analysis and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS). Additional tests involved high resolution mass spectroscopy of evolved gasses and reaction products, allowing isotopic differentiation, and high resolution gamma spectroscopy. Neutrons were searched for via 235U fission fragments and n-g reactions. The results of over 10 series of runs were ambiguous. However, the definitive test: operating a system in a low background cave with high resolution gamma spectroscopy, failed to show any radioactive reduction of the system as a whole. Regardless of these results, the testing protocols developed define the standard and rigor by which any proposed catalytically reduced radioactive system must be subjected. It is crucial that statistically significant results be obtained, including the statistical uniformity of the matrix composition, as otherwise comparisons will be impossible and the conclusions drawn will be erroneous. 1. Introduction J. Bochris [BOCK92], T. Claytor [CLAY90], J. Jorne [JORN94], G. Miley [MILE96], and others have presented low energy nuclear effects occurring in solid lattices. Some of these experiments have reported elemental transmutation as well. All of these systems have either metal hydrides, deuterides, or proton conductors in common. JWK International Corporation and its team sought to apply low energy elemental transmutation observed in hydrided materials to radioactive materials, and undertook an evaluation of a proprietary system developed to electrocatalytically reduce actinide radioactivity using a model uranium/thorium system in a solid catalyst. 2. Catalytic System Operation We employed a proprietary 0.25 gram matrix slightly impregnated with 235U depleted uranium and thorium. Uranium and thorium were chosen as test elements because they are both radioactive and form metal hydrides. The latter condition is hypothesized as necessary for the proposed effect at room temperature by electrolytically forming uranium and thorium hydrides in the presence of lithium sulfate in the electrolyte. The matrix is formulated in several proprietary steps resulting in dispersed uranium and thorium oxides. These oxides are very stable, and should resist chemical attack in the cell. 3. Instrumentation Instrumentation was employed to assess the matrix and system prior, during and after an experimental run. The goal of this instrumentation was to establish: evidence of radioactive reduction evidence of nuclear transmutation This was accomplished by monitoring radiation and trace materials. 3.1 Radiation Measurements Geiger Counters are sensitive to X-rays, beta particles, gamma rays and alpha particles. With the exception of the gamma rays, the others are easily attenuated by the water and the plastic components used in the system. Consequently, we observe gamma lines using liquid nitrogen cooled Ge detectors in a low background Pb shielded cave. 235U makes a sensitive in situ neutron diagnostic, because of its high fission cross section to < 0.5 ev and > 1 MeV neutrons. Similarly, the lithium sulfate in the water electrolyte and the polycarbonate housings make good detectors for neutron capture, gamma (n-g) reactions. Only one naturally occurring isotope of uranium, 235U, with a half life of 7.04 x 108 years, has detectable gamma lines: 185.7 and 143.8 KeV. It should be noted that the 185.7 KeV line is easily confused with the 226Ra 186.1 KeV line. However, 238U, with a 4.47 x 109 year half life, decays to: 238U -> 234Th + a + g -> 234mPa + g + b -> 234U + b Consequently, we observed two > 1 MeV g lines of 234mPa, and two > 90 KeV lines from 234Th. 234mPa has a half life 1.17 minutes. Naturally occurring thorium, which is 100% 232Th with a 1.4 x 1010 year half-life, decays as: 232Th -> 228Ra + a -> 228Ac + g + b -> 228Th + b We observed over ten gamma lines from 228Ac ranging in energy from 270 KeV to over 1 MeV. If the daughter products of U and Th are not in secular equilibrium with their parents, then they would not provide an accurate measure of the parent’s presence. Because of the relatively long half-lives of two of the daughters: 5.7 years for 228Ra and 24 days for 234Th, we are concerned about the time required to re-establish secular equilibrium. However, we are most concerned about breaking the 232Th decay chain since 228Ra may form an insoluble precipitate, RaSO4. This is of particular concern in all electrolysis studies using both Th and Li2SO4. Alpha and beta particles were counted with a scintillator in vacuum. Using the Feather Analysis technique, calibrated sheets of aluminum and lead were utilized to provide a known attenuation to beta particles and X-rays [OVER60]. This was used as an ancillary monitor of sample radioactivity. One indication of elemental transmutation would be evidence of a K-capture of an electron or the X-ray emission which occurs when an electron fills a new shell formed during transmutation. Since we were not calibrated to detect photons below 90 KeV, and were not sensitive below 40 KeV, we were unable to observe these X-rays. 3.2 Trace Material Analysis If nuclear processes are occurring, then a nuclear ash must result. Since the overall radioactivity may be reduced by the process, then the nuclear ash must be stable. Several different instruments were employed to monitor trace materials, including: Neutron Activation Analysis Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray Analysis Neutron activation analysis (NAA) requires subjecting a sample to an intense neutron flux for several minutes followed by successive counting periods where gamma ray emissions are recorded. Not all elements can be activated by this mechanism, but for those that can be, NAA provides an exquisitely sensitive technique accurate to parts per billion or better for some isotopes. NAA can also be used to give isotopic data. However, care must be taken, where assumptions of isotopic natural abundance are made, as well as where there is a variable abundance, such as with lead. Unfortunately, 235U present in the samples also fission during NAA and its’, and 238U, fission products complicate the elemental analysis. Neutron Activation Analysis was performed in three different facilities. Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS) compliments NAA. A sample is heated to several thousand degrees Celsius and injected into a mass spectrometer. The technique is typically sensitive to parts per billion. Unfortunately, three orders of magnitude in sensitivity is lost because of the small sample sizes employed. This results in a sensitivity of about 2-5 parts per million. Although this is sufficient for many of the candidate transmutation materials, it is insensitive at this level to the rare earths that are also candidate transmutation products. The argon isotope 40Ar, which is used as the feed gas in the instrument, interferes with the calcium isotope 40Ca, and compromises the sensitivity for this isotope. In addition, sample preparation compromises this technique. Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS) requires that a sample be dissolved in a liquid for injection. Very corrosive acids are chosen such as perchloric acid. Unfortunately, another candidate transmutation element, silicon, does not dissolve in perchloric acid, so "wet" preparation is very important. The ICP/MS samples run were dissolved in perchloric acid. A high resolution ICP/MS can be tuned to count specific ions with a particular mass. This can be used to accurately determine the isotopic abundance of various elements. Unfortunately, isotopes with the same mass, such as the nickel isotope 64Ni and the zinc isotope 64Zn are indistinguishable even with the highest resolution mass spectrometer. These isotopes require a chemical separation prior to the ICP/MS analysis. Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray (EDAX) analysis provides a surface elemental scan by looking at secondary X-rays from a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) electron beam as it is directed across a sample. This technique is sensitive to parts per thousand. However, this low resolution is useful since an element must be in high concentration to be observed by this technique. 4. Results of Experiments with Uranium and Thorium Samples were taken from runs including used and unused U and Th impregnated matrix, and used and unused high purity 1 molar Li2SO4. The tubing, plastic housings and filter paper were also analyzed. The possible effects observed included reductions in radioactivity and elemental transmutation, however these were inconclusive because of inhomogeneous samples and statistically incomplete sampling. Most significantly, real-time gamma monitoring of a closed system resulted in no reduction in gamma lines from 235U, or the 238U decay chain or the 232Th decay chain. The non-operating experiment was housed sufficiently long in the gamma detector to trap radon gas in a closed system and showed an increase in 212Pb and 208Tl activity, both of which are expected in the 232Th decay chain and are radon decay products. High resolution mass spectroscopy of the evolved gasses during experiments at the University of Rochester (UR) and NRL showed no isotopic or gas production anomalies. Curiously, the UR experiment, which was gas sampled, indicated radioactive reduction by matrix measurements, whereas the NRL gas sampled experiment showed no reduction during the real time gamma counting experiment. U and Th were found to apparently decrease by 50%-90%, as measured in the same sample before and after an experimental run, by alpha, beta and gamma counting. Very little U and no Th was on the filter paper or in the electrolyte, as measured by gamma counting and neutron activation of the electrolyte. However, it was difficult to accurately weigh the matrix after a run because of Li2SO4 coatings and the possibility of washing away the matrix while rinsing off the Li2SO4. It is suspected that matrix fines became distributed throughout the system, thereby resulting in an "apparent" reduction. ICP/MS showed an apparent increase in elemental Ba(+104x), Ca, Ni(+18.5x), Mg, Zn(+10x), Al, Pb (+15x) and decreases in U and Th. However, the material was not uniform, rendering before and after run comparisons statistically impossible. Further testing is also required to rule out contamination from handling and other sources. Various "inert" components, such as o-rings, have been shown to be contamination sources, especially barium [LITT98]. It is worth noting that due to the short time scales of the experiments, typically 4 hours, and the low current densities, less than 0.2 amps, an insignificant electrolytically induced contamination concentration should occur [BOCK96]. U and Th have a neutron excess. 238U has a ratio of 146:92 or 1.6:1, neutrons to protons. 232Th has a ratio of 142:90, also 1.6:1. Any transmutation of these elements must account for these surplus neutrons. ICP/MS data of possible transmuted Mg, Ni, Cu, Zn and Ba showed no change in their naturally occurring isotopic abundances within the statistical error of the measurement. Indeed, there were 1-2 percent changes between the used and unused samples, as well as natural abundances, but these were all within the error bars. The inability to distinguish between 64Ni and 64Zn leaves open the possibility that the heavy nickel isotope 64Ni may be in higher abundance and the light zinc isotope 64Zn in lower abundance, or vice versa. Similarly, 67Zn can not be reported because it overlaps with doubly charged 134Ba++ in the mass spectrometer. ICP/MS is accurate enough to correctly identify three uranium isotopes: 234U, 235U, and 238U in the samples. Since we used depleted 235U uranium, ICP/MS showed the samples contained 0.2% 235U, vs. a natural abundance of 0.7% 235U, which is consistent with commercially available uranium. EDAX analysis showed the initial matrix to consist of S, U, Cu, and Th. After a run there was a qualitative reduction in the U and Th line heights, along with the additional presence of Mg, Al, Si, Sb, Cr, Fe, Ni, Cu, Os, and Pt. Os may be confused with a Cu peak. S was in the original matrix, and in the Li2SO4 added to the electrolyte. There were trace amounts of Cr, Fe, Ni and Pt in the system, primarily in the electrical feed wires and Ti electrodes. Similarly, Al and Si were present in the alumina pump head used prior to the adoption of a contact-less peristaltic pump. However, Ti was notably absent, despite the Ti electrodes presenting the largest surface area for contact. This may be indicative of an oxide forming on the Ti, thereby sealing it from contact with the electrolyte, as well as reducing its electrical conductivity. It was suggested that under these conditions the Pt feed wire provides the majority of the surface area for electrolysis, and hence, an active source of contamination [LITT98]. It should also be noted that the U nucleus binding energy provides on the order of 200 MeV/nucleus fission. Although these experiments were run without calorimetry, there was no perceptible temperature increase (>5o C) associated with liberating this energy. Thorium fission would also result in similar excess energy. 5. Statistical Sampling The major flaw in this study was the inability to establish a normal distribution for the radioactive matrix so as to allow random sampling to give statistically meaningful results of both radioactive and trace materials before and after experiments. A significant effort will be required in the future to determine the statistical distribution of the matrix components, since ICP/MS and NAA are destructive, and comparisons require a normal distribution. Similarly, the small sample size, coupled with the secular dis-equilibrium of the U and Th daughter decay products, gave rise to poor gamma counting statistics. 6. Conclusion These were the first exhaustive measurements of possible radioactive reduction attempting to account for mass, neutron and radiation balances. Although 50-90% apparent reductions in U and Th were indicated by a variety of analytic techniques comparing the matrix before and after an experiment, its inhomogeneous nature coupled with possible losses through handling, make statistically significant comparisons impossible. It is likely that fines with a high surface to volume ratio, and consequently increased U and Th uptake during matrix fabrication, were mechanically redistributed through the system, thereby accounting for observed radioactive reductions. Morrison [MORR98] suggested tagging future experiments with strong gamma emitters like 137Cs or 131I to track material transport. However, the tag’s chemistry will differ from that of U and Th, or their decay daughters. There were no isotope shifts from natural abundance within experimental error for Mg, Ni, Cu, Zn, Ba, or U. There was no evidence of >100 KeV radiation, indicating neither radioactive fission products nor neutrons observed by n-g reactions. No anomalous gases or isotopes were seen during two runs. Both the neutron surplus and the unseen excess binding energy present major experimental and theoretical difficulties for the proposed system. Similarly, the observed lack of radioactive reduction in a system undergoing real time gamma analysis challenges claims of radioactive reduction. These experimental protocols, monitoring energy, mass, neutron and radiation balances in a statistically significant way, are required of all systems purporting to reduce radioactivity using hitherto unknown physical processes. 7. References [BOCK92] Bockris, J.O’M, et al., "Tritium and Helium Production in Palladium Electrodes and the Fugacity of Deuterium Therein", Frontiers of Cold Fusion, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cold Fusion, pp. 231-244, October 21-25, 1992. [BOCK96] Bockris, J. Memorandum to G. Miley regarding removing material from solution, July 31, 1996. [CLAY92] Claytor, Tuggle, D.G, and Taylor, S.F., "Evolution of Tritium from Deuterided Palladium Subject to High Electrical Currents", Frontiers of Cold Fusion, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Cold Fusion, pp. 217-229, October 21-25, 1992. [JORN94] J. Jorne, "Neutron Emission Studies During the Electrolysis of Deuterium by using BaCeO3 Solid Electrolyte and Palladium Electrodes" Fusion Technology 26 pp 244-247, 1994. [LITT98] Little, Scott, April 22, 1998. Personal communication. [MILE96] Miley, G. and Patterson, J., "Nuclear Transmutations in Thin-Film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis" Preprint from the 2nd International Conference on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, Texas A&M, College Station, TX, September 13-14, 1996. [MORR98] Morrison, D. Suggested during the ICCF-VII Conference in Vancouver, B.C., April 24, 1998. [OVER60] Overman, Clark, HM, Radioisotope Techniques. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc. 1960. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 22:51:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA03254; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:40:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:40:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006401bd8eb1$4bfa6aa0$489b85ce default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Neutron Decay and Allowed Proton Orbits Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:33:53 -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: <"MWRuE.0.ko.W7ETr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19470 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Neutron (1.008665 AMU) decays to a Proton (1.0078250 AMU) an electron (0.0005460 AMU)and an antineutrino (less than 5.0E-10 AMU rest mass)but unknown relativistic mass, but with a velocity very very close to c. Regardless, there is a barrier radius of twice the 2.81E-15 meter electron radius around the proton, based on the 0.275 Mev electron-antineutrino rejection energy. These quantized " electron barrier orbits" extend out to the ground-state Bohr Orbit (5.3E-11 meters) and contradict Mills' simple "Fractional Orbit" Hydrino Theory. OTOH, With an electron-Proton or electron-deuteron collision that forms the neutrino-antineutrino pair thus forming a Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutron, the mechanism involved Must circumvent the "electron barrier orbits". This DOES NOT NEGATE MILLS' experimental results. In the case of the deuteron the "proton end" may not form the same type of "electron barrier orbit" if any, which is consistent with the extremely low P-P reaction cross-section in comparison to the D-D reaction cross-section. BTW. These days one's P-P cross-section depends on the price of Viagra? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 23:01:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA05917; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:59:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:59:09 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: Subject: RE: Radio Power Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:08:18 +1000 Message-ID: <001e01bd8eb6$01e02220$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <001101bd8e9d$e5196ba0$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"GGA_12.0.LS1.gOETr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19471 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I wrote: >Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set >up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is >it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments >such as computers? Sorry, I meant "... for purposes of communications transmission." Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 23:23:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA10652; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3574C954.56E7 earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 22:56:04 -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 Subject: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash ICCF-7 April, 1998 HTML version Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------353E37367EB" Resent-Message-ID: <"DtGY-2.0.2c2.4eETr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19472 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. --------------353E37367EB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit mailbox:/C%7C/EARTHLNK/Netscape/NAVIGATOR/Mail/Inbox?id=3.0.5.32.19980602222445.00850100 mail.eden.com&number=10436&part=1.2 --------------353E37367EB Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="ICCF4VI.html" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="ICCF4VI.html" Received: from natasha.eden.com (root natasha.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by belize.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA10205 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 20:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Steph.texas.net (a6-197.eden.com [206.81.233.197]) by natasha.eden.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA24734 for ; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:28:11 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980602222445.00850100 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 22:24:45 -0500 To: rmforall earthlink.net From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash, rtf format 06/02/98 In-Reply-To: <35747C92.1678 earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_896862285==_" --=====================_896862285==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 05:28 PM 6/2/98 -0500, you wrote: >June 2, 1998 > >Hi Scott, I called Larry Forsley yesterday, and we talked half an >hour. He send this goodie-- we're not supposed to refer directly to >CETI-- can you decode it into HTML and send it to me? Sure....here it is. I will study it now. --=====================_896862285==_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ICCF4VI.html" ICCF paper with corrections

Analyzing Nuclear Ash from the Electrocatalytic= Reduction of Radioactivity in Uranium and Thorium

Lawrence Forsley, Robert August, Jacob Jorne,= Jay Khim, Fred Mis; and Gary Phillips1

JWK International Corporation, Suite 800, 7617= Little River Turnpike

Annandale, VA 22003 USA lforsley jwk.com

Abstract

A proprietary electrolytic system for the reduction= of radioactivity in uranium and thorium was evaluated from June through= December 1996. An exhaustive analysis of reaction materials taken before,= during and after the experiments was carried out. These tests involved= trace metals analysis via Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA), Energy= Dispersive Atomic X-ray (EDAX) analysis and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass= Spectroscopy (ICP/MS). Additional tests involved high resolution mass= spectroscopy of evolved gasses and reaction products, allowing isotopic= differentiation, and high resolution gamma spectroscopy. Neutrons were= searched for via 235U fission fragments and n-g reactions.

The results of over 10 series of runs were ambiguous.= However, the definitive test: operating a system in a low background cave= with high resolution gamma spectroscopy, failed to show any radioactive= reduction of the system as a whole. Regardless of these results, the= testing protocols developed define the standard and rigor by which any= proposed catalytically reduced radioactive system must be subjected. It is= crucial that statistically significant results be obtained, including the= statistical uniformity of the matrix composition, as otherwise comparisons= will be impossible and the conclusions drawn will be erroneous.

1. Introduction

J. Bochris [BOCK92], T. Claytor [CLAY90], J. Jorne= [JORN94], G. Miley [MILE96], and others have presented low energy nuclear= effects occurring in solid lattices. Some of these experiments have= reported elemental transmutation as well. All of these systems have either= metal hydrides, deuterides, or proton conductors in common. JWK= International Corporation and its team sought to apply low energy elemental= transmutation observed in hydrided materials to radioactive materials, and= undertook an evaluation of a proprietary system developed to= electrocatalytically reduce actinide radioactivity using a model= uranium/thorium system in a solid catalyst.

2. Catalytic System Operation

We employed a proprietary 0.25 gram matrix slightly= impregnated with 235U depleted uranium and thorium. Uranium and= thorium were chosen as test elements because they are both radioactive and= form metal hydrides. The latter condition is hypothesized as necessary for= the proposed effect at room temperature by electrolytically forming uranium= and thorium hydrides in the presence of lithium sulfate in the electrolyte.= The matrix is formulated in several proprietary steps resulting in= dispersed uranium and thorium oxides. These oxides are very stable, and= should resist chemical attack in the cell.

3. Instrumentation

Instrumentation was employed to assess the matrix= and system prior, during and after an experimental run. The goal of this= instrumentation was to establish:

  • evidence of radioactive= reduction

  • evidence of nuclear transmutation

This was accomplished by monitoring radiation and trace= materials.

3.1 Radiation Measurements

Geiger Counters are sensitive to X-rays, beta= particles, gamma rays and alpha particles. With the exception of the gamma= rays, the others are easily attenuated by the water and the plastic= components used in the system. Consequently, we observe gamma lines using= liquid nitrogen cooled Ge detectors in a low background Pb shielded= cave.

235U makes a sensitive in situ= neutron diagnostic, because of its high fission cross section to < 0.5= ev and > 1 MeV neutrons. Similarly, the lithium sulfate in the water= electrolyte and the polycarbonate housings make good detectors for neutron= capture, gamma (n-g) reactions.

Only one naturally occurring isotope of uranium,= 235U, with a half life of 7.04 x 108 years, has= detectable gamma lines: 185.7 and 143.8 KeV. It should be noted that the= 185.7 KeV line is easily confused with the 226Ra 186.1 KeV line.= However, 238U, with a 4.47 x 109 year half life,= decays to:

238U -> 234Th= + a + g= -> 234mPa + g + b= -> 234U + b

Consequently, we observed two > 1 MeV g lines of 234mPa, and two > 90 KeV= lines from 234Th. 234mPa has a half life 1.17= minutes. Naturally occurring thorium, which is 100% 232Th with a= 1.4 x 1010 year half-life, decays as:

232Th -> 228Ra += a ->= 228Ac + g= + b ->= 228Th + b

We observed over ten gamma lines from= 228Ac ranging in energy from 270 KeV to over 1 MeV. If the= daughter products of U and Th are not in secular equilibrium with their= parents, then they would not provide an accurate measure of the parent=92s= presence. Because of the relatively long half-lives of two of the= daughters: 5.7 years for 228Ra and 24 days for 234Th,= we are concerned about the time required to re-establish secular= equilibrium. However, we are most concerned about breaking the= 232Th decay chain since 228Ra may form an insoluble= precipitate, RaSO4. This is of particular concern in all= electrolysis studies using both Th and= Li2SO4.

Alpha and beta particles were counted with a= scintillator in vacuum. Using the Feather Analysis technique, calibrated= sheets of aluminum and lead were utilized to provide a known attenuation to= beta particles and X-rays [OVER60]. This was used as an ancillary monitor= of sample radioactivity.

One indication of elemental transmutation would be= evidence of a K-capture of an electron or the X-ray emission which occurs= when an electron fills a new shell formed during transmutation. Since we= were not calibrated to detect photons below 90 KeV, and were not sensitive= below 40 KeV, we were unable to observe these X-rays.

3.2 Trace Material Analysis

If nuclear processes are occurring, then a= nuclear ash must result. Since the overall radioactivity may be= reduced by the process, then the nuclear ash must be stable. Several= different instruments were employed to monitor trace materials,= including:

  • Neutron Activation Analysis

  • Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass= Spectroscopy

  • Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray Analysis

  • Neutron activation analysis (NAA) requires= subjecting a sample to an intense neutron flux for several minutes followed= by successive counting periods where gamma ray emissions are recorded. Not= all elements can be activated by this mechanism, but for those that can be,= NAA provides an exquisitely sensitive technique accurate to parts per= billion or better for some isotopes. NAA can also be used to give isotopic= data. However, care must be taken, where assumptions of isotopic natural= abundance are made, as well as where there is a variable abundance, such as= with lead. Unfortunately, 235U present in the samples also= fission during NAA and its=92, and 238U, fission products= complicate the elemental analysis. Neutron Activation Analysis was= performed in three different facilities.

Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS)= compliments NAA. A sample is heated to several thousand degrees Celsius and= injected into a mass spectrometer. The technique is typically sensitive to= parts per billion. Unfortunately, three orders of magnitude in sensitivity= is lost because of the small sample sizes employed. This results in a= sensitivity of about 2-5 parts per million. Although this is sufficient for= many of the candidate transmutation materials, it is insensitive at this= level to the rare earths that are also candidate transmutation products.= The argon isotope 40Ar, which is used as the feed gas in the= instrument, interferes with the calcium isotope 40Ca, and= compromises the sensitivity for this isotope.

In addition, sample preparation compromises this= technique. Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS) requires= that=20a sample be dissolved in a liquid for injection. Very corrosive= acids are chosen such as perchloric acid. Unfortunately, another candidate= transmutation element, silicon, does not dissolve in perchloric acid, so= "wet" preparation is very important. The ICP/MS samples run were dissolved= in perchloric acid.

A high resolution ICP/MS can be tuned to count specific= ions with a particular mass. This can be used to accurately determine the= isotopic abundance of various elements. Unfortunately, isotopes with the= same mass, such as the nickel isotope 64Ni and the zinc isotope= 64Zn are indistinguishable even with the highest resolution mass= spectrometer. These isotopes require a chemical separation prior to the= ICP/MS analysis.

Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray (EDAX) analysis provides= a surface elemental scan by looking at secondary X-rays from a Scanning= Electron Microscope (SEM) electron beam as it is directed across a sample.= This technique is sensitive to parts per thousand. However, this low= resolution is useful since an element must be in high concentration to be= observed by this technique.

4. Results of Experiments with Uranium and= Thorium

Samples were taken from runs including used and= unused U and Th impregnated matrix, and used and unused high purity 1 molar= Li2SO4. The tubing, plastic housings and filter paper= were also analyzed. The possible effects observed included reductions in= radioactivity and elemental transmutation, however these were inconclusive= because of inhomogeneous samples and statistically incomplete sampling.

Most significantly, real-time gamma monitoring of a= closed system resulted in no reduction in gamma lines from= 235U, or the 238U decay chain or the 232Th= decay chain. The non-operating experiment was housed sufficiently long in= the gamma detector to trap radon gas in a closed system and showed an= increase in 212Pb and 208Tl activity, both of= which are expected in the 232Th decay chain and are radon decay= products.

High resolution mass spectroscopy of the evolved gasses= during experiments at the University of Rochester (UR) and NRL showed no= isotopic or gas production anomalies. Curiously, the UR experiment,= which was gas sampled, indicated radioactive reduction by matrix= measurements, whereas the NRL gas sampled experiment showed no reduction= during the real time gamma counting experiment.

U and Th were found to apparently decrease by= 50%-90%, as measured in the same sample before and after an experimental= run, by alpha, beta and gamma counting. Very little U and no Th was on the= filter paper or in the electrolyte, as measured by gamma counting and= neutron activation of the electrolyte. However, it was difficult to= accurately weigh the matrix after a run because of Li2SO4= coatings and the possibility of washing away the matrix while rinsing= off the Li2SO4. It is suspected that matrix fines= became distributed throughout the system, thereby resulting in an= "apparent" reduction.

ICP/MS showed an apparent increase in elemental= Ba(+104x), Ca, Ni(+18.5x), Mg, Zn(+10x), Al, Pb (+15x) and decreases in U= and Th. However, the material was not uniform, rendering before and after= run comparisons statistically impossible. Further testing is also required= to rule out contamination from handling and other sources. Various "inert"= components, such as o-rings, have been shown to be contamination sources,= especially barium [LITT98]. It is worth noting that due to the short time= scales of the experiments, typically 4 hours, and the low current= densities, less than 0.2 amps, an insignificant electrolytically induced= contamination concentration should occur [BOCK96].

U and Th have a neutron excess. 238U has a= ratio of 146:92 or 1.6:1, neutrons to protons. 232Th has a ratio= of 142:90, also 1.6:1. Any transmutation of these elements must account for= these surplus neutrons. ICP/MS data of possible transmuted Mg, Ni, Cu, Zn= and Ba showed no change in their naturally occurring isotopic abundances= within the statistical error of the measurement. Indeed, there were 1-2= percent changes between the used and unused samples, as well as natural= abundances, but these were all within the error bars. The inability to= distinguish between 64Ni and 64Zn leaves open the= possibility that the heavy nickel isotope 64Ni may be in higher= abundance and the light zinc isotope 64Zn in lower abundance, or= vice versa. Similarly, 67Zn can not be reported because= it overlaps with doubly charged 134Ba++ in the mass= spectrometer.

ICP/MS is accurate enough to correctly identify three= uranium isotopes: 234U, 235U, and 238U in= the samples. Since we used depleted 235U uranium, ICP/MS showed= the samples contained 0.2% 235U, vs. a natural abundance of 0.7%= 235U, which is consistent with commercially available= uranium.

EDAX analysis showed the initial matrix to consist of= S, U, Cu, and Th. After a run there was a qualitative reduction in the U= and Th line heights, along with the additional presence of Mg, Al, Si, Sb,= Cr, Fe, Ni, Cu, Os, and Pt. Os may be confused with a Cu peak. S was in the= original matrix, and in the Li2SO4 added to the= electrolyte. There were trace amounts of Cr, Fe, Ni and Pt in the system,= primarily in the electrical feed wires and Ti electrodes. Similarly, Al and= Si were present in the alumina pump head used prior to the adoption of a= contact-less peristaltic pump. However, Ti was notably absent, despite the= Ti electrodes presenting the largest surface area for contact. This may be= indicative of an oxide forming on the Ti, thereby sealing it from contact= with the electrolyte, as well as reducing its electrical conductivity. It= was suggested that under these conditions the Pt feed wire provides the= majority of the surface area for electrolysis, and hence, an active source= of contamination [LITT98].

It should also be noted that the U nucleus binding= energy provides on the order of 200 MeV/nucleus fission. Although these= experiments were run without calorimetry, there was no perceptible= temperature increase (>5o C) associated with liberating this= energy. Thorium fission would also result in similar excess energy.

5. Statistical Sampling

The major flaw in this study was the inability to= establish a normal distribution for the radioactive matrix so as to allow= random sampling to give statistically meaningful results of both= radioactive and trace materials before and after experiments. A significant= effort will be required in the future to determine the statistical= distribution of the matrix components, since ICP/MS and NAA are= destructive, and comparisons require a normal distribution. Similarly, the= small sample size, coupled with the secular dis-equilibrium of the U and Th= daughter decay products, gave rise to poor gamma counting statistics.

6. Conclusion

These were the first exhaustive measurements of= possible radioactive reduction attempting to account for mass, neutron and= radiation balances. Although 50-90% apparent reductions in U and Th were= indicated by a variety of analytic techniques comparing the matrix before= and after an experiment, its inhomogeneous nature coupled with possible= losses through handling, make statistically significant comparisons= impossible. It is likely that fines with a high surface to volume ratio,= and consequently increased U and Th uptake during matrix fabrication, were= mechanically redistributed through the system, thereby accounting for= observed radioactive reductions. Morrison [MORR98] suggested tagging future= experiments with strong gamma emitters like 137Cs or= 131I to track material transport. However, the tag=92s chemistry= will differ from that of U and Th, or their decay daughters.

There were no isotope shifts from natural= abundance within experimental error for Mg, Ni, Cu, Zn, Ba, or U. There was= no evidence of >100 KeV radiation, indicating neither radioactive= fission products nor neutrons observed by n-g= reactions. No anomalous gases or isotopes were seen during= two runs. Both the neutron surplus and the unseen excess binding= energy present major experimental and theoretical difficulties for the= proposed system. Similarly, the observed lack of radioactive reduction in a= system undergoing real time gamma analysis challenges claims of radioactive= reduction.

These experimental protocols, monitoring energy, mass,= neutron and radiation balances in a statistically significant way, are= required of all systems purporting to reduce radioactivity using hitherto= unknown physical processes.

7. References

[BOCK92] Bockris, J.O=92M, et al., "Tritium and= Helium Production in Palladium Electrodes and the Fugacity of Deuterium= Therein", Frontiers of Cold Fusion, Proceedings of the Third= International Conference on Cold Fusion, pp. 231-244, October 21-25,= 1992.

[BOCK96] Bockris, J. Memorandum to G. Miley regarding removing material= from solution, July 31, 1996.

[CLAY92] Claytor, Tuggle, D.G, and Taylor, S.F., "Evolution of Tritium= from Deuterided Palladium Subject to High Electrical Currents",= Frontiers of Cold Fusion, Proceedings of the Third International Conference= on Cold Fusion, pp. 217-229, October 21-25, 1992.

[JORN94] J. Jorne, "Neutron Emission Studies During the Electrolysis of= Deuterium by using BaCeO3 Solid Electrolyte and Palladium Electrodes"= Fusion Technology 26 pp 244-247, 1994.

[LITT98] Little, Scott, April 22, 1998. Personal communication.

[MILE96] Miley, G. and Patterson, J., "Nuclear Transmutations in= Thin-Film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis" Preprint from the 2nd= International Conference on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, Texas= A&M, College Station, TX, September 13-14, 1996.

[MORR98] Morrison, D. Suggested during the ICCF-VII Conference in= Vancouver, B.C., April 24, 1998.

[OVER60] Overman, Clark, HM, Radioisotope Techniques. McGraw-Hill= Book Co., Inc. 1960.

 --=====================_896862285==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 --=====================_896862285==_-- --------------353E37367EB-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 23:38:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA13205; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:33:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:33:01 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:33:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Radio Power Resent-Message-ID: <"DTmRw2.0.EE3.QuETr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19473 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I wrote: > >>Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set >>up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is >>it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments >>such as computers? > >Sorry, I meant "... for purposes of communications transmission." > >Brendan Hall Don't think it is legal, but extracting radio broadcast power has been done many ways. People extracting enough to run part of their household create "black" areas, shadows behind themselves in the broadcast area, and thus the jig is up. Since your use is on a portable you would not have the shadow problem. Also the energy utilization would be small if you used the energy for 24 hour/day charging. Antenna size might be a problem, but once you have a good antenna all you need to do is use an RF transformer to jack up the voltage to where you need it, rectify it, and make a charging circuit that prevents overcharging. Would not work well in remote areas. You would need to be in city near transmitters. If the idea worked well it might be worthwhile for a city of people to pay for their own power broadcast channel. Might also save a lot of batteries going into the dump. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 23:45:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA13795; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:35:13 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:35:13 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:35:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Radio Power In-Reply-To: <001e01bd8eb6$01e02220$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hHsWI3.0.FN3.TwETr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19474 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Brendan Hall wrote: > > I wrote: > > >Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set > >up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is > >it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments > >such as computers? > > Sorry, I meant "... for purposes of communications transmission." OK. I think the answer is NO because Tesla's scheme utilized Schuman Cavity Resonance , ELF 7-8 CPS and your power collecting "electrode" was the ENTIRE EARTH"S MASS (LOTS of inductance). To extract the energy though you just rectify and filter the received power. The Usual Ohm's law factors applied. It was NOT " free " energy. Most of the energy from centemporary radio transmitters gets cancelled as noise . IS it therefore LOST (unrecoverable)? I don't know but I think maybe not. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 2 23:53:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA19316; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:48:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:48:08 -0700 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:48:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski X-Sender: jimostr victor1.mscomm.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: RE: Radio Power In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"usLJv3.0.kj4.d6FTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19475 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 2 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > > Don't think it is legal, but extracting radio broadcast power has been done > many ways. People extracting enough to run part of their household create > "black" areas, shadows behind themselves in the broadcast area, and thus > the jig is up. Alteration of rransmitter field patterns? By a RECIEVER? Golly Horace! With a narrow enough field pattern you could set up a comm system , right? But it would be weird , the reciever would be the transmitter (of information).. Jim Ostrowski From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 00:30:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA27127; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:27:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:27:58 -0700 (PDT) From: "Brendan Hall" To: Subject: RE: Radio Power Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 17:37:06 +1000 Message-ID: <002501bd8ec2$6937b4e0$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: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Resent-Message-ID: <"HFgsW2.0.md6.xhFTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19476 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >I wrote: > >>Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set >>up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is >>it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments >>such as computers? > >Sorry, I meant "... for purposes of communications transmission." > Horace wrote: >If the idea worked well it might be worthwhile for a city of people to pay >for their own power broadcast channel. Might also save a lot of batteries >going into the dump. Hmm. How about setting up a system whereby the receiver extracts the power from a current band that is already broadcasting. In a turn key product, it would include all software to keep it going. This is the real selling point, as the software can include the ability to extract advertisements that have been broadcast digitally from the station. Naturally, the acceptance of such power reception will include accepting the condition of advertisements. This could lead to a whole new generation of viruses, if the software is not written correctly. Imagine, sudden contagion throughout a city. However, antiviral broadcasts may be useful, making some of the current computer management ubiquitous (invisible to the end user). Brendan Hall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 00:53:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA29701; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:51:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:51:33 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:52:17 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: RE: Radio Power Resent-Message-ID: <"JW0Jt3.0._F7.42GTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19477 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 5:37 PM 6/3/98, Brendan Hall wrote: [snip] >Hmm. How about setting up a system whereby the receiver extracts the power >from a current band that is already broadcasting. In a turn key product, it >would include all software to keep it going. This is the real selling >point, as the software can include the ability to extract advertisements >that have been broadcast digitally from the station. Naturally, the >acceptance of such power reception will include accepting the condition of >advertisements. [snip] Could be wrong, but I do not think you would get this past either the FCC or the station owner. The service provider (phone co. etc.) would have to provide his own station. It might be a very viable idea to piggyback a specific product with existing stations though - a win-win partnership, unless they figured out a way to cut you out. Might have to put the receiving antenna(s) on a vehicle though. Also don't know how practical it would be to power a PC. A low power portable might work. Cell phone, pager, wrist watch, clock, or calculator would be feasible though. You would have to tune to specific stations, and you would only get a trickle from each station. Remember crystal radios? They don't require a battery, but they don't put out much power either. A big antenna can draw a lot more power, but there goes the portability. The "house power" antenna I heard about took up the attic of a barn which was near a radio station. I think keeping things on standby, especially memory, is a very good application. This approach could be improved by augmenting with solar cells, radioactive batteries (a coming product) or something else. There are also devices designed to run on 60 cycle radiation - you just put a horizontal loop in the baseboards of a room, or in an attic. I can hear the cringes now! Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 05:47:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02145; Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:32:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 09:32:32 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980602110828.00c28ad0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 11:08:28 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: hydrogen question Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"UuKI03.0.0X.Ra2Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19453 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If you fill a vessel with atomic hydrogen gas at 1 atm pressure, how rapidly will it recombine into molecular hydrogen? Specifically what is the time constant for this recombination? (any hints, suggestions, or references would be greatly appreciated) 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 Jun 3 07:52:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA19846; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19980603142340.2096.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:23:40 -0700 (PDT) From: michael randall Subject: RE: Radio Power To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"acuX43.0.mr4.55MTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19478 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---Brendan Hall wrote: > > > I wrote: > > >Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set > >up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is > >it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments > >such as computers? > > Sorry, I meant "... for purposes of communications transmission." > > Brendan Hall Tesla's idea was to resonant the transmitter and reciever for radio and power transfer. Below is a radio kit on this idea. www.midcoast.com/~scisourc/p-cat.html Resonant Circuits # 10-416 $67.00The study of communication by means of electromagnetic waves is aided by the use of this resonant circuit kit. The transmitter and receiver coils are carefully wound on durable cylinders and form the heart of an RLC oscillator. A signal can be transmitted from one circuit to another that is tuned to the same frequency, even though the two are physically isolated. Not only is this a useful demonstration of radio communication but topics such as induced EMF, directional antennas, electromagnetic shielding using faraday cages, electronic oscillators, alternating current circuits, diode rectification, and many others can be discussed and demonstrated. The frequency of oscillation is tunable over the AM radio band. Operates on a 1.5 volt "D" cell (not included). The kit includes a transmitter and receiver coil, variable capacitor, diode, and LED. A frequency generator is required for some experiments. Regards, Michael Randall _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 09:18:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA07941; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 09:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 09:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 09:35:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199806031435.JAA21662 dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: Re: hydrogen question To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"Ee5LC1.0._x1.ZNNTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19479 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: You wrote: > >If you fill a vessel with atomic hydrogen gas at 1 atm pressure, how >rapidly will it recombine into molecular hydrogen? Very very fast. Easiest thing for it to form a hydride of itself. There was a mention of keeping hydrogen atomic at 0.3 K under strong magnetic influenc so that it is in a triple spin state and thereby weakly interactvie (its beyond me). Normal single spin states makes it strongly interactive to form a molecule (highly reactive). >Specifically what is the time constant for this recombination? Haven't seen any stopwatch data but like any gas chemical reaction, it would depend on P & T. And if it takes lowering temperatures that much to somewhat slow things down for atomic hydrogen studies, things must be pretty fast at your temperatures. By the way, the stainless metal container (iron, chrome, nickel, etc,) dissolves hydrogen to form true solution dependant on P & T.. Not so obvious like solid into liquid solutions. Might affect results you are looking for. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 11:57:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09195; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 11:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 11:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 10:17:31 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: hydrogen question Resent-Message-ID: <"7TWu_3.0.ZF2.jjPTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19480 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:08 AM 6/2/98, Scott Little wrote: >If you fill a vessel with atomic hydrogen gas at 1 atm pressure, how >rapidly will it recombine into molecular hydrogen? Specifically what is >the time constant for this recombination? > >(any hints, suggestions, or references would be greatly appreciated) Scott, You would think H would combine very fast to make H2, and in an O2 mixture, that the H or H2 would combine very fast to make H2O. However, supposedly, Brown's gas produces too much energy and too much heat to come solely from a 2 H2 + O2 -> 2 H2O. It is hypothesised that the hydrogen remains monatomic for the several seconds it takes to get from the plates to the flame. I don't know if there is a peer reviewed article on this - probably not. If there is a significant amount of monatomic H in a gas, it should be feasible to measure the volume or pressure drop as recombination occurs. It would also be possible to assess the H/H2 ratio by measuring bouyancy. Put in plastic bag of known volume and weight and measure lift. Measure and compensate for air pressure. Problems might be gas production rate (insufficient), H2 leakage from the bag, and gas purity. H + H recombination should emit UV light, right? Might be possible to directly measure recomination rate in a quartz cell? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 12:57:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19659; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 12:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 12:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:28:39 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Radio Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"yHF8P3.0.1p4.vYQTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19481 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: There are several common designs, some of which use two tuned circuits, for radio power. An example is one circuit is tuned to a local high power AM station. The resultant is recified and filtered and sometimes a charge pump, or voltage mulitplier is incorporated. This DC is now used to supply power for amplification the second tuned circuit which then can recieve weak station. A long wave fellow can get 32 volts p-p from antnna nearby WLW in Cincinnati... The late Paul Monas built at least one radio powered motor ... Moans was a debunked of fraud perpetual motion. The antenna was a loop and fed recitifer. This also was powered from WLW [700 AM, home of Gary Burbank the famous DJ!] J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 13:18:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA26198; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3575AC7E.E90F80B verisoft.com.tr> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 23:05:18 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: The Principle of Non-Gravitating Vacuum Energy and ... (eprint:gr-qc/9605026) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"G2Pfz.0.9P6.fwQTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19482 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This paper is the case of our last year discussions about ZPE - GR compatibility. New paper from the same authors published today as: gr-qc/9806006 Gravity, Cosmology and Particle Physics without the Cosmological Constant Problem Both available from xxx.lanl.gov Regards, hamdi ucar General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, gr-qc/9605026 From: Alex Kaganovich Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 12:52:02 +0300 (IDT) (12kb) The Principle of Non-Gravitating Vacuum Energy and some of its consequences Authors: E.I.Guendelman, A.B.Kaganovich (Physics Dept., Ben Gurion University, Israel) Comments: 23 pages Report-no: Phys.BGU-137/96 For Einstein's General Relativity (GR) or the alternatives suggested up to date$ the vacuum energy gravitates. We present a model where a new measure is introduced for integration of the total action in the D-dimensional space-time. This measure is built from D scalar fields $\varphi_{a}$. As a consequence of such a choice of the measure, the matter lagrangian $L_{m}$ can be changed by adding a constant while no gravitational effects, like a cosmological term, are induced. Such Non-Gravitating Vacuum Energy (NGVE) theory has an infinite dimensional symmetry group which contains volume-preserving diffeomorphisms in the internal space of scalar fields $\varphi_{a}$. Other symmetries contained in this symmetry group, suggest a deep connection of this theory with theories of extended objects. In general {\em the theory is different from GR} although for certain choices of $L_{m}$, which are related to the existence of an additional symmetry, solutions of GR are solutions of the model. This is achieved in four dimensions if $L_{m}$ is due to fundamental bosonic and fermionic strings. Other types of matter where this feature of the theory is realized, are for example: scalars without potential or subjected to nonlinear constraints, massless fermions and point particles. The point particle plays a special role, since it is a good phenomenological description of matter at large distances. de Sitter space is realized in an unconventional way, where the de Sitter metric holds, but such de Sitter space is supported by the existence of a variable scalar field which in practice destroys the maximal symmetry. The only space - time where maximal symmetry is not broken, in a dynamical sense, is Minkowski space. The theory has non trivial dynamics in 1+1 dimensions, unlike GR. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 13:44:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA01479; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 13:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980603163723.00cca8c0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:37:23 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: hydrogen question Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980602110828.00c28ad0 mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"TTYmS.0.xM.lERTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19483 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:08 AM 6/2/98 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >If you fill a vessel with atomic hydrogen gas at 1 atm pressure, how >rapidly will it recombine into molecular hydrogen? Specifically what is >the time constant for this recombination? > >(any hints, suggestions, or references would be greatly appreciated) 1) Very rapidly--watch out for flying debris if you get anywhere near 1 atm. 2) If you keep the contents in the dark and away from radiation sources, it might last quite a while before the recombination started. Of course, anywhere on the surface of the earth, cosmic rays are common enough that you will be visiting point 1 before the container is full. 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 Jun 3 15:26:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA27000; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 10:35:57 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806031038_MC2-3F06-D641 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"uB-ba2.0.hb6.cnSTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19485 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:LForsley jwk.com This was a test of CETI's remediation claims, not the Cincinnati Group's (CG). I would like to see Forsely try the CG device in the cave as well, although I would hate to be the one who pays for the test. I think the remediation and transmutation businesses are a distraction, a dead end, and a waste of time, because these processes are difficult to verify, and because I see no significant potential near-term market for them. Forsley's test is one of the best experiments yet performed. The results are negative, albeit a little ambiguous. They will not inspire investor confidence. I wish that CETI and CG would take this as a wake up call and concentrate on energy production instead, which can be verified much more easily. The French AEC performed rigorous preliminary tests on the GC and found evidence that it *does* reduce radioactivity. I cannot judge whether their methods were as good as Forsley's. They should compare notes. There may be a huge market for remediating nuclear waste from U.S. bomb production and the nuclear industry . . . and then again, there may not be. I investigated this last year. I read parts of the U.S. DoE remediation plan on the Web and in a printed book: "Linking Legacies," DOE/EM-0319, January 1997. I conclude that remediation may not significantly reduce the cost of cleaning up the nuclear mess. The budget is complex, but I believe that most of that cost is for gathering the materials. What you do with the garbage after you gather it in one place does not matter much. Whether you transport it somewhere and put it in the ground, or magically remediate it, the project costs look roughly the same as far as I can tell. The numbers are astronomical either way. I would recommend putting the garbage underground, but not too far underground, and not in a sealed passageway. We think of this stuff as dangerous garbage and we wish we could be rid of it somehow, but my guess is that the next generation will find a use for it, and they will want it stored in a convenient, accessible location. One generation's garbage is treasure to the next. It is a misconception that in the old days people lived carefully and frugally, washed their dinner napkins, and believed in "waste not, want not." They used fewer resources per capita, and they did not pave over huge areas to make a wasteland. We do live in a "throw away" society, but on the other hand people used to waste the few resources they did have. Pollution per capita was worse. Wood burning stoves and horse transport are environmental and public health nightmares. (See O. L. Bettman, "The Good Old Days--They Were Terrible!") Wooden tea clipper ships wore out after five years and ten voyages to China. It is difficult to imagine a transport system in which huge amounts of wood and hundreds of man years were devoted to a vessel that was used ten times. It makes the Apollo rockets look good. Thousands of wooden ships were abandoned and sunk to make landfill harbors in San Francisco and New York. Great forests in North American were decimated in the late 19th century. Roughly one-forth of the logs ended up water logged and sunk at the bottom of the Great Lakes. They are now being excavated, dried off, milled, and sold at a good profit. Mankind learns to made better and better use of resources. Faxes and the Internet gave rise to effective Garbage Exchanges in the U.S. Nowadays, a cannery manager with a thousand tons of fish heads to dispose of will list them in an on-line exchange. A fertilizer manufacturer will send a truck to collect them. When oil was first refined to produce kerosene in the 1860s, the lighter gasoline was thrown away. Up until the 1970s, when gasoline was refined, natural gas was burned off and wasted. We are now creating giant landfills which bother some people. Environmentalists fret about them. I predict that in a hundred years, with better robots and chemical processing, people will find these landfills more valuable than gold mines. They are a concentration of refined elements, expensive chemicals, and a fabulous storehouse for archeologists. An anthropologist excavated a landfill from the 1950s and found newspapers in neat stacks, and corn-on-the-cob nearly intact and edible. I saw a photograph of it: the newspaper is completely legible. Many landfills offer ideal anaerobic environments to preserve materials and prevent bio-degradation. The other problem with remediation is that there is only one potential customer, the DoE, and it might take years or decades to award a contract. As I said, I predict it never will, because by the time the DoE moves people will find a good use for rad waste. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 16:08:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA06020; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:11:42 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash [2] Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806031614_MC2-3F0C-714D compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"cFbjF3.0.oT1.KPTTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19486 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:LForsley jwk.com [THIS MAY BE COPY # 2.] This was a test of CETI's remediation claims, not the Cincinnati Group's (CG). I would like to see Forsely try the CG device in the cave as well, although I would hate to be the one who pays for the test. I think the remediation and transmutation businesses are a distraction, a dead end, and a waste of time, because these processes are difficult to verify, and because I see no significant potential near-term market for them. Forsley's test is one of the best experiments yet performed. The results are negative, albeit a little ambiguous. They will not inspire investor confidence. I wish that CETI and CG would take this as a wake up call and concentrate on energy production instead, which can be verified much more easily. The French AEC performed rigorous preliminary tests on the GC and found evidence that it *does* reduce radioactivity. I cannot judge whether their methods were as good as Forsley's. They should compare notes. There may be a huge market for remediating nuclear waste from U.S. bomb production and the nuclear industry . . . and then again, there may not be. I investigated this last year. I read parts of the U.S. DoE remediation plan on the Web and in a printed book: "Linking Legacies," DOE/EM-0319, January 1997. I conclude that remediation may not significantly reduce the cost of cleaning up the nuclear mess. The budget is complex, but I believe that most of that cost is for gathering the materials. What you do with the garbage after you gather it in one place does not matter much. Whether you transport it somewhere and put it in the ground, or magically remediate it, the project costs look roughly the same as far as I can tell. The numbers are astronomical either way. I would recommend putting the garbage underground, but not too far underground, and not in a sealed passageway. We think of this stuff as dangerous garbage and we wish we could be rid of it somehow, but my guess is that the next generation will find a use for it, and they will want it stored in a convenient, accessible location. One generation's garbage is treasure to the next. It is a misconception that in the old days people lived carefully and frugally, washed their dinner napkins, and believed in "waste not, want not." They used fewer resources per capita, and they did not pave over huge areas to make a wasteland. We do live in a "throw away" society, but on the other hand people used to waste the few resources they did have. Pollution per capita was worse. Wood burning stoves and horse transport are environmental and public health nightmares. (See O. L. Bettman, "The Good Old Days--They Were Terrible!") Wooden tea clipper ships wore out after five years and ten voyages to China. It is difficult to imagine a transport system in which huge amounts of wood and hundreds of man years were devoted to a vessel that was used ten times. It makes the Apollo rockets look good. Thousands of wooden ships were abandoned and sunk to make landfill harbors in San Francisco and New York. Great forests in North American were decimated in the late 19th century. Roughly one-forth of the logs ended up water logged and sunk at the bottom of the Great Lakes. They are now being excavated, dried off, milled, and sold at a good profit. Mankind learns to made better and better use of resources. Faxes and the Internet gave rise to effective Garbage Exchanges in the U.S. Nowadays, a cannery manager with a thousand tons of fish heads to dispose of will list them in an on-line exchange. A fertilizer manufacturer will send a truck to collect them. When oil was first refined to produce kerosene in the 1860s, the lighter gasoline was thrown away. Up until the 1970s, when gasoline was refined, natural gas was burned off and wasted. We are now creating giant landfills which bother some people. Environmentalists fret about them. I predict that in a hundred years, with better robots and chemical processing, people will find these landfills more valuable than gold mines. They are a concentration of refined elements, expensive chemicals, and a fabulous storehouse for archeologists. An anthropologist excavated a landfill from the 1950s and found newspapers in neat stacks, and corn-on-the-cob nearly intact and edible. I saw a photograph of it: the newspaper is completely legible. Many landfills offer ideal anaerobic environments to preserve materials and prevent bio-degradation. The other problem with remediation is that there is only one potential customer, the DoE, and it might take years or decades to award a contract. As I said, I predict it never will, because by the time the DoE moves people will find a good use for rad waste. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 16:16:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA08204; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:13:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:13:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980603164628.00ca8900 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:46:28 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Radio Power Cc: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" In-Reply-To: <001101bd8e9d$e5196ba0$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"1LJtV.0.302.EYTTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19487 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:15 PM 6/3/98 +1000, Brendan Hall wrote: >Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we have set >up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. Is >it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power instruments >such as computers? You mean you PAY for your power? (I've done demos of milliwatt level devices run by broadcast power--mostly from UHF television stations. It has alway amused me that some digital watches have batteries, since they only need microwatts.) 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 Jun 3 16:40:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA12004; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0957 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Radio Power Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 10:17:58 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"U91FV3.0.Fx2.QnTTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19488 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Brenden It is very possible. Lots of instruments do this. Try this experiment. Stick a wire a several feet long into the input of an oscilloscope, and ground the ground. You will probably see several volts of a noisy sinewave, at about a microsecond period, as well aas ordinary AC hum pickup at 60 HZ. In my Loran navigation system on my boat, the preamp gets all its power from the antenna it is directly connected to. No batteries, gain of 20 db, at 100KHz. Hank > ---------- > From: Brendan Hall[SMTP:brendan mackayallen.com.au] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 8:15 PM > To: 'Vortex Discussion Group' > Subject: Radio Power > > Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we > have set > up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power transmission. > Is > it possible to use radio waves to extract power for low power > instruments > such as computers? > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 16:48:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA14611; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:41:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:41:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0955 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Looking for info Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 09:58:17 -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 mx2.eskimo.com id QAA14513 Resent-Message-ID: <"jjIVW1.0.yZ3.myTTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19489 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: William The sun's gravity is constantly changing with time, as mass is converted into energy, which then propagates into space. Are you sure you are saying what you mean? Hank > ---------- > From: William Beaty[SMTP:billb eskimo.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 6:54 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Looking for info > > On Wed, 3 Jun 1998, Jean - Paul Bibérian wrote: > > > I believe it was on Vortex that there was a message mentionning that > > NASA, for satellites orbits calculations had to assume infinite > speed > > for the propagation of the gravitational field from the sun to the > > satellite. > > I'm convinced that this is some sort of urban legend. The sun's > gravity > field does not change with time, so propagation velocity of changes in > gravity would not apply. > > The propagation velocity might become significant if the sun was > replaced > by a pair of neutron stars. If the period of revolution of the > neutron > stars was a multiple of the orbital period of a planet, would the > planet > experience resonant pumping as with saturn's ring gaps, and be > deviated > from a simple orbit? But even in this situation the phase > relationship > is far less important than the frequency match, therefor the velocity > of > gravity still would not have an effect. I think... > > ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 3 18:30:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09894; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:28:23 -0700 (PDT) From: aki ix.netcom.com Message-ID: <3575F883.58F ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 18:29:39 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Radio Power References: <19980603142340.2096.rocketmail send1e.yahoomail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"G_Xuq.0.QQ2.rWVTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19490 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Junw 3, 1998, > ---Brendan Hall wrote: > >Tesla looked at transmitting power through the air. Since then we > have set up powerful radio transmitters for the purposes of power > transmission. Is it possible to use radio waves to extract power for >low power instruments such as computers? > > Sorry, I meant "... for purposes of communications transmission." Yes, but: I guess solar power devices can be considered a power extractor of that great radio transmitter in sky. Why piddle around with sucking power out of human scale radio transmitters that usually peters out with the square of the distance?(unless it is beamed toward you) Combine some state of the art solar cells, batteries, circuitry, and Voila! free fusion power for the purpose of communicating transmissions and running a washing machine, and heating water, and running a car, and etc. Unfortunately it still takes two arms and two legs to get what you need to get started. :) -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 19:56:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA28869; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 16:11:25 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Test message, Achtung! Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806031614_MC2-3F0C-714C compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"V_Mum.0.r27.idWTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19491 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex My messages do not appear to be going through to Vortex. Here is a test message. This was a sign posted in the U.K. ATLAS computer site in the 1960s, quoted by Stan Kelly-Bootle in "The Devil's DP Dictionary" (McGraw-Hill, 1981): ACHTUNG!! ALLES LOOKENPEEPERS!! Das computermachien ist nicht fur gefingenpoken and mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, bowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken bei da dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen hans in das pockets muss; relaxen and watch das blinkenlichten. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 20:00:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00227; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980603164342.00cd6a70 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 16:43:42 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"8IBBL3.0.93.riWTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19492 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The devices I have seen all used DC grids and an external RF source. Farnsworth believed that the AC caused the ions to cycle back and forth though the center. I, and a lot of other people, believe that the effect was similar to a magnetron, and that you got circulating currents of ions. Reach a critical point, and instead of diffuse clouds you have 0.1 mm diameter or smaller currents running around in overlapping loops. Do it just right, and you have a beam collision machine. 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 Jun 3 21:27:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00531; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:52:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 19:52:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003f01bd8f53$612f76c0$989985ce default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: CNN - Air-pollution additive contaminating California water - June 3, 1998 (htt Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:54:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8F20.F99BBAA0" 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: <"x_xf_1.0.08.ckWTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19493 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_01BD8F20.F99BBAA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The down-side of the oxygenated gasoline octane boosters-Carbon monoxide reducers: Methyl Tert Butyl Ether (MTBE), Ethanol, and Methanol. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806/03/california.water/ ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8F20.F99BBAA0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN - Air-pollution additive contaminating California water - June 3, 1998.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN - Air-pollution additive contaminating California water - June 3, 1998.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806/03/california.water/ Modified=E03044B4528FBD01A7 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD8F20.F99BBAA0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 23:36:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA22074; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:19:52 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Subject: Re: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash In-Reply-To: <199806031038_MC2-3F06-D641 compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"JL4cK2.0.nO5.GxZTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19495 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Barker's method is effective, dry and not costly. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 23:37:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA22749; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:29:45 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: SCR specs needed! In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19980602173941.00757ea0 cnct.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"zm-pv2.0.KZ5.QzZTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19496 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Looks like a date code or house number. One way to use them would be to get the IR SCR databook and find the range or series of parts in same package style. Now you will have the pin out. Run up a low drain curcuit and test for gate actuation in milli or microamps. Now, having established a good range to turn it on, make up a high drain test fixture and see how much load it will take with no heat sink until it gets to 100 C on the tab.... AND ... compare on resistances with databook specs.... You should be darn close to knowing enough to use the part. I do this all the time. In IR will send you the die diagram and you have a friendly dentist then you can get a good idea too. Anyone else out there have any good tricks? J On Tue, 2 Jun 1998, Keith Nagel wrote: > Hello Vorts: > > I found a bunch of SCR's at the Rochester Hamfest; part number 37-152 X3 > made by international rectifier. For the life of me, I can't find this part > number at IR's site. Help me out please! > > K. > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 3 23:47:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA26120; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:45:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:45:39 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry math.ucla.edu Message-ID: <35764211.4B644BE3 math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 23:43:30 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash References: <199806031038_MC2-3F06-D641 compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fBQkr2.0.0O6.HAaTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19497 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jed Rothwell wrote: > I think the remediation and transmutation businesses are a distraction, a dead > end, and a waste of time, because these processes are difficult to verify, and > because I see no significant potential near-term market for them. Jed, I think your market analysis misses the point. We are not simplytalking about launching a new type of mousetrap here....we are talking about a revolution in Physics. If CETI could demonstrate to the scientific community that they could deactivate radioactive nuclei via chemical processes, they would be a turning point into the scientific development of the human race. Surely that would translate into some sort market value, and even if it did not it is the sort of accomplishment most scientists/engineers/technologists would trade their lives for. To try and fit it into a simple market analysis is something like doing a cost/benefit analysis of the second coming....I'd say it really misses the big picture. Also, the demonstration that their rad deactivation work is invalid would seem to cast a serios shadow on their entire body of claims, especially when coupled to the fact that its +3 years since they made their big publicity push and they still have not convinced any major scientific or corporate entities of the reality of their claims. Pesronally, I can't help but think that the CETI stuff was all some sort of mistake, given their inability to capitalize on such apparent gross effects. I wish Wharton would tell us more about the rumors he has heard of experiments that showed no net heat production. For the informal record, I have also heard "rumors" that there are various "shortcomings" in Miley's supposed replication of XS heat generation as well (and certainly the paper Miley put out, and casual conversations with him have not done much to dispell these rumors---i.e. he has downplayed in writing and in discussions the calorimetry work he did). Since the only information I have been able to get about CETI's work during the past year or so is through the "rumor mill", I blame them for doing nothing to dispell these rumors. Certainly the burden is on them to prove their claims, and they have really done nothing to follow through. ---- 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 Jun 4 01:21:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA17658; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 01:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 01:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:53:54 +1000 X-Sender: mindtech mailhost.nor.com.au (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mindtech nor.com.au (Peter Nielsen) Subject: Re: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts Resent-Message-ID: <"8zUT4.0.lJ4.UYbTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19498 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >Scalar waves >supposedly require no energy to generate. So, a means of decoding them >would be getting something for nothing, right? > >Horace Heffner > It takes current to drive a non-inductive bifilar coil as used for generation of scalars. The output is proportional. Peter Nielsen From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 04:38:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA15166; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:36:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:36:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <002601bd8fab$6d459c20$90b4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Pump Surge Problem Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:24:21 -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: <"mrTkN1.0.ui3.CReTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19499 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex My 3/4 Hp 10 gpm well pump is located in a pit at the well some 125 ft from the pressure tank in the house. The 40 to 60 pound pressure switch fed by a 1/4" plastic tube is mounted on the pump which is fed from a 120/240 VAC outlet in the well pit. When the pump starts the inertia of the 125+ ft 1" line causes the pump-switch to surge throwing the pressure switch and sets up an on/off oscillation of the pump. I installed a needle valve in the 1/4" line to the pressure switch, to alleviate the problem, but it is extremely difficult to set and has to be adjusted every few months. It is too much trouble to put the pressure switch on the pressure tank and run the switched power line back to the pump. When this oscillationwhich is rough on the pump occurs every light in the house (even fluorescents)blinks enough to let you know it is happening. Would a small air-cushion surge tank on the 1/4" pressure switch line do any good, and how large would it have to be? Or Any Electrical Delay thoughts? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 04:44:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA14979; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:41:52 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:41:52 -0700 From: Geosas aol.com Message-ID: <5364138e.357687d0 aol.com> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 07:41:02 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Neutrino oscillations Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.i for Windows sub 164 Resent-Message-ID: <"6qfqK.0.ef3.vVeTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19500 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> >>Hi, >> >> Have you seen the breaking news at >>http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~jgl/neutrino_news.html >> >> Other than in the press release I gather that it's oscillation >>to tau or sterile species, with delta m^2 of 10^-2 to 10^-3 eV^2 >>with maximal mixing angle. Let me know if you hear anything else. >> From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 05:10:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA04279; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:21:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 21:21:50 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 20:22:19 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Experiment report #3 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"Mz5qB1.0.m21.UttSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19430 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: PRIOR CONCLUSION This, to me, is fairly conclusive proof that, as the shielding gets better, the effect goes away. It is still a curiosity that the signal penetrated the shielding much better than an ordinary AM radio broadcast of the same intensity. It is notable that the shielding that was penetrated was primarily composed of iron, so the penetration may be magnetically based. CONJECTURE The penetrating waves have a strong longitudinal component that more readily penetrates ferrous conductors due to the reinforcing of the EM H field with the M field of the shield. The current generated about the longitudinal H field would be circular and retarding upon the initial penetration, but the eventual collapse of the resulting B field would reinforce the current and thus the B field, thus aiding in its penetration. Is this reasonable? How would one test this hypothesis? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 05:16:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA22839; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:15:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <005001bd8fb1$b8a44a80$90b4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Neutrino Mass and Cold Fusion Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:10:00 -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: <"YVUVM2.0.na5.S_eTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19501 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The 0.07 +/- 0.04 ev puts the formation of a Neutrino-antineutrino Pair at about 0.14 ev. or around 1625 K. Not too far from what you would expect in the CF experiments with Deuterium in a Pd lattice or in the cooler parts of an electrical discharge (the positive column of Vince Cockeram's Hydrogen-Potassium "Hydrino" experiment)? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 05:49:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA01143; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:47:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:47:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980604074656.00850ce0 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 07:46:56 -0500 To: "Vortex-L" From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem In-Reply-To: <002601bd8fab$6d459c20$90b4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"ws3aw1.0.mH.zTfTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19502 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:24 AM 6/4/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >My 3/4 Hp 10 gpm well pump is... >When the pump starts the inertia....sets up an on/off oscillation of the pump. >I installed a needle valve in the 1/4" line good, a "resistor". >Would a small air-cushion surge tank on the >1/4" pressure switch line do any good.... yes, that's the "capacitor" of an RC filter that protects the pressure switch from the pressure (voltage) spike that occurs when you try to make a certain flow rate (current) occur in a long pipe (inductor). The tank has to be between the needle valve and the presure switch. The tank MUST remain full of air...not water. This could be a problem as air tends to dissolve slowly in water. >and how large would it have to be? hmmm! Since it almost works with no overt "capacitor" at all, A pretty small one might do it. How about an air conditioner freon line filter? They are fist-sized tanks with fittings on each end and can take the pressure. I'm worried about the air dissolving. Another solution that would work even if everything filled with water is to use an exandable bladder instead of a rigid tank. Maybe you could do it by simply inserting, say, a hundred feet of the same plastic 1/4" tubing between the needle valve and the pressure switch! 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 Jun 4 05:55:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA23373; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:54:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:54:41 -0700 Message-ID: <357331AB.ACED1C27 microtronics.com.au> Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:26:43 +0930 From: Greg Watson Organization: Greg Watson Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: List FreeNrg Subject: Re: SMOT Mk5 Details References: <19980601073115.21321.qmail hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"--vu31.0.gi5.g4pSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19425 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Rob King wrote: > > Greg, > > Looking at the plans for this I assume you get a net height gain of 6mm, > this is far more than the previous one. 6mm is what I can achieve with my magnets. Others will get different heights. > Or is it less than 6mm because of magnetic drag back. > If you make the end drop say 3mm can you then get it to roll away using > this small drop, giving you a net height gain of 3mm? > Whats the minimum drop you require to get it to roll away..or to put it > another way what is the max. height gain you can get from one ramp? The Mk5 is designed to do a LEVEL ROLLAWAY. Others may achieve more. > I will have to get my magnets out again for this one....it looks very > promising. I would love to get this running. > I have all the bits to build a MK5, but my ball bearing was an old mouse > ball with the rubber scrapped off so I need to get a new clean ball > beraing from somewhere. > Are the kits you sent out based on the MK5? Probably. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 06:00:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA03596; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:58:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007001bd8fb7$be727080$90b4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:53:01 -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: <"iuBYx.0.4u.ZdfTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19503 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scott Little To: Vortex-L Date: Thursday, June 04, 1998 6:46 AM Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem >At 05:24 AM 6/4/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: > >>My 3/4 Hp 10 gpm well pump is... > >>When the pump starts the inertia....sets up an on/off oscillation of the >pump. > >>I installed a needle valve in the 1/4" line > >good, a "resistor". > >>Would a small air-cushion surge tank on the >>1/4" pressure switch line do any good.... > >yes, that's the "capacitor" of an RC filter that protects the pressure >switch from the pressure (voltage) spike that occurs when you try to make a >certain flow rate (current) occur in a long pipe (inductor). > >The tank has to be between the needle valve and the presure switch. > >The tank MUST remain full of air...not water. This could be a problem as >air tends to dissolve slowly in water. > >>and how large would it have to be? > >hmmm! Since it almost works with no overt "capacitor" at all, A pretty >small one might do it. How about an air conditioner freon line filter? >They are fist-sized tanks with fittings on each end and can take the pressure. > >I'm worried about the air dissolving. > >Another solution that would work even if everything filled with water is to >use an exandable bladder instead of a rigid tank. Maybe you could do it by >simply inserting, say, a hundred feet of the same plastic 1/4" tubing >between the needle valve and the pressure switch! You guys are sharp! I think I'm going to stuff a partially-inflated bicycle inner tube into a a piece of pipe and "Tee" off the 1/4" line that goes to the pressure switch. Ie., a capacitor. :-) Thanks Much! 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 Thu Jun 4 06:27:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA19347; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:24:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 06:24:59 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980604092811.00c34dd0 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:28:11 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Radio Power Cc: In-Reply-To: <000101bd8f3a$9a831940$1346d3d0 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"aewH43.0.yj4.Z0gTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19504 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:49 AM 6/3/98 -0400, Mike Carrell wrote: >One could probably run a CMOS pocket calculator from this energy -- they run >off a few solar cells quite easily, but forget it for your desktop. To >extract energy efficiently your receiving antenna needs to be similar in >size to a fractional wavelength, which is rather conspicuous in the AM band. That's why I prefer to use UHF TV. The antenna is much smaller, and the broadcast power is much higher. I think the most powerful licensed AM stations in this country are at 50,000 watts, whereas some UHF stations are over a million watts. >And I don't think you want to be living in RF energy fields of such >intensity that you can extract power from them. Get out that aluminium foil beanie. ;-) Seriously, I think that some stations are overpowered given their transmitter locations. It used to be that stations chose a hilltop with no nearby obstructions, but now houses have been built near many of these sites. 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 Jun 4 06:50:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA07132; Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:18:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:18:10 -0700 Message-ID: <000101bd8f3a$9a831940$1346d3d0 default> From: "Mike Carrell" To: Subject: Re: Radio Power Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 06:49:33 -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: <"x4QBQ1.0.xk1.SkSTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19484 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I hope you all had your tongues firmly in cheek on this one. Tesla had visions of broadcast power and did set up a powerful spark-driven oscillator in Colorado and reportedly extracted power to light a lamp at some distance. Details I have are sketchy. Remember that Tesla included as "lamps" various high voltage glow discharge devices which are most ingenious but don't qualify as your ordinary 100 W incandescent lamp -- more like disconnected 40 W fluorescence. Tesla also dreamed of the ionosphere and the earth as forming a cavity resonator, so the inverse-square law doesn't quite apply. As for extracting energy from radio waves directly, that is exactly what the original crystal sets did, and happens to any audio circuits in my house if I'm not careful, since I live a couple of miles from a 50 kW AM transmitter at 1060 kHz. Any slightly rectifying junction in cabling will get the local station and there is at least 20-40 mV on any loose hunks of wire around. One could probably run a CMOS pocket calculator from this energy -- they run off a few solar cells quite easily, but forget it for your desktop. To extract energy efficiently your receiving antenna needs to be similar in size to a fractional wavelength, which is rather conspicuous in the AM band. It's like collecting sunlight with solar cells, but much feebler. And I don't think you want to be living in RF energy fields of such intensity that you can extract power from them. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 07:16:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA20559; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 07:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980604101454.00c4a790 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 10:14:54 -0400 To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Cc: "Vortex-L" , "George" In-Reply-To: <007001bd8fb7$be727080$90b4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"IJPJ3.0.915.8kgTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19505 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:53 AM 6/4/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >You guys are sharp! I think I'm going to stuff >a partially-inflated bicycle inner tube into a >a piece of pipe and "Tee" off the 1/4" line >that goes to the pressure switch. Ie., a capacitor. :-) Actually, you are probably better off if you don't inflate the tube, just stuff enough of it into the tee. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 08:03:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05128; Sat, 30 May 1998 18:26:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 30 May 1998 18:26:49 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00c901bd8c32$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 Thu Jun 4 09:00:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02280; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:20:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:20:47 -0700 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:17:30 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: News and a visit from Les Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806011420_MC2-3EC2-D64A compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"QHXo-1.0.YZ.z3lSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19409 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: Temperature measurement errors cause by conduction of heat through the stem of the temperature probe, known as "stem effects", will tend to dominate when the probe is inserted into a shallow layer of catalyst. I believe "stem effects" are also called "wicking" by some people. The most recent series of tests showed that the temperature elevation is independent of input energy, so I'd say this hypothesis is ruled out. Conduction errors would have to produce artifacts in proportion to the input heat. Perhaps the proportionality would not be strictly linear. Perhaps when you reduce input by 24%, the artifact might decline only 10%, but I cannot imagine it would remain unaffected. If power had only been reduced 5% I would not feel so confident, but 24% is a drastic reduction. How could the "stem effect" remain impervious to it? The only model that makes sense to me is that something inside the cell is producing heat at a steady power level. Other models require baroque complications and special cases, like the epicycles of Ptolemaic astronomy. I also cannot imagine how a stem effect would not occur with hydrogen. In the well-insulated cell, the difference between the performance with H2 and D2 is much too large to be accounted for by gas conductivity. Any gas should produce more or less the same stem effect artifact. (Of course, that would make it invisible with Case's method and readily apparent with Little's, whereas if we *are* looking at an artifact it has to work the other way: Case sees it, Little doesn't.) I think the most interesting thing about the latest results are that Case has now inadvertently replicated Little. Little has not yet been able to replicate real or artifactual heat, but when Case used a configuration similar to Little's, he managed to clobber his cell and make it work (or not work) like Little's. That should give us confidence in both of them. Their results agree, so far. A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that the calorimeter might be playing a role in this by removing heat the wrong way: too slow, too fast, from the bottom instead of the top or vice versa. I hope I made it clear that this is pure speculation and I have no idea what the best way to remove heat would be, or whether this is, in fact, a critical parameter. I am sure you do not want to remove it too quickly because that will quench the reaction. It might be necessary to put layers of insulation between the cooling coils and the cell. The rest is speculation. I only meant to say that *it might be important* and you should add this to your list of two-hundred other parameters that must be investigated carefully to pin down the difference between the Case and Little configurations. In books about fission reactors I have read that removing heat correctly is a critical and extremely complex problem. We have no reason to think these small CF reactors are less complex than the big ones. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 09:24:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09831; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:10:33 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Analyzing Nuclear Ash / CETI policy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806041212_MC2-3F25-919B compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"5Jzod3.0.XP2.SbiTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19506 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Barry Merriman >INTERNET:barry math.ucla.edu Barry Merriman writes: Jed, I think your market analysis misses the point. We are not simply talking about launching a new type of mousetrap here....we are talking about a revolution in Physics. If CETI could demonstrate to the scientific community that they could deactivate radioactive nuclei via chemical processes, they would be a turning point into the scientific development of the human race. No way, Jose. The scientific community would ignore it. Tom Claytor at Los Alamos and Mike McKubre at SRI have demonstrated equally revolutionary effects, and they have had zero impact on the scientific community. They have infinitely more credibility than CETI, and their instruments are the best in the world. Surely that would translate into some sort market value . . . I do not think remediation would have near term market value. I do not see any, although I admit the nuclear clean up operation is incredibly complex and I know little about it. Transmutation might have value if you could manufacture rare and precious elements. Energy generation definitely will have market value. Energy is the most valuable commodity on earth, and, paradoxically, the most abundant commodity in the universe. The cost of energy is a reflection of man's ignorance, not of abundance. To try and fit it into a simple market analysis is something like doing a cost/benefit analysis of the second coming....I'd say it really misses the big picture. Any market analysis will miss the larger point, which is the scientific revolution. I deliberately left that out because I take it for granted that unconventional results will be attacked, ignored and rejected no matter how good the proof and no matter how simple it is to replicate the experiment, until commercial applications appear. Scientists will believe what they are paid to believe. It was not a simple market analysis. Vague and incomplete, yes, but I had to wade through mind bendingly boring pages of bureaucratic cost projections before I realized that the final disposal of the rad waste was a small part of the total cost. Remediation might eliminate transportation and long term storage costs too, in which case it would save more than I think. Also, the demonstration that their rad deactivation work is invalid would seem to cast a serious shadow on their entire body of claims . . . Why? This statement makes no sense to me. They have hardly begun to explore the remediation, and remediation is far more difficult to verify than excess heat. I would have no idea where to begin or how to do it, whereas I could set up a 100% convincing demonstration of 10 watt excess heat with one hand tied behind my back. (1 watt would be much harder to prove, and I would not bother with 100 milliwatts.) . . . especially when coupled to the fact that its +3 years since they made their big publicity push and they still have not convinced any major scientific or corporate entities of the reality of their claims. They have not tried! To the contrary, they prevent information about their products and progress from leaking out. When people express doubts about the reality of cold fusion, the folks at CETI are delighted. They told me so many times. They do not want people to believe. As you know they actively discourage replications, even by threatening lawsuits. They say the obscurity of CF, the hostility and disbelief gives them more years to develop it in secret, and more future market share. They are not the first people in history to have this attitude. At various times Edison, the Wrights and many modern high tech companies have also embraced this idea. Personally, I can't help but think that the CETI stuff was all some sort of mistake, given their inability to capitalize on such apparent gross effects. That is a peculiar basis to judge a scientific issue. Why not flip a coin or consult an Ouija board instead? You have no reason to conclude it was mistake. You have not found an error in the experimental technique, which was published in considerable detail in our magazine. You have not found an error in Miley's transmutation data. The fact that a company has not or cannot capitalize on a breakthrough has no bearing on calorimetry or spectroscopy. High temperature superconductors were discovered two years before CF. Hundreds of thousands of times more money has been invested in them than in cold fusion, yet so far none of the major applications predicted for them has panned out. The return on investment has been close to zero. Do you conclude that HTSC do not exist? How about Josephson junctions, bubble memory, and rotary engines? I can list dozens of experimental technologies that did not pan out despite huge investments. It would absurd to conclude these things do not exist. I wish Wharton would tell us more about the rumors he has heard of experiments that showed no net heat production. I predict he never will. For the informal record, I have also heard "rumors" that there are various "shortcomings" in Miley's supposed replication of XS heat generation as well . . . Bully for you. Unless you are willing to spell them out here, in detail, in a message you copy to Miley for comments, I don't believe a word of it. I am sick of this kind of rumor mongering bullshit. I have gotten far too much of it from both sides. Since the only information I have been able to get about CETI's work during the past year or so is through the "rumor mill", I blame them for doing nothing to dispel these rumors. Certainly the burden is on them to prove their claims, and they have really done nothing to follow through. That is 100% correct. They are to blame, and they have done nothing to dispel the rumors. That is deliberate. They are delighted these rumors go around. They encourage them. *That* statement -- my statement -- is not a rumor or an exaggeration. Jim Reding and other others at CETI told me so point blank, in person and on the telephone many times over the last three years. Perhaps they have changed their minds about this policy, but I have not heard about it. To describe my response to CETI, I would have to break forum rules about civility. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 09:48:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14003; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:13:32 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Vortex acting screwy Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806041217_MC2-3F27-3CCD compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"M1UYA.0.jQ3.ltiTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19507 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Vortex is delaying and possibly repeating messages. I keep getting automatic notices that my messages are delayed four hours, and just a vortex message popped out that I sent days ago. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 09:51:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA05929; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:44:44 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:44:44 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00e301bd8fd7$bba168a0$90b4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Pump Surge Problem Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:42:08 -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: <"CztPe2.0.NS1.vxiTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19508 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex With all the great input, I ended up buying a 100 ft coil of 1/4" Poly Tubing for $4.00, and put that in series with the needle valve in the pressure switch line. It seems to have solved the problem. An RL time constant fluid circuit? Thanks to all for the suggestions. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 09:52:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA06876; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:47:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 09:47:20 -0700 Message-ID: <19980604155756.28524.qmail hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [194.73.204.17] From: "Rob King" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 08:57:55 PDT Resent-Message-ID: <"5dVh-1.0.2h1.J-iTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19509 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Frederick, How about this then: mains switch driving a relay via a blocking diode and resistor of the similar value the the relay coil resistance with a large value capacitor across the coil of the relay. The breakers for the relay switch the pump on and off. The delay from the capacitor should stop the occilations by allowing the pump to over run by a couple of seconds. Also because the capacitor has to charge up first this will also add a delay to the switch on. ----|>----RRRRR---|-------------+ capacitor relay coil --------switch----|-------------+ -------relay-breaker------------+ pump --------------------------------+ make sure all components are rated for at least your mains voltage and get the polarity right for your electrolitic cap or it will be knackered in no time. Rob King >From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 05:54:48 1998 >Received: (from smartlst localhost) > by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA15166; > Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:36:47 -0700 (PDT) >Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:36:47 -0700 (PDT) >X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com >Message-ID: <002601bd8fab$6d459c20$90b4bfa8 default> >Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" >From: "Frederick J. Sparber" >To: "Vortex-L" >Cc: "George" >Subject: Pump Surge Problem >Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 05:24:21 -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: <"mrTkN1.0.ui3.CReTr" mx2> >Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com >X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19499 >X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com >Precedence: list >Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com > >To: Vortex > >My 3/4 Hp 10 gpm well pump is located in a pit at the well some 125 ft from >the pressure tank >in the house. > >The 40 to 60 pound pressure switch fed by a >1/4" plastic tube is mounted on the pump which >is fed from a 120/240 VAC outlet in the well >pit. > >When the pump starts the inertia of the 125+ ft >1" line causes the pump-switch to surge throwing the pressure switch and >sets up an on/off oscillation of the pump. > >I installed a needle valve in the 1/4" line >to the pressure switch, to alleviate the problem, but it is extremely >difficult to >set and has to be adjusted every few months. > >It is too much trouble to put the pressure switch on the pressure tank and >run the switched power line back to the pump. > >When this oscillationwhich is rough on the pump occurs every light in the >house (even fluorescents)blinks enough to let you know >it is happening. > >Would a small air-cushion surge tank on the >1/4" pressure switch line do any good, and how large would it have to be? Or >Any Electrical Delay thoughts? > >Regards, Frederick > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 10:05:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA19015; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:56:23 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Vortex fixed? Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806041258_MC2-3F34-5255 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"1uHoD1.0.xe4.MBjTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19510 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The last message came back after a normal delay . . . this is one more test message. To take up space I'll quote Kelly-Bootle again: APL n. [A Personal Language, A Packed Language, or (rarely) A Programming Language.] A language, devised by K. Iverson (1961), so compacted that the source code can be freely disseminated without revealing the programmer's intentions or jeopardizing proprietary rights. > There are three things a man must do Before his life is done; Write two line in APL, And make the buggers run. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 10:37:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26176; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:33:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:33:51 -0700 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199806031038_MC2-3F06-D641 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:33:47 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Forsley: Analyzing Nuclear Ash Resent-Message-ID: <"dheBB1.0.qO6.wfjTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19511 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex; Jed Rothwell has some excellent comments here on CETI's remediation claims. >I think the remediation and transmutation businesses are a distraction, a dead >end, and a waste of time, The results are negative, > They will not inspire investor confidence. I wish >that CETI and CG would take this as a wake up call and concentrate on energy >production instead, which can be verified much more easily. I expect that we will not see much in the way of concentration on energy production as CETI already knows that they are producing nothing there except fool's heat. The secret experiments in which an entire PPC system was placed in an insulated container proved conculsively that there is zero energy production. I have suggested that Jed contact Dennis Cravens, who knows about these experiments, to see if he could find out some details. Since Jed is a leading cf believer and an excellent investigative scientific reporter, I thought that he might find something out. 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 Jun 4 11:25:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA12020; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:17:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:17:41 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:18:13 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts, ERRORS Resent-Message-ID: <"wTl2Q.0.Zx2.1JkTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19512 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:53 AM 6/4/98, Peter Nielsen wrote: >>Scalar waves >>supposedly require no energy to generate. So, a means of decoding them >>would be getting something for nothing, right? >> >>Horace Heffner >> > >It takes current to drive a non-inductive bifilar coil as used for >generation of scalars. The output is proportional. > >Peter Nielsen Scalar radiation carries no energy. Its Poynting vector is zero. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the energy going into the bifilar coil is going into heat and into genuine EM radiation. I think this must be a clue as to what is happening with my coil, and in the various scalar wave type experiments. I think in my experiment there is a form of EM radiation being created that is much better at ferrous conductor penetration than ordinary AM radio. It also seems to be realy bad at penetrating multiple layers of aluminum foil. This would not be the case for genuine scalar waves. Detectability of scalar waves is a multi-edged sword. If they are detectable, then either they are shieldable, or energy is not conserved. The more easily detected the less material it takes to absorb or reflect them, or vice versa. BTW, I think the efficiency of aluminum foil at shielding is a good sign that a waveguide might be made from aluminum, which might aid in speed of light tests and other diagnosic measures. The notion of scalar wave detectability seems a bit incredible to me. Ordinary matter, consisting of matched vast and matched quantities of charge, must generate very large magnitude scalar waves, when in periodic motion. Suppose we have a 440 Hz tuning fork (one of Frank Stenger's ideas), with 0.1 cm sway, that would be 0.2 cm per cycle and or 88 cm/sec avg. velocity. Fe has density of 7.86 g/cm^3, and at. wt. of 55.85. Let's assume the "business end" of the fork has about 4 cm^3. The no. of moles is 4/55.85 = 0.0716 moles = 4.313x10^22 atoms. Fe has 52 protons and 52 electrons so Q = 4.49 x 10 ^24 q = 7.19x10^5 coulombs moving at 88 cm/sec. Lets assume they are distributed over about 2 cm, so at a linear velocity of 88 cm/sec the charge goes by at a rate of 2/88 sec = 2.27x10^-2 seconds, so the equivalent current is 31.7 MA. Let's consider a 30 cm radius, 2 cm x 2 cm square cross section iron or steel rod. The "buisness end" might be considered 8 cm long. so that's 32 cm^3 of Fe or 0.572 moles = 3.45x10^23 atoms = 3.59x10^25 q = 5.74x10^6 coulombs. At 3600 RPM, the rotation speed would be 3.14159 x 26 x 2 cm/sec = 163.3 cm/sec. The charge goes by in 2/163.3 = 1.224x10^-2 sec. The peak current would be 469 MA, at 60 Hz. To get dI/dt we can use a 2 x (469 MA) / (1/60 sec) = 56.3 GA/sec for the rod. One GA is a billion amps. For the tuning fork, 2 x 31.7 MA/(1/440 sec) = 27.9 GA/sec. Not much difference. Vibration speed makes up for less mass. It appears sonically vibrating large masses should produce enormous scalar radiation. Earthquakes and atom bomb blasts should produce whopping scalar waves. We are immersed in a giant scalar field - that of the earth, due to its rotation. If scalar fields can be manipulated to produce scalar waves, we have no need to build the scalar field generator! For some reason I just don't think a tuning fork will produce a detectable scalar wave. Even though it should produce ten billion times the scalar radiation of my modest little bifilar coil experiment, I can't believe for a second it will produce an EM signal detectable at a range where the sound is abated, say 1000 yards. If completely acoustically isolated, I don't think the vibrating would be detectable at even 1 yard using any of the scalar detectors. That is not to say that there is not scientifically interesting and possibly useful information to be had from the scalar experiments. In my experiment, for example, it appears, due to the calibration of the broadcast energy, matching the radio output to that of a broadcast station, that very slective shielding was going on with the steel cages. The AM signal was attenuated, the bifilar coil output was not. However, it has just occurred to me that this was not a good calibration. The sine wave signal from the bifilar coil was not modulated, so the audio output matching was bogus. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 11:33:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA06038; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:27:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:27:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:24:51 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199806041824.NAA19732 dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem To: fjsparb sprintmail.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"KQg4k1.0.BU1.QSkTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19513 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: June 4, 1998 You wrote: >When the pump starts the inertia of the 125+ ft >1" line causes the pump-switch to surge throwing the pressure switch >and sets up an on/off oscillation of the pump. Some ideas come to mind. The "complicated" Why not install an automatic, timed, variable bypass pressure relief valve on the pressure switch line. It can be set to a pressure level a little below your cut-off pressure. It is triggered by the pump-switch. After a certain time, allowing for the water line inertia to be overcome, it is turned off and reset automatically to wait for the next trigger from the pump switch. I do not know if such a device exists commercially, but it should be easy enough to rig up. A little easier. A simple one that comes to mind is a valved bleed off "T" on the pressure switch line. An electric cut-off valve switch opens the "T" with the pump-switch turning on. After a determined time to overcome the water line inertia, the valve is closed and electric circuit reset for the next turn-on pump-switch signal. Simpler yet. Or, it may be that the line inertia load problem is faced by the motor immediately as it is trying to get up to speed to its full 3/4 hp capacity. If this is the case, then a temporary bypass on the main water line with a timed cut off valve may serve the purpose of stopping the oscillations. Old solution. Or, why not just add a high enough vertical stand pipe to the main line near the pump? Or a vertical pipe with an air tank on top. It's an old plumbing design in home plumbing to prevent line 'knocking' with sudden pressure changes. Newer solution. Or, do not touch anything except install an automatic variable speed controller to the motor pump. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 11:58:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA11368; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980604101237.00c3d980 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 10:12:37 -0400 To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Cc: "Vortex-L" , "George" In-Reply-To: <002601bd8fab$6d459c20$90b4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"eyWOy2.0.Mn2.8nkTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19514 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:24 AM 6/4/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >Would a small air-cushion surge tank on the >1/4" pressure switch line do any good, and how large would it have to be? Or >Any Electrical Delay thoughts? You could add a circut so that the switch must be off for a few seconds before the pump will shut down, but that still leaves wear and tear on the switch. You could also go with an air-cushion, but that is just as much trouble as your needle valve. What I would do is build the hydrostatic equivalent of an LC circut with a resonant frequency less than your current oscillation. How I would do that is to take two washers with about a 1/4" i.d. hole, and put them at opposite ends of a short length of 1/2" copper tubing. Coat the inside of the tubing with a layer of silicone. Of course, dimensions shouldn't be critical, so use whatever you have in the workshop. (Smaller holes and more volume in the pipe correspond to lower frequencies, as does more silicone. But you don't want the silcone to block free flow through the center.) Of course, if you were not a do it yourselfer, you would go to the local hardware store and ask what they have to prevent water hammers. 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 Jun 4 12:17:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA23439; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:58:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 13:58:55 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD8D75.D5E0A000 oemcomputer> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:56:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8D75.D5E0A000" Resent-Message-ID: <"35l9S2.0.rj5.8OnSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19416 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D75.D5E0A000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- From: Horace Heffner[SMTP:hheffner corecom.net] Sent: Monday, June 01, 1998 2:37 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Experiment report #2 - bifilar coil >The ability to penetrate the shields was not dependent upon either a >Caducius coil not a bifilar coil as transmitter. Neither is it clear >exactly what makes for a good antenna. The human body made a partially >effective transmitter, when various metal objects, and lengthy test = leads, >failed as transmitters. This is most unusual. What is being produced that can get through the = shield? Is it the coil that makes whatever it is, or the other = components? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D75.D5E0A000 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhsUAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABACgAAABSRTogRXhw ZXJpbWVudCByZXBvcnQgIzIgLSBiaWZpbGFyIGNvaWwAUA0BBYADAA4AAADOBwYAAQAPADgAGgAB AD4BASCAAwAOAAAAzgcGAAEADwA2ACoAAQBMAQEJgAEAIQAAADA0NTE2MTBDMjdGOUQxMTFBNzVF RThFMDBBQzEwMDAwAOwGAQOQBgCgBAAAFAAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAA AAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAQM8Ovp+NvQEeAHAAAQAAACgAAABSRTogRXhwZXJpbWVudCByZXBvcnQg IzIgLSBiaWZpbGFyIGNvaWwAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAb2Nn74HszaWg/lkEdGnXujgCsEAAAAAHgAe DAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABcAAABzdGtAc3VuaGVyYWxkLmluZmkubmV0AAADAAYQ ZbEZgAMABxAPAgAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAALS0tLS0tLS0tLUZST006SE9SQUNFSEVGRk5FUlNNVFA6 SEhFRkZORVJAQ09SRUNPTU5FVFNFTlQ6TU9OREFZLEpVTkUwMSwxOTk4MjozN1BNVE86Vk9SVEVY LUxARVNLSU1PQwAAAAACAQkQAQAAAAIDAAD+AgAA6QUAAExaRnUuGcKF/wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKD AFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcTAoO6MxMNfQqACM8J2TsV/3gyNTUCgAqBDbELYG7w ZzEwMxQgCwoUIgwBGmMAQCAKhQqLbGkxBDgwAtFpLTE0NM8N8AzQHMMLWTE2CqADYPZ0BZAFQC0e 5wqHHZsMMHUeZkYDYTof7h5mDIIgtkgFsADQZSOQDcFuBJAAW1NNVFA6aGhNJCRABaEFkW0uJFB0 fl0fjyCdBmACMCHPIttNAQIgZGF5LCBKdREkUCAwMSqwMTk5ADggMjozNyBQZk0mPyCdVG8ofyLb dkEVoWV4LWxAB5BrOQdwby4lsSwvJ051Yo5qHqEuTyLbRXhwBnErB4ACMCAWAHAVoSAj8RIgLSBi BpADEArBBaBnAxAa7xvzMzYdZxo5Pjc5bS2nJPAgAaADEGl04HkgdG8gNcAl8SPAJx6QPMA8IXNo CJBsZKkEIHdhBCBuHoAgDbC3PQENsDYhdTZwA6BlPJA7JPAFwGExXTnvOv8gQ8BhZHVjaXUEIDeS fT6TYTcLPEAEID1BAIBt4zyQHpByLiAHsT/kBADjRwAFQGNsZQrAQF9Bb6c7HjBgANB0bDywdxHA OwVAAMBrB5ECEEAhIGeebwRwPEACMAnwbmFGYdk8Emh1A4IG4GQ8sADA9w2wRIEKsXQHMUswR89I 3+dJ7w3QHqFpdj2BRcgqsO9LYAnwMBAKwGkIYAQgB4DrAZADIG8zc3MqsABwTKD/R4AZAD2gPLEH kAVAR4E+MO4sT19QbzseZgtwR4BMoflFm3MuN9847xpIPBBHEt1UkW9WgSrgQ9B1B0BGYPZXS3JH EWI/0BkAPPADYK9DkVpxPaBLgWMDkWcSACM9kQNgdWdoPZk/IH5JRyM9okQDYTNLtEtiZf9S4Ebx X/IqsAWxPaIegEACJyWxP5EoQXM/W6xLefdHgAfwRmBNYYBPIAQARjFfC0YS8jtpCoUVIQBrgAAA AwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzAACCeAn429AUAACDAACCeAn429AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAA AAAAAwANNP03AAByTQ== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD8D75.D5E0A000-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 12:51:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA21525; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0959 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Test message, Achtung! Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:53:10 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"MqqSq2.0.EG5.1RlTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19515 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Was macht du, Kemosabe? Your coming through fine here. Hank > ---------- > From: Jed Rothwell[SMTP:72240.1256 compuserve.com] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 1:11 PM > To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com > Subject: Test message, Achtung! > > To: Vortex > > My messages do not appear to be going through to Vortex. Here is a > test > message. This was a sign posted in the U.K. ATLAS computer site in the > 1960s, > quoted by Stan Kelly-Bootle in "The Devil's DP Dictionary" > (McGraw-Hill, > 1981): > > > ACHTUNG!! ALLES LOOKENPEEPERS!! > > Das computermachien ist nicht fur gefingenpoken and mittengrabben. Ist > easy > schnappen der springenwerk, bowenfusen und poppencorken mit > spitzensparken. > Ist nicht fur gewerken bei da dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken sichtseeren > keepen > hans in das pockets muss; relaxen and watch das blinkenlichten. > > > - Jed > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 12:52:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA12875; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:45:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:45:56 -0700 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:39:03 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Warning: could not send message for past 4 hours (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/REPORT; REPORT-TYPE=delivery-status; BOUNDARY="MBE28090.896988750/eskinews.eskimo.com" Content-ID: Resent-Message-ID: <"ENiqI.0.u83.lblTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19516 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A 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. --MBE28090.896988750/eskinews.eskimo.com Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:32:30 -0700 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem To: herman college.antioch-college.edu Subject: Warning: could not send message for past 4 hours ********************************************** ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** ********************************************** The original message was received at Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:10:11 -0700 from college.antioch-college.edu [192.131.123.11] ----- The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors ----- ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... Deferred: Connection refused by mx2.eskimo.com. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours Will keep trying until message is 5 days old --MBE28090.896988750/eskinews.eskimo.com Content-Type: MESSAGE/DELIVERY-STATUS Content-ID: Reporting-MTA: dns; eskinews.eskimo.com Arrival-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:10:11 -0700 Final-Recipient: RFC822; vortex-l eskimo.com Action: delayed Status: 4.4.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; mx2.eskimo.com Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:32:30 -0700 Will-Retry-Until: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 08:10:11 -0700 --MBE28090.896988750/eskinews.eskimo.com Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822 Content-ID: Received: from college.antioch-college.edu (college.antioch-college.edu [192.131.123.11]) by eskinews.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA04296 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:10:11 -0700 Received: (from herman localhost) by college.antioch-college.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24655; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:03:36 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:03:36 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980604074656.00850ce0 mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Delay actuation Condition feed Snub the motor feed at the motor... and at the switch use an appropriate delay relay, some of the commercial ones have a dial to adjust delay length. To help more you can use a load matching transformer above ground and heavier conductors to the pump. In any event snubs at motor and at transformer will never hurt. --MBE28090.896988750/eskinews.eskimo.com-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 13:39:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02980; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3576FA61.1919 keelynet.com> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 14:49:53 -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 Subject: Tesla Patent & OCR help Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"th7Rp1.0.Tk.b8mTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19517 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gnorts and Hi Folks! Here is a guy trying to do something good that will benefit many of us once this information is scanned in and OCR'ed...if you can help out, please contact him directly, we all benefit from this, so thanks in advance; ======================= Someone was kind enough to mail me copies of a bunch of British and Canadian Tesla patents. As I find time I'll be (scanning in/cleaning up/converting-to-pdf-files) them. I've already put two of the patents up on my web-site: http://www.u36.com/~fredw/patents/index.htm Of the two, the one that is most interesting to me is the Tesla Pump patent. This is probably what George Wiseman based his Tesla Pump paper on. There is too much work for too little return (for me) involved in OCR'ing them, so I won't be doing that. However, if you know of any Tesla-people who have time on their hands... getting these converted to text will make it a lot easier for people to get the information. Someone in the US said they'd be mailing me copies of some American Tesla patents, but none have shown up, and I can't find his email (to remind him). Oh well. fred - fredw mks.com -- 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 Jun 4 13:39:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA05319; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:31:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:31:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <012701bd8fec$72219820$90b4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: , "Akira Kawasaki" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:10:25 -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: <"RJNR62.0.0J1.QGmTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19518 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Akira Kawasaki To: fjsparb sprintmail.com ; vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thursday, June 04, 1998 12:24 PM Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Akira wrote: >June 4, 1998 > >You wrote: > >>When the pump starts the inertia of the 125+ ft >>1" line causes the pump-switch to surge throwing the pressure switch >>and sets up an on/off oscillation of the pump. > >Some ideas come to mind. It looks like Scott Little goes to the head of the Class on this one! The $4.00, 100 ft of 1/4" polyethylene "hydraulic delay line" in series with the needle valve, desensitized the thing and it works like a champ. After averaging a new $300.00 pump about every 5 years, maybe this one will last for a while. Thanks Scott, I owe you one. :-) Regards, Frederick > > >The "complicated" >Why not install an automatic, timed, variable bypass pressure relief >valve on the pressure switch line. It can be set to a pressure level a >little below your cut-off pressure. It is triggered by the pump-switch. >After a certain time, allowing for the water line inertia to be >overcome, it is turned off and reset automatically to wait for the next >trigger from the pump switch. I do not know if such a device exists >commercially, but it should be easy enough to rig up. > >A little easier. >A simple one that comes to mind is a valved bleed off "T" on the >pressure switch line. An electric cut-off valve switch opens the "T" >with the pump-switch turning on. After a determined time to overcome >the water line inertia, the valve is closed and electric circuit reset >for the next turn-on pump-switch signal. > >Simpler yet. >Or, it may be that the line inertia load problem is faced by the motor >immediately as it is trying to get up to speed to its full 3/4 hp >capacity. If this is the case, then a temporary bypass on the main >water line with a timed cut off valve may serve the purpose of stopping >the oscillations. > >Old solution. >Or, why not just add a high enough vertical stand pipe to the main line >near the pump? Or a vertical pipe with an air tank on top. It's an old >plumbing design in home plumbing to prevent line 'knocking' with sudden >pressure changes. > >Newer solution. >Or, do not touch anything except install an automatic variable speed >controller to the motor pump. > >-ak- > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 13:55:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02280; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:20:47 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:20:47 -0700 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:17:30 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: News and a visit from Les Case Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806011420_MC2-3EC2-D64A compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"QHXo-1.0.YZ.z3lSr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19409 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: Temperature measurement errors cause by conduction of heat through the stem of the temperature probe, known as "stem effects", will tend to dominate when the probe is inserted into a shallow layer of catalyst. I believe "stem effects" are also called "wicking" by some people. The most recent series of tests showed that the temperature elevation is independent of input energy, so I'd say this hypothesis is ruled out. Conduction errors would have to produce artifacts in proportion to the input heat. Perhaps the proportionality would not be strictly linear. Perhaps when you reduce input by 24%, the artifact might decline only 10%, but I cannot imagine it would remain unaffected. If power had only been reduced 5% I would not feel so confident, but 24% is a drastic reduction. How could the "stem effect" remain impervious to it? The only model that makes sense to me is that something inside the cell is producing heat at a steady power level. Other models require baroque complications and special cases, like the epicycles of Ptolemaic astronomy. I also cannot imagine how a stem effect would not occur with hydrogen. In the well-insulated cell, the difference between the performance with H2 and D2 is much too large to be accounted for by gas conductivity. Any gas should produce more or less the same stem effect artifact. (Of course, that would make it invisible with Case's method and readily apparent with Little's, whereas if we *are* looking at an artifact it has to work the other way: Case sees it, Little doesn't.) I think the most interesting thing about the latest results are that Case has now inadvertently replicated Little. Little has not yet been able to replicate real or artifactual heat, but when Case used a configuration similar to Little's, he managed to clobber his cell and make it work (or not work) like Little's. That should give us confidence in both of them. Their results agree, so far. A couple of weeks ago I mentioned that the calorimeter might be playing a role in this by removing heat the wrong way: too slow, too fast, from the bottom instead of the top or vice versa. I hope I made it clear that this is pure speculation and I have no idea what the best way to remove heat would be, or whether this is, in fact, a critical parameter. I am sure you do not want to remove it too quickly because that will quench the reaction. It might be necessary to put layers of insulation between the cooling coils and the cell. The rest is speculation. I only meant to say that *it might be important* and you should add this to your list of two-hundred other parameters that must be investigated carefully to pin down the difference between the Case and Little configurations. In books about fission reactors I have read that removing heat correctly is a critical and extremely complex problem. We have no reason to think these small CF reactors are less complex than the big ones. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 14:13:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA15307; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:10:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:10:37 -0700 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 16:42:24 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Larry Wharton's fan dance Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806041644_MC2-3F3B-D153 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"C1VSU.0.Rk3.4rmTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19519 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 continues to reveal a little and hide a little about this amazing alleged event which proved that a gigantic worldwide error has been made by thousands of scientists for 90 years. He says: The secret experiments in which an entire PPC system was placed in an insulated container proved conculsively that there is zero energy production. I have suggested that Jed contact Dennis Cravens, who knows about these experiments, to see if he could find out some details . . . Yo, Larry: Give Us A Break! Spill the beans already. Who did the experiment, what did they do, what were the results? What the heck is a "PPC" system? Why do you demand that I call Dennis Cravens? As a matter of fact I did call him, but he is busy or unavailable. In any case I have spoken to him many times before, and at ICCF7, and he never mentioned these miraculous results. That isn't like him. If Cravens knew of revolutionary results which would make the principal researchers famous world-wide he would replicate them and publish them quick as poss. So would you, if you had any sense. Tell us what you know. Put your name on this! Every textbook on calorimetry will have to be revised to account for this newly discovered "Wharton Effect." You'll go down in history, MIT and Harvard will offer you a professorship. Show us why flow calorimetry does not work and your future is assured. It does not matter who discovered it first so long as you publish first! Add a theoretical explanation and you are in like flint. Maybe these results are not so revolutionary. Maybe you are talking about a small error magnified by low power such as the ones described by the NHE and Storms. That is nothing dramatic and it does not disprove the high power, high flow calorimetry. Since Jed is a leading cf believer and an excellent investigative scientific reporter, I thought that he might find something out. I thought you might save us some trouble and POST THE INFORMATION HERE, instead of playing stupid, annoying, childish games. You are obviously not restrained by a non-disclosure agreement, since you have already told me where to get the information. I suspect you have heard rumors about the CETI tests at Los Alamos, and you confused these in your mind with some other tests, like the calorimeter-within-a-calorimeter tests performed at the NHE and by Ed Storms. As I reported here, Claytor determined that the flow rate in a CETI cell was too slow, the fluid was not being mixed, and the temperature Delta T was not reliable. That's what he told me at ICCF7. That was with a 1 ml cell. I cannot imagine why CETI did not come back with a 10 ml or 100 ml cell, with larger input and output and a higher flow rate. I cannot explain anything they do or fail to do, and I gave up trying years ago. You got mixed up about Mizuno. He removed the cell from the calorimeter; you thought he removed the cathode from the cell. It would not surprise me if you have garbled an account of the Los Alamos tests. They were not secret, and they did not involve a calorimeter within another. They did not overthrow standard calorimetric techniques going back to 1905. They *were* negative, however. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 14:29:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA21962; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:25:53 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:25:53 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:24:44 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Experiment report #4 - bifilar coil Resent-Message-ID: <"-Sz-b3.0.LM5.T3nTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19520 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: BIFILAR COIL EXPERIMENT #4 The purpose of this experiment was to evaluate the importance of signal modulation when calibrating transmission energy to match the AM station energy. In the prior experiment the signal current was 5.4 mA RMS, the voltage 521 mV RMS, the broadcast distance about 2.5 feet. Using cos(30 deg.) as power factor, gives 2.4 mW broadcast power. To eliminate the need for manual keying, and thus free up hands for playing withthe signal generator settings, the signal generator was set in burst mode, using about 1/4 second bursts once every 1 second. The signal generator was set to 50 percent modulation. This produced a beep a second on radio. Attenuation of the generator output was adjusted unitl the volume of the beep produced matched the volume of the broadcast. The calibrated values were 2.9 mA RMS at 252 mV RMS. Again using cos(30 deg.) = 0.866 as the power factor, that gives 0.63 mW as output power. When the lid was placed on the tin, the volume of both the radio signal and the beep were fully attenuated. The best beep volume was at about 549.1 kHz. It appears the radio station is broadcasting on 550 kHz, not 540 kHz, as the radio dial says. It is interesting that FM modulation produced a more audible beep then AM modulation with the same power. Using 20 percent frequency modulation the calibration values were about 1.7 mA at 124 mV, or 0.18 mW. When the attenuation of the signal generator was changed to match the prior experiments the beep could clearly be heard, though the radio station could not. CONCLUSION Better calibration using modulated output eliminates the result of the apparent penetration of the steel cage with the bifilar coil output. This experiment has indicated that the bifilar coil experiment results previously obained were actually artifacts. Thus a negative result is obtained at this frequency using a bifilar coil as described. CONFIGURATION INFORMATION REPEATED FROM PRIOR EXPERIMENTS 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 goes 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. To improve the Faraday shielding over The bifilar coil experiment #1, the tin containing the radio was placed inside a heavy steel cabinet. The cabinet, now containing a high voltage DC power supply (off), was formerly an IBM 3274 controller cabinet, about a 2' x 2' x 1.5' heavy guage steel cabinet. The cabinet doors, as manufactured, are both ground strapped, and have contact brushes and contact plates on the unhinged sides to ensure good signal shielding. The cabinet is grounded through use of the ground wire to a three pronged receptical. The tin was placed inside the power supply cabinet, at distance of about 2.5 feet from the coil, 3.5 feet from the oscillator, both of which were placed on a 2"x10"x2' platform outside the grounded cabinet, at the level of the tin. The voltage probe was placed at the oscillator output lead. The current sensing resistor was placed right after the ground lead from the oscillator. With the coil in a normal bifilar configuration, the current sense voltage was 546 mV RMS, so the current was about 54.6 mA RMS. The output voltage was 5.45 Vrms. Call this the closed circuit configuration. To check the capacitive/inductive linkage in the coil, vs conductive linkage, the two sides of the twisted pair were disconnected at the far end of the coil, eliminating any conductive linkage. With the coil in a nonconductive configuration, the current sense voltage was 485 mV RMS, so the current was about 48.5 mA RMS. The output voltage was 5.75 Vrms. Call this the open circuit configuration. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 14:54:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA20176; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 14:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 13:43:53 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Larry Wharton's fan dance Resent-Message-ID: <"aymdF.0.5x4.qLnTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19521 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 4:42 PM 6/4/98, Jed Rothwell wrote: [Snip] >Spill the beans already. Who did the experiment, >what did they do, what were the results? Amen. Spill some of that musical fruit Larry! >What the heck is a "PPC" system? [snip] A Patterson Power Cell. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 15:11:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA07137; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:08:38 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:08:38 -0700 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:03:36 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980604074656.00850ce0 mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ihEqj2.0.ij1.JhnTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19522 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Delay actuation Condition feed Snub the motor feed at the motor... and at the switch use an appropriate delay relay, some of the commercial ones have a dial to adjust delay length. To help more you can use a load matching transformer above ground and heavier conductors to the pump. In any event snubs at motor and at transformer will never hurt. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 16:04:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA28874; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 16:02:31 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 16:02:31 -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: <35772712.21C20971 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 18:00:34 -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: Tesla Patent & OCR help References: <3576FA61.1919 keelynet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6dkrh2.0.w27.1UoTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19523 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jerry W. Decker wrote: > Of the two, the one that is most interesting > to me is the Tesla Pump patent. Thanks Jerry for posting the location of this information online! Tesla's pump design is one of my favorites and I am alway interested in adding to my collection. Searching for information on this design is what eventually lead me to this list........ 8^) If anyone else shares my facination, the best reference book I've been able to find is carried by Lindsay Publications The book is "Tesla's Engine" #1307 US$19.95. Excellent site for the frugal researcher in any field. 8^) John E. Steck --------------------------------o]{: Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 17:47:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA08715; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:45:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:45:16 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <66777e1f.35773f62 aol.com> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:44:17 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: <"ntkbL.0.r72.P-pTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19524 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Good Afternoon Folks, I have been busy, not with the experiment as I would have wished but busy with my big blue day (and night) job. Since last Saturday I have put in over 80 hours and hardly any time left for anything else. The big push is over (at least for two weeks) at last. I ordered four digital multimeters and a digital panel meter this morning from Midwest Surplus. I will probably use only two for the experiment but at $15 bucks each, hey, a couple of spares will be nice. The meters spec at 10 megohms input impedence and 0.1% accuracy. Thats good enough for me. The digital panel meter I will install into the power supply as an indicator of DC output voltage. At least all this down time has really proved out the vacuum system. It has not leaked a single millimeter since I last pumped it down on the 27th of May. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 20:51:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA08627; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:49:39 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:49:39 -0700 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 22:49:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199806050349.WAA24963 dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"1HPAf.0.g62.HhsTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19525 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 4, 1998 Forgot to suggest one more: Get the crummy plumbing contractor that did the original installation without a line damper ("shock absorber") for the knocks (hammer), to fix it right like it should have been done. It would be interesting to see how long the motor and the length of polyethylene lasts over five years. Forget it if it was a do-it-yourself. -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 20:55:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA00415; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35776B5B.444 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 23:51:55 -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: Scalar Birds??? (Was something else) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zILxo3.0.P6.xksTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19526 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > Suppose we have a 440 Hz tuning fork with > 0.1 cm sway, that would be 0.2 cm per cycle and or 88 cm/sec avg. velocity. > Fe has density of 7.86 g/cm^3, and at. wt. of 55.85. Let's assume the > "business end" of the fork has about 4 cm^3. The no. of moles is 4/55.85 = > 0.0716 moles = 4.313x10^22 atoms. Fe has 52 protons and 52 electrons so Q > = 4.49 x 10 ^24 q = 7.19x10^5 coulombs moving at 88 cm/sec. Lets assume > they are distributed over about 2 cm, so at a linear velocity of 88 cm/sec > the charge goes by at a rate of 2/88 sec = 2.27x10^-2 seconds, so the > equivalent current is 31.7 MA. Hey, Horace, now I know how the humming birds manage to cross the Gulf of Mexico on their migration - their little scalar-wave generating wings flapping at about 60 Hz can obviously tap into the huge geo-scalar field for energy and directional information. And I've been wasting my time feeding those little buggers sugar water - I should mount a 200 watt, 60 Hz woofer on my deck and blast the little rascals with some concentrated energy (bifilar driver coil, of course!) - moves both ways at the same time. :-) Just ignore this time-wasting blather - I've been moving dirt all day in the hot sun! Frank (bird man of Fox Road) Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 4 22:00:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA31006; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:58:19 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:58:19 -0700 From: ehammond pacbell.net Message-ID: <35777CE3.14F3 pacbell.net> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 22:06:43 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-PBME (Macintosh; U; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts, ERRORS References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"XM8nX.0.Ca7.dhtTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19527 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Try putting ferrite magnets in center of coil. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 00:36:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA29403; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:34:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:34:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:33:18 -0800 To: "Frederick J. Sparber" , From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Resent-Message-ID: <"ykbpq.0.GB7.P-vTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19528 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 4:48 PM 6/1/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: [snip] >Robert Eachus claims that "Stripping" of the >neutrons from deuterons (which should require >2.3 Mev) occur readily in plasmas od 1.0 ev or less, [snip] This is not correct, is it? Stipping begins at about 10 KeV, right? >indicating that the >"proton end" of >the deuteron might be interacting with an electron and forming a neutral >particle,in which case the neutron sloughs off, but there should be a >healthy energy release as kinetic >energy of the neutron and the neutral entity. [snip] "The electron" to which you refer is probably from the target, as the deuteron would be ionized. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 00:47:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA01952; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:44:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Scalar Birds??? (Was something else) Resent-Message-ID: <"uatkv2.0.KU.R8wTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19529 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:51 PM 6/4/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: [snip] >Hey, Horace, now I know how the humming birds manage to cross the >Gulf of Mexico on their migration - their little scalar-wave generating >wings flapping at about 60 Hz can obviously tap into the huge >geo-scalar field for energy and directional information. And I've been >wasting my time feeding those little buggers sugar water [snip] Do those birds drink that sugar water or dunk in it? 8^) Speaking of waves, ocean waves must produce prodigious quantities of scalar radiation. Whales, whose songs travel over thousands of miles, must be amoung the greatest living scalar wave generators. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 01:03:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA21524; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:01:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:01:30 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006101bd9057$c1325e20$9eb4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:58:34 -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: <"-FPZ6.0.iF5.LNwTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19530 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Akira Kawasaki To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, June 04, 1998 9:51 PM Subject: Re: Pump Surge Problem Aki wrote: >June 4, 1998 > >Forgot to suggest one more: Get the crummy plumbing contractor that did >the original installation without a line damper ("shock absorber") for >the knocks (hammer), to fix it right like it should have been done. It >would be interesting to see how long the motor and the length of >polyethylene lasts over five years. > >Forget it if it was a do-it-yourself. LOL! I is the crummy plumbing contractor. :-) The polyethylene in the well pit where there is no sunlight, and weird albino crickets by the thousands, (too humid for black widow spiders) will probably outlast the electrical wiring. Regards, Frederick > >-ak- > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 01:10:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA05000; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:08:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:08:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <006b01bd9058$7d79d4a0$9eb4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Scalar Birds??? (Was something else) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:03:50 -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: <"xzIDG2.0.0E1.5UwTr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19531 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: Thursday, June 04, 1998 9:52 PM Subject: Scalar Birds??? (Was something else) Frank Stenger wrote: >Horace Heffner wrote: >> >> Suppose we have a 440 Hz tuning fork with >> 0.1 cm sway, that would be 0.2 cm per cycle and or 88 cm/sec avg. velocity. >> Fe has density of 7.86 g/cm^3, and at. wt. of 55.85. Let's assume the >> "business end" of the fork has about 4 cm^3. The no. of moles is 4/55.85 = >> 0.0716 moles = 4.313x10^22 atoms. Fe has 52 protons and 52 electrons so Q >> = 4.49 x 10 ^24 q = 7.19x10^5 coulombs moving at 88 cm/sec. Lets assume >> they are distributed over about 2 cm, so at a linear velocity of 88 cm/sec >> the charge goes by at a rate of 2/88 sec = 2.27x10^-2 seconds, so the >> equivalent current is 31.7 MA. > >Hey, Horace, now I know how the humming birds manage to cross the >Gulf of Mexico on their migration - their little scalar-wave generating >wings flapping at about 60 Hz can obviously tap into the huge >geo-scalar field for energy and directional information. And I've been >wasting my time feeding those little buggers sugar water - I should >mount a 200 watt, 60 Hz woofer on my deck and blast the little rascals >with some concentrated energy (bifilar driver coil, of course!) - moves >both ways at the same time. :-) > >Just ignore this time-wasting blather - I've been moving dirt all day in >the hot sun! > >Frank (bird man of Fox Road) Stenger Hey Frank, I think you just solved the "Taos Hum" mystery. Big (very big) ELF Humming Birds! :-) Regards, Frederick > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 03:20:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA02716; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 03:16:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 03:16:42 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <009a01bd906a$9b101ee0$9eb4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Thermal Neutrinos and Cold Fusion Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 04:13:01 -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: <"gF_Em3.0.Hg.9MyTr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19532 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To; Vortex The recent disclosure that the rest mass-energy of the neutrino or antineutrino is 0.07 ev makes for some interesting calculations for the Superstring particle theory. For the 0.14 ev energy required for creation of the neutrino-antineutrino pair from an electron-deuteron or electron-proton collision: W = 2.24E-20 = hbar/t, t = 4.707E-15 seconds or dx = v*dt, assuming v is the same as the velocity of the electron in the ground state Bohr orbit, c/137 = 2.186E6 meters/sec x = 1.03E-8 meters (103 angstroms). >From the circle-string theory: Radius R = kq^2/W = 1.03E-8 meters = 103 angstroms also. Since 0.14 ev at 11,600 deg K/ev = 1624 deg K and if this "resonance point" is critical, it would seem that it might be more difficult to hit it (except by chance) at higher temperatures. This lepton pair production energy "window" is probably responsible for the cavitation-sonoluminescence phenomena as well as surface liquid-gas-solid Pd-Deuterium CF effects. Given the "room" needed for the formation of the neutrino-antineutrino pair and subsequent reduction in size by interaction with and integration into a Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutron entity, a relatively cool, tenuous, gas environment would be the most favorable for the desired o/u effects. Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 06:04:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA30234; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 05:57:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 05:57:11 -0700 Message-ID: <3577EB4D.5B2C interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 08:57:49 -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: Scalar waves Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"qTi3j.0.KO7.ci-Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19533 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortex: My jokes about scalar waves are, perhaps, getting close to stepping on the spirit of this list. So - a more serious point: If a bifilar coil can generate scalar waves, note that probably most coils constructed have been of metal conductors. This means that the current in adjacent wires involves "like" charges moving in opposite directions. My speculation was that the counter-currents from any moving normal matter should also generate scalar fields and/or waves. However, this would involve "opposite" charges moving in the same direction. This might imply that there is some unknown (to me!) fundamental difference between otherwise identical currents - one composed of electrons moving north, and one composed of + charges moving south. Certainly, on the "micro" level the velocity vector is one such difference. There must (?) be others on this level - QM, etc.? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 06:41:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA08133; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 06:39:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 06:39:17 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980605094255.00c31810 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:42:55 -0400 To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Thermal Neutrinos and Cold Fusion Cc: "Vortex-L" , "George" In-Reply-To: <009a01bd906a$9b101ee0$9eb4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"FOand1.0.w-1.4K_Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19534 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:13 AM 6/5/98 -0600, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >The recent disclosure that the rest mass-energy >of the neutrino or antineutrino is 0.07 ev makes for some interesting >calculations for the Superstring particle theory. Take that number with a several grains of salt... First, the real conclusion from the study is that the mass is not zero. A negative mass squared (i.e. the neutrino is a tachyon) was in no way ruled out. Second, the equation they are fitting permits lots of solutions of higher mass. You can probably rule out a mass over 1 ev, but I certainly would expect the error bars to be something like 0.04 to 0.30 ev. 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 Jun 5 06:43:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA09061; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 06:41:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 06:41:50 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980605094509.00a02280 spectre.mitre.org> X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:45:09 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: "Robert I. Eachus" Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"xM-JM3.0.DD2.QM_Tr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19535 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:33 PM 6/4/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote: >This is not correct, is it? Stipping begins at about 10 KeV, right? Yes, and yes. What happens is that you have a distribution of energies in the plasma. If you use a "classical" gas model, the likelihood of a 10 keV particle in a 1 eV plasma is extremely low. But we are not talking about classical gasses, we are working with plasmas created and confined by electromagnetic fields. What happens is that a small population of "hot" particles separates from the plasma through a runaway process, and can be a thousand times (or more) as energetic as the plasma. Note that I didn't use the word hot here. The energy of these particles is non-thermal, the relative thermal temperature of the particles is quite low. The easy way to think of what happens is that a random group of charged particles travelling in the same direction is attracted into a cluster by their self-generated magnetic fields. Since the fields become stronger both with more particles and as the particles get closer together such artifacts are quite stable. (Electromagnetic repulsion keeps the ions apart. In the normal case the ions are positively charged, and the charge is partially screened by the electrons in the plasma. The ion cluster, although I hate to use that word here, attacts the electrons but they constantly get stripped away by interactions with the rest of the plasma, so the visible charge of the cluster is less than the charge on the ions.) If the ions gain energy from the external fields, most hot fusion experts name the effect an instability and try to get rid of it. ;-) This is why you see increased neutron counts right as the containment collapses. My read has always been that the right way to get to fusion is to harness these effects not try to get rid of them. 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 Jun 5 07:39:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA19234; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 07:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 07:37:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00ae01bd908e$c71d8bc0$9eb4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Predictions Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:31:56 -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: <"e2dt11.0.Si4.gA0Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19536 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex The Neutrino or Antineutrino rest mass-energy is determined as 0.07 ev +/- 0.04 ev. It is MOST LIKELY 0.0496 ev. The most probable Fusion Resonances are at: 0.992 ev 13.6 ev 1863 ev 255 Kev Any Bets? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 08:35:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA29516; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 08:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:25:36 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Long-baseline news special edition; early June 1998 (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nbX_r.0.4D7.Vx0Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19537 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi everyone, there is now very strong evidence for neutrino oscillations and hence neutrino mass. Pity my experiment didn't find them! Cheers Martin ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 08:06:34 -0500 From: Maury Goodman at Argonne To: LONGBNEWS fnal.gov Cc: MCG hep.anl.gov Subject: Long-baseline news special edition; early June 1998 Long-Baseline Neutrino News -- Special Edition Early June 1998 *** Super-Kamiokande reports neutrino mass is non-zero In an announcement at Neutrino '98, Super-Kamiokande described its very strong evidence that neutrino oscillations are needed to explain their atmospheric neutrino data. See www.phys.washington.edu/~superk/sk_release.html. Data from their contained events, partially contained events, Multi-Gev events, upward muons and upward stopping muons all differ from expectation but can be explained with large mixing and delta msquared of a few times 10**-3. Watch for two New York Times articles starting with the front page of the Friday June 5 issue. Some details about the Super-Kamiokande results are available at www.phys.hawaii.edu/~jgl/neutrino_news.html Papers are being submitted on the neutrino oscillation analysis and will be available soon. *** Super-Kamiokande; contained events, zenith, neutral current With 535 days of data, Super-Kamiokande has 3032 1-ring events, 1018 2-ring, 426 >2-ring, and 301 partially contained events(PCE). Expected were 3223, 1076, 465 and 372. The Sub-GeV R is 0.627 +- .026 +- .05 and the Multi-Gev value is .647 +- .049 +- .078. The zenith angle distribution fits nicely to 50 10**-3 eV^2 with sin^2 theta=1 for the sub-GeV, Multi-GeV and PCE data. If there was a problem with the neutrino flux, it might show up in the (neutral current) pi0 events. But [pi0/e)(data)]/[pi0/e(MC)] is 0.94 +- .08(stat) +- 0.03(MC-stat) +- 0.19(syst) *** more Super-Kamiokande results; azimuthal angle, upware mus Neutrino Oscillations can cause zenith angle changes, but not azimuth angle changes for contained events. Noticable azimuth effects are expected from geomagnetic effects for certain energies. Effects are seen as expected, giving confidence that the measured zenith angle anomalies are real. Upward muons and upward stopping muon angular distributions provide two more independent data sets to study for oscillation effects. Analysis of both data sets gives a poor chi-squared without oscillations and a good chi-squared when large mixing and 5 10**-3 eV^2 numu to nutau oscillations are put in. *** Japanese budget cuts threaten Super-Kamiokande operations. Due to the financial difficulty of the Japanese government, operating funds for Super-Kamiokande have been reduced by 15% for 1998. This may require them to cease operation for 2 months. An additional 15% cut is expected next year. Under these circumstances, they will have to stop the operation of the experiment,probably for 4 months. These cuts are being applied equally, across-the-board, to all institutions, without consideration of the relative scientific importance of the projects or the devastating impact that such cuts may have. *** K2K schedule K2K will turn on at 0001 on Jan 1, 1999 (Japanese time), using a fast spill. They will run 3-5 months, being off during the summer and slow spill at KEK. Super-Kamiokande plans to empty during the summer of 1999 to replace some tubes. The K2K run is expected to take 3 years with 6 months of running per year. *** Soudan 2 flavor ratio still low Soudan 2 now has double the fiducial exposure of the Frejus experiment. From 3.56 fiducial kiloton years, the neutrino flavor ratio is 0.58 +/- 0.11 +/- 0.06. Soudan 2 has isolated a sample of nu-mu flavor events for which the resolution in L/Enu for incident neutrinos is excellent, as the result of imaging of the recoiling hadronic system. In this sample of events, with Enu between 0.5 to 2.0 GeV, the nu-mu flux appears depleted in both down-going as well as up-going neutrinos. *** Diablo Avocado still skeptical (but mellowing?) about nu-osc While he cannot find anything wrong with the Super-Kamiokande analysis, Diablo Avocado is still skeptical about neutrino oscillations. Why are the parameters so conveniently those that show up in atmospheric neutrinos where we have no control over the beam? Why maximal mixing? He will be watching the long-baseline results with great interest, although it now appears that they will not be able to completely rule out Super-K if they come out negative. *** MINOS tubes held hostage by NASA MINOS has a choice between an existing Hamamatsu phototube, and a newer 61-ch tube being prototyped by DEP, which was ordered for testing many moons ago. The package finally came, but inside was a Power Supply. Customs people said that by mistake NASA has MINOS' DEP tubes and MINOS has their Power Supply. The Power Supply is sent back. Does NASA do the same? Nooooo-ooh. (Try that a la Bill Murray) NASA told the customs people that they will not even begin to send the tubes back to be sent to MINOS until they get their Power Supply ... due to "government regulations". *** CERN research board hears about neutrino momentum At their April 1998 meeting, it was reported the SPSC felt that TOP, a proposal for a TOSCA prototype was now premature. It was also reported that the INFN had included a sizeable fraction of the cost of the Gran Sasso neutrino beam in its next 5-year plan which is to be be discussed in the coming months. This new beam was thus gathering momentum. *** Notable new references <+> L.M. Johnson and D.W. McKay, "Fitting new interaction pieces into neutrino puzzles," hep-ph/9805311, to appear in Phys. Lett. B <+> Bahcall et al., "How uncertain are solar neutrino predictions", IASSNS-AST 98/26, May 1998. <+> Adelberger et al., "Solar Fusion Cross Sections", IASSNS-AST 98/24, May 1998. <+> T. Teshima and T. Sakai, "Atmospheric neutrino oscillations in three-flavor neutrinos", hep-ph/9805386 <+> Lawrence J. Hall and Hitoshi Murayama, "Study of Inclusive Multi-Ring Events from Atmospheric Neutrinos", hep-ph/9806218 <+> Brahmachari and Mohapatra, "Grand Unification of the Sterile Neutrino", hep-ph/9805429 <+> Ernest Ma and Probir Roy, "New Interactions in Neutrino Oscillations with Three Light Flavors", PRL 80 p 4637, May 1998. <+> Y. Yamanoi et al., "Large Horn Magnets at the KEK Neutrino Beam Line", KEK 97-225 ****************************************************************** Also at http://www.hep.anl.gov/ndk/longbnews/index.html Maury Goodman Maury.Goodman anl.gov 630-252-3646 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 10:52:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08299; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:47:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:47:41 -0700 X-Sender: wharton 128.183.200.226 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199806041644_MC2-3F3B-D153 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:47:00 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Secret CETI experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"OOMTT3.0.112.ty2Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19539 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex, I do not know much about the secret CETI experiments so I can not reveal much. What I do know comes from talking to CETI people so I would not say that it is rumors. This came up when I was trying to interest them in my concept of the PPC (Patterson Power Cell) as a heat pump that could exceed the Carnot limit. I was surprised to hear that they were already investigating this and that they had a scientist who was working on this concept. So right from the start it was apparent that CETI had good reason to believe that the PPC was acting as a heat pump. Otherwise, it would have been foolish to hire a scientist to work on researching this hypothesis. And I do not think that I was being lied to by the CETI people. Every indication I have is that the CETI people have something and that they are honestly trying to understand it scientifically. The secrecy seems designed only as a strategy to limit potential competition and not to cover up bogus results. Then I received some vague references to experiments in which an entire PPC system was put in an enclosed chamber and the temperature of the entire system did not increase as much as expected based on the indicated combined flow calorimetry excess heat production. Quoting an e-mail from Dennis Cravens: >Hi, I'm Dennis Cravens with CETI Christian Ismert forwarded your email for >my >comments. I think you have some interesting points. You refer to >a paper. >I would love to see more on the subject. Dennis Cravens >PS. at least >one group saw a delta temp in the fluid flow but not the >average of the whole >device , as seen within a closed test chamber. I only know that which may be inferred from the above PS and similar comments. In reference to Jed Rothwell's comments: >Larry Wharton continues to reveal a little and hide a little about this >amazing alleged event which proved that a gigantic worldwide error has been >made by thousands of scientists for 90 years. The technique of combined flow calorimetry has been only in use by a few scientists for about 5 years. > If Cravens knew of revolutionary results which would make the >principal researchers famous world-wide he would replicate them and publish >them quick as poss. So would you, if you had any sense. I realize the significance of the CETI results. I would like to include them in some publication but the secrecy prevents their use as a reference. 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 Jun 5 10:53:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA09033; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:49:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:49:42 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F095F xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Scalar Birds??? (Was something else) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:23:59 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"5Dhkk.0.HC2.i-2Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19540 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace You have hit the nail on the head. Whales do sing in scalar waves. Sound pressure is a scalar, and it propagates through the ocean very nicely. Hank > ---------- > From: hheffner corecom.net[SMTP:hheffner@corecom.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, June 05, 1998 12:44 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Scalar Birds??? (Was something else) > > At 11:51 PM 6/4/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > [snip] > >Hey, Horace, now I know how the humming birds manage to cross the > >Gulf of Mexico on their migration - their little scalar-wave > generating > >wings flapping at about 60 Hz can obviously tap into the huge > >geo-scalar field for energy and directional information. And I've > been > >wasting my time feeding those little buggers sugar water > [snip] > > Do those birds drink that sugar water or dunk in it? 8^) > > Speaking of waves, ocean waves must produce prodigious quantities of > scalar > radiation. > > Whales, whose songs travel over thousands of miles, must be amoung the > greatest living scalar wave generators. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 10:54:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA09200; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:50:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:50:04 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0960 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Scalar waves Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:31:11 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"y7TiL1.0.2F2.4_2Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19541 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Francis The mundane fluorescent bulb meets your criteria. Electrons and negative ions flow towards the anode, positive ions torwards the cathode in the plasma. The scalar waves generated must propagate all over a room lit with these bulbs. Next question is - How do you detect them? Hank > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, June 05, 1998 5:57 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Scalar waves > > Vortex: > > My jokes about scalar waves are, perhaps, getting close to stepping on > the spirit of this list. So - a more serious point: > If a bifilar coil can generate scalar waves, note that probably most > coils constructed have been of metal conductors. This means that the > current in adjacent wires involves "like" charges moving in opposite > directions. My speculation was that the counter-currents from any > moving normal matter should also generate scalar fields and/or waves. > However, this would involve "opposite" charges moving in the same > direction. This might imply that there is some unknown (to me!) > fundamental difference between otherwise identical currents - one > composed of electrons moving north, and one composed of + charges > moving > south. Certainly, on the "micro" level the velocity vector is one > such > difference. There must (?) be others on this level - QM, etc.? > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 11:28:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22889; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:22:12 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:22:12 -0700 Message-ID: <000a01bd90ae$b012e720$255b2bcf ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Secret CETI experiments Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:20:47 -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: <"2KDPM1.0.ca5.8T3Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19542 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello Larry Wharton! You quoted Dennis Cravens: >>Hi, I'm Dennis Cravens with CETI Christian Ismert forwarded your email for >>my >comments. I think you have some interesting points. You refer to >>a paper. >I would love to see more on the subject. Dennis Cravens >>PS. at least >one group saw a delta temp in the fluid flow but not the >>average of the whole >device , as seen within a closed test chamber. Then said: >I only know that which may be inferred from the above PS and similar comments. I don't understand how you can reconcile the above with that which you said earlier: >The secret experiments in which an entire PPC system was placed in an >insulated container proved conculsively that there is zero energy >production. I have suggested that Jed contact Dennis Cravens, who knows >about these experiments, to see if he could find out some details . . . The example you gave is hardly 'conclusive proof' that there is zero energy production. Indeed, it seems to me that you may have mis-interpretted Dennis Craven's remarks. It looks to me as if he was indicating that he saw no significant delta-T, due to the heat-pump effect, in his system when he enclosed the test chamber. The implication from his paragraph here is that he DID continue to see the excess heat production. Do you have any other evidence that they saw no heat production when closing their test chamber? Did you speak to anyone personally on this issue, from CETI? Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 11:57:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA29550; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:50:41 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: TV channel interference? Resent-Message-ID: <"gaGJ_1.0.bD7.Uv3Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19543 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I was experimenting with a custom built RF receiver, driving it with a bifilar coil with a from 1 to 20 MHz square wave, when I discovered, via a loud buzz noise followed by much hostility and abuse from the family, that I was interfering significantly with both TV picture and sound a couple rooms away. 8^) I did mangage to pin down the frequency of most interference (to the channel they were watching) at about 9.1 MHz, before they discovered I was the cause. 8^) Using a square wave coincidentally produces a resonant ring in the coil/oscillator circuit at about 9 MHz, regardless of frequency of the square wave. Let's see. TV channels are 6 MHz wide, CH 2 is 54-60 MHz. That gives: CH. MHz == ======= 2 54-60 3 60-66 4 66-72 5 72-78 6 78-84 7 84-90 8 90-96 9 96-102 10 102-108 11 108-114 12 114-120 13 120-126 Is that right? If so, why the big reaction to a 9.1 MHz wave? I think they were watching CH 4, which is about 8 times 9 MHz. Hard to believe a 3 octave overtone was so effective. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 12:25:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA07217; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:18:33 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:18:33 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:23:52 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Tesla Patent & OCR help Resent-Message-ID: <"6eKpu2.0.Lm1.7I4Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19544 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 6:00 PM 6/4/98, John Steck wrote: [snip] >If anyone else shares my facination, the best reference book I've been able to >find is carried by Lindsay Publications The book >is "Tesla's Engine" #1307 US$19.95. > >Excellent site for the frugal researcher in any field. 8^) I tried the above URL, but it was unknown. Is there a spelling error? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 12:35:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA11934; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:31:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:31:25 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00d701bd90ad$42ce4c00$9eb4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: Re: Scalar waves Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:10:41 -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: <"yap2A1.0.fv2.6U4Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19545 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Scudder, Henry J To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Friday, June 05, 1998 11:53 AM Subject: RE: Scalar waves Hank Scudder wrote: >Francis > The mundane fluorescent bulb meets your criteria. Electrons and >negative ions flow towards the anode, positive ions torwards the cathode >in the plasma. The scalar waves generated must propagate all over a room >lit with these bulbs. Next question is - How do you detect them? Fish scales,perhaps? Carp have scales,don't they? :-) Regards, Frederick > >Hank > >> ---------- >> From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] >> Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Sent: Friday, June 05, 1998 5:57 AM >> To: vortex-l eskimo.com >> Subject: Scalar waves >> >> Vortex: >> >> My jokes about scalar waves are, perhaps, getting close to stepping on >> the spirit of this list. So - a more serious point: >> If a bifilar coil can generate scalar waves, note that probably most >> coils constructed have been of metal conductors. This means that the >> current in adjacent wires involves "like" charges moving in opposite >> directions. My speculation was that the counter-currents from any >> moving normal matter should also generate scalar fields and/or waves. >> However, this would involve "opposite" charges moving in the same >> direction. This might imply that there is some unknown (to me!) >> fundamental difference between otherwise identical currents - one >> composed of electrons moving north, and one composed of + charges >> moving >> south. Certainly, on the "micro" level the velocity vector is one >> such >> difference. There must (?) be others on this level - QM, etc.? >> >> Frank Stenger >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 12:40:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA10765; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:35:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:35:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357847BE.3E663EEE darknet.net> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 15:32:14 -0400 From: Steve Organization: DarkNet Online/Digital Fusion X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Tesla Patent & OCR help References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FDdnj2.0.6e2.bX4Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19546 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace, http://www.lindsaybks.com/ works for me.. maybe the server was down for a while? ttyl -Steve -- darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616 DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 13:02:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA16795; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:56:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:56:15 -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: <35784C9E.B6877342 css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 14:53:02 -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: Tesla Patent & OCR help References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cLXMi2.0.G64.Or4Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19547 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > At 6:00 PM 6/4/98, John Steck wrote: > >If anyone else shares my facination, the best reference book I've been able to > >find is carried by Lindsay Publications The book > >is "Tesla's Engine" #1307 US$19.95. > > > >Excellent site for the frugal researcher in any field. 8^) > I tried the above URL, but it was unknown. Is there a spelling error? Hmm. I not sure why you can't get there. I dragged that address right out of my URL line in Netscape, no typing done. I just tried it and it came up for me. Perhaps there is a lot of line traffic in your area right now and the packet request is timing out? Been seeing some real funky stuff online in the last couple of days. I can cut and paste their current inventory list into an email and send it privately to you if needed. May be too lengthy of a message for the list. Let me know. 8^) John E. Steck --------------------------------o]{: Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 13:04:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA24615; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:00:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:00:55 -0700 From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 13:59:49 -0700 Message-ID: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: TV Interference? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"tes2M.0.v_5.gv4Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19548 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 05-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >I was experimenting with a custom built RF receiver, driving it with a >bifilar coil with a from 1 to 20 MHz square wave, when I discovered, Horace, Were you sweeping with the Sq Wave Signal? Maybe try driving the coil with specific sq wave frequencies and see where the interference occures. I have a RF system that fires a 1"x 24" argon plasma tube ( 7 torr). If I modulate the plasma with a sq wave in the audio range I completely wipeout chanels 2 and 9. I have been experimenting with micro-organisms (I am using protazoans) exposed to the sq wave modulated RF at about 40 watts power. Different organisms are affected at different unique sq- wave frequencies. Unmodulated RF CW has no effect. I have also been able to affect (kill a large % of sample) while the sample was stored in an all metal box several meters from the plasma tube. This was an accidental discovery when I mistakenly killed my whole batch of specimens. Maybe, a scalar wave detector needs to be a living biological specimen? I think I may try substituting a bifilar coil for the plasma tube. Do you have any idea what size tube and how many turns I should start with? Is your coil an air core? Thanks, ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 14:04:16 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11224; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:58:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:58:20 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 07:15:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Predictions Resent-Message-ID: <"5lNYA.0.nk2.bl5Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19551 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 8:31 AM 6/5/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >To: Vortex > >The Neutrino or Antineutrino rest mass-energy is determined as 0.07 ev +/- >0.04 ev. > >It is MOST LIKELY 0.0496 ev. > >The most probable Fusion Resonances are at: > >0.992 ev > >13.6 ev > >1863 ev > >255 Kev [snip] How about showing your calculations? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 14:52:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26282; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:47:08 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:47:08 -0700 From: Schaffer gav.gat.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19980605232846.20f76d52 po.pacific.net.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:47:01 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Output Calcs Resent-Message-ID: <"pB2_71.0.UQ6.QT6Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19552 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mpowers Consultant posted: >I copied this from the Farnsworth Page: > [snip lower gain results] > > The Mark III Fusor produced startling > high records in quick succession. > By the start of 196.5 the team was routinely > measuring 15.5 G-neutrons/sec. at 150 Kv and 70 mA.. My analysis is: P_fusion = (15.5x10^9 n/s)(17.58x10^6 eV/n)(1.6x10^-19 j/eV) = 0.0436 W P_input = (150x10^3 V)(70x10^-3 A) = 10,500 W This is about a factor of 200000 short of energy breakeven. 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 Jun 5 15:02:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16249; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:53:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:53:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <000a01bd90cb$add63760$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Predictions Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 15:47:49 -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: <"h_0S03.0.oz3.5Z6Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19553 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, June 05, 1998 3:02 PM Subject: Re: Predictions >At 8:31 AM 6/5/98, Frederick J. Sparber wrote: >>To: Vortex >> >>The Neutrino or Antineutrino rest mass-energy is determined as 0.07 ev +/- >>0.04 ev. >> >>It is MOST LIKELY 0.0496 ev. >> >>The most probable Fusion Resonances are at: >> >>0.0992 ev >> >>13.6 ev >> >>1863 ev >> >>255 Kev >[snip] > >How about showing your calculations? Just a matter of slight modification of the Light Lepton pair production Hypothesis, that says that Nothing can orbit a Proton or Deuteron closer that twice the radius of the electron (2 * 2.81E-15 Meters) and all other quantized orbits and Neutrino-Antineutrino pairs that can be produced and form the Quasi-Neutron or Quasi-DiNeutron are n*13.6/alpha^n' or n*13.6*alpha^n'. The best clue is the ACCEPTED PHYSICS of Pair Production from the collision of an electron and a Proton or Deuteron: w = hbar/t or dx = c*alpha*t, then orbit Radius R = kq^2/w. Easy to check out, but the charge of the Neutrino and Antineutrino although +/- 1.6E-19 Coulombs and 180 degrees from each other are 90 and 270 degrees from regular (heavier) Leptons, thus they act neutral towards them. The moment they are formed they can gain energy from the heavy Quarks-electrons and change radius thus the "OSCILLATIONS" noticed in the Neutrino Experiments. Regards, Frederick > >Regards, > >Horace Heffner > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 15:01:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA29859; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:14:09 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:14:09 -0700 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:20:48 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Cause for optimisim with SMOT. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"QM1ma1.0.xH7.C65Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19549 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: HI everyone, well I certainly have not been Greg Watson's biggest fan but I've tried his SMOT mark 5 and I do get solid roll-aways. I followed his design quite closely but my implementation is a real hack. My 4 mm release curve is very poor approximation to a a circular arc. The magnets are held in place with sticky tape the the thing is mounted on balsa wood pieces that vibrate when the ball drops of the end. Never-the-less I do get roll aways in excess of 100 mm pretty reproducibally. I'm concerned at this stage that my bench is not level, there may be a fraction of a mm drop. I'm also concerned that I may be inadvertantly be putting a bit of a push to the ball when I place the ball at the start of the ramp. As I said my system right now can not really be rotated 180 degrees with ease, it might fall apart! Still this Mark 5 is far closer to anomalus behaviour than my previous attempts and as I said I do get sold roll-aways already. Based on this, I will get our workshop to build a really nice system and put two in a row. If I get acceleration I'll know we've finally got something here. So I suggest that it would be worth all you frustrated SMOTTERS to dust off your magnets and balls and try the Mark 5. Cheers! Martin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 15:04:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16484; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:55:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:55:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:49:12 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Cause for optimism with SMOT. Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806051751_MC2-3F48-CD39 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"78qXn2.0.J14.za6Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19554 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex; >INTERNET:msevior liszt.ph.unimelb.edu.au Martin Sevior writes: Never-the-less I do get roll always in excess of 100 mm pretty reproducibally. I'm concerned at this stage that my bench is not level, there may be a fraction of a mm drop. I'm also concerned that I may be inadvertently be putting a bit of a push to the ball when I place the ball at the start of the ramp. You should be concerned about both points. I mounted a crude SMOT on a new piece of plastic coated board intended for use as a shelf. I put it the shelf on a level table. I folded over a piece of paper twice, and wedged it under one end, to give the shelf a slight uphill bias against the SMOT. The SMOT never worked. When I moved the paper to the other side of the shelf, giving it a positive, downhill bias, I got many rollaways. I conclude that a rolling, vibrating bead is an exquisitely sensitive instrument for detecting a 0.01% gradient. (There are 250 sheets of 20 lb paper per inch, the board was 36" long.) Do not take a shelf out of a bookcase. It will be bowed in the middle. Use a new piece of lumber. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 15:08:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA30258; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:58:00 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0960 xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:57:15 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: RE: Scalar waves Resent-Message-ID: <"xTxin3.0.iO7.cd6Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19555 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hank - > How do you detect them? They might affect the rate at which certain things happen. Like capacitance, for instance. Some experimenters in this area point to transient changes in the properties of dielectrics as a possible method of detection. In the capacitor experiments I did, it was very difficult (on a no-budget no-lab basis) to isolate the changes I saw in the caps from the effects of temperature - another "scalar" - which certainly contaminates the results. But some that I did with the caps wrapped up in urethane foam, covered with layers of aluminum foil, and left inside a cooler with quite small temperature drifts througout the run did show some correlation to the *outside* temperature changes and not the *inside* ones. This correlation might be assigned to instrument error from having the DMM outside the cooler. I didn't think DMMs were that inaccurate over just a few degrees T, but it's a logical argument in the absence of any actual calibration on the instrument. I think the % accuracy listed with the DMM's documentation was much better than could account for the measurements I took, but then I was looking at last digit data on the MV scale, so maybe not. If I run this again, I'll have all the instruments mounted inside the cooler and visible through a small window, as well as a large thermal mass inside there to help keep the temp more constant. I still think there's something to the possibility of dielectrics as detectors. The TTB results were not ambiguous at all - a temperature controlled run with a 1/10 degree max drift yielded those same characteristic curves. Only problem is most people believe TTB was a simple crackpot and the results aren't reliable. I admit I'd like to see trustworthy confirmation/replication of those results, even though I figure TTB probably had it right. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 15:18:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA21876; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 15:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 15:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3578970D.6200 bellsouth.net> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 18:10:37 -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: TV channel interference? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"hdcmz1.0.iL5.Vt6Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19556 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > I think they were watching CH 4, which is about 8 times 9 MHz. Hard to > believe a 3 octave overtone was so effective. > > Regards, > > Horace Heffner TV's are very poorly shielded. You were probably interfering with the TV baseband or one of the heterodyne sources. You can confirm this by observing interference on other channels and seeing how it changes. Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 15:24:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA04133; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 15:21:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 15:21:00 -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: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:20:16 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Cause for optimisim with SMOT. Resent-Message-ID: <"Zd7xG1.0.U01.Bz6Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19557 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Martin - I agree with Jed, the *slightest* downward slope will let a decent SMOT do a level rollaway. It's got to be tried with a very slight uphill bias - any small bias will do to break it out clear of the downhill/dead-level ambiguity. I mean if you can get a level rollaway up a half-millimeter bias and you know you're not pooching the ball into the gate - you've got something. I'm glad you're looking into this though. The last series of experiments I did with SMOTs makes it difficult for me to get excited about the latest and greatest from Greg. I still think the level rollaway might be possible based on some sneaky energy input from such as the thermal/magnetic effects we've discussed. Not sure how useful that would be though, as there is already work on refrigeration and so forth being done using this effect. But - good luck! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 15:31:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA30692; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:16:29 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:16:29 -0700 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 23:25:27 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980605232846.20f76d52 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="iso-8859-1" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mpowers Consultants Subject: Farnsworth Fusor Output Calcs Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA30475 Resent-Message-ID: <"TXqGK1.0.wU7.O85Ur" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19550 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I copied this from the Farnsworth Page: ............................................................................ ............................................... With deuterium gas in the Mark II Model 2 Fusor a count exceeding 50 M­neutrons cc/sec was recorded at 80 Kv. and 30 mA. input. This device produced 1.3 G-neutrons/sec. in a sustained reaction for more than one minute. These reactions were stable, completely under the operator's control, and could be repeated. On October 5, 1965 the Fusor Mark II­Model 6 was tested. A reconfigured, high­precision ion gun arrangement produced l G­neutrons cc/see at 20 Kv. and 1 mA .... a record achievement. On December 28, 1965 tritium was admitted into the test chamber ... producing 2.6 G-neutrons/sec. at 105 Kv. and 45 mA.. With a mixture of tritium and deuterium on the very next day Dr. Farnsworth's team measured and recorded 6.2 G-neutrons/sec. at 170 Kv.. The Mark III Fusor produced startling high records in quick succession. By the start of 196.5 the team was routinely measuring 15.5 G-neutrons/sec. at 150 Kv and 70 mA.. ............................................................................ .............. If the numbers are to be believed, then his output would have been as follows: 50.0 Mn 80 Kv x 30 mA (= 2400va) : 20833 n/va 1 Gn 20 Kv x 1 mA (= 20va): 50000000 n/va 2.6 Gn 105 Kv x 45 mA (= 4725va): 550265 n/va 15.5 Gn 150 Kv x 70 mA (= 10500va): 1476190 n/va Anybody out there got any different figures ? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 16:12:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA01610; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:07:10 +1000 X-Sender: mindtech mailhost.nor.com.au (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mindtech nor.com.au (Peter Nielsen) Subject: RE: Scalar waves Resent-Message-ID: <"58gCY2.0.0P.Zg7Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19558 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Francis > The mundane fluorescent bulb meets your criteria. Electrons and >negative ions flow towards the anode, positive ions torwards the cathode >in the plasma. The scalar waves generated must propagate all over a room >lit with these bulbs. Next question is - How do you detect them? > >Hank > Scalars are virtual potentials, created by cancellation of vectors. In the above example, there is obviously no such translation as the ions are moving past each other toward the electrodes. Peter Nielsen From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 16:29:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA03484; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0966 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Scalar waves Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:18:13 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"7zHWt3.0.Ms.Nr7Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19559 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Why not use battery operated A/D converters for your instruments, fiber optically coupled to the outside world, to minimize E/M coupling. Calibration and Null runs are important here, as well as a large thermal mass, and Faraday shields. You want to try and eliminate as much outside signal getting in as possible. Hank > ---------- > From: Rick Monteverde[SMTP:monteverde worldnet.att.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Friday, June 05, 1998 2:57 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Scalar waves > > Hank - > > > How do you detect them? > > They might affect the rate at which certain things happen. Like > capacitance, for instance. Some experimenters in this area point to > transient changes in the properties of dielectrics as a possible > method of > detection. > > In the capacitor experiments I did, it was very difficult (on a > no-budget > no-lab basis) to isolate the changes I saw in the caps from the > effects of > temperature - another "scalar" - which certainly contaminates the > results. > But some that I did with the caps wrapped up in urethane foam, covered > with > layers of aluminum foil, and left inside a cooler with quite small > temperature drifts througout the run did show some correlation to the > *outside* temperature changes and not the *inside* ones. This > correlation > might be assigned to instrument error from having the DMM outside the > cooler. I didn't think DMMs were that inaccurate over just a few > degrees T, > but it's a logical argument in the absence of any actual calibration > on the > instrument. I think the % accuracy listed with the DMM's documentation > was > much better than could account for the measurements I took, but then I > was > looking at last digit data on the MV scale, so maybe not. > > If I run this again, I'll have all the instruments mounted inside the > cooler and visible through a small window, as well as a large thermal > mass > inside there to help keep the temp more constant. I still think > there's > something to the possibility of dielectrics as detectors. The TTB > results > were not ambiguous at all - a temperature controlled run with a 1/10 > degree > max drift yielded those same characteristic curves. Only problem is > most > people believe TTB was a simple crackpot and the results aren't > reliable. I > admit I'd like to see trustworthy confirmation/replication of those > results, even though I figure TTB probably had it right. > > - Rick Monteverde > Honolulu, HI > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 17:14:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA13048; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 17:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35788837.C7CE7E08 cwnet.com> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 17:07:43 -0700 From: Jones Beene Reply-To: jonesb9 cwnet.com Organization: IdeaWorks Consulting X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "vortex-l eskimo.com vortex news group" Subject: Fusor trek: the next generation Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Z7nJd1.0.oB3.9Z8Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19560 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Speculation Alert! Armchair scientists get ready for some thought fodder. Imagine yourself in your new 300 SEL , circa 2001. All leather and twenty years worth of fuel included. After collecting and digesting recent posts from a number of forums that relate to Miley’s incarnation of the Farnsworth Fusor, the question remains: is he really onto something here ... some “thing” as in the next big “thing”- or is this going to be little more than a laboratory gadget? For instance, there is the understated Euro announcement: Dr. George Miley of the Fusion research center at the U. of Ill (USA) has built a "Farnsworth Fusor"... which produces 10^10 neutrons per second from the D-D reaction. Plans are (with Daimler Benz) to market the device as a "controlled neutron source." Ahem... controlled neutron source? Right. Isn’t this a company that has, shall we say, more than a passing interest in compact power plants. Not to mention big American ones formerly owned by Chrysler. Follow the money. But first, what is Miley doing: not D-T fusion but D-D “stripping?” It is highly unlikely that he can achieve a real D-D fusion reaction in a Farnsworth type tube. It was noted on Vortex that a "problem" with the original Farnsworth approach is low power density. “You end up with an electrostatic confinement fusion device which produces neutrons and about 78 watts of total energy. Farnsworth put in nearly 12 Kilowatts and got about 10.0 milliwatts out, a factor of a million away from wall-socket break-even, self-sustaining or not (the Mark III fusor was apparently a factor of 200,000 short of energy breakeven). Use those neutrons in subcritical fission, and you can turn the total output power into a megawatt without any enriched uranium. But obviously most of the energy you get is fission, and it is if anything, a little dirtier than standard light water reactors. So the device remains an interesting source of high-energy neutrons.” Ah, there’s the rub. But what about other alternatives that might be on the minds of unnamed auto executives, particularly those in a country with no oil reserves? Fifty years ago, “cheap” neutrons were thought to be the holy grail of power engineering. So what if we took many wrong turns in the intervening years ? 10^10 neutrons per second from a simple tube has got to have some value aside from triggering a uranium reactor. Physicists in the 1940s used to gladly shell out $30,000 for a speck of radium/beryllium to do this same trick, and that was when 30k was worth a darn sight more than the down payment on a Daimler Benz .... So, what about those alternatives? low Z fission? direct conversion? boron/beryllium neutron multiplication? It would be great if we could clarify Miley’s apparatus before moving on. Engineers, as opposed to physicists, would definitely prefer to deal with a stripping reaction and low energy neutrons. Not only is tritium most definitely 'de classe' for ein auto, but the D-T fusion reaction releases very high energy neutrons at the expense of markedly more severe containment and shielding requirements. Can you imagine the DMV combined with the AEC ? now there’s a real bureaucracy for you. Yes, Farnsworth’s patent specifically mentions tritium. And he did seem to age rather rapidly towards the end. Anyone remember him on “What’s My Line?” A pathetic little man by that time who mumbles casually that he invented TV (Philo who? chuckle, chuckle). Never mind, when all is said and done, he’ll rank right up there with the great ones. Back to Miley. Can we really expect 10^10 thermal neutrons per second from the D-D stripping reaction, continuous, from about 12 kW input power to a tube that is simple and reliable (but doesn’t scale) and is a factor of 200,000 away from break-even? If so, it might really be possible to design a small, relative clean power producing device of about 50 kW while at the same time avoiding uranium or other high Z materials and minimizing radiation and shielding requirements... and, of course, while we’re at it, why not avoid the steam conversion cycle. Hey, lets do it up right and beat those pesky krauts to the showroom. Basically the key to a successful design begins with boron. The 10B + n -> 4He + 7Li + 2.8 MeV reaction will multiply the minuscule initial output of the fusor by 3 million to one or thereabouts. But is it enough? Since the B cross section for thermal neutrons is immense (3840 barns), even a relatively thin containment structure will capture almost all of the neutrons produced. If we start with a Farnsworth “tube,” it might make sense to think about a “tube within a tube” direct conversion thermionic device. What about boron carbide for a main structure which serves as both the exterior shell of the Farnsworth tube and also as the emitter for thermionic device? BC is a tough refractory material that could be coated on the outside with a high work function material that would be shielded from the neutron flux. The conversion efficiency of a typical thermionic device is only about 10% in hydrocarbon combustion - as usually computed. But that is because we have to reject the lower 80 per cent of the thermal spectrum for hydrocarbon combustion. When heat rejection is limited solely to anode cooling (the tube throughput) the converter should be much more efficient. But how much? We are walking a fine line here in terms of the possibility of amping up a feeble neutron flux into a real power plant. What about using the 4He + 7Li + 2.8 MeV reaction byproducts to multiply neutrons? The only way this idea makes sense is by adding beryllium into the wall structure. Then you can partially recycle the high energy alphas but you multiply your gamma radiation problem. And also, catch-22, doesn’t most of the 2.8 MeV go with the lithium? It’s all a numbers game. Any takers? Pleasant daydreams, vortexers Jones Beene From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 20:29:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA14327; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:27:37 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:27:37 -0700 Message-ID: <3578B742.77FE interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 23:28:02 -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: Scalar waves -Peter & Hank References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"sNJES1.0.ZV3.dSBUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19561 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Peter Nielsen wrote: > > >Francis > > The mundane fluorescent bulb meets your criteria. Electrons and > >negative ions flow towards the anode, positive ions torwards the cathode > >in the plasma. The scalar waves generated must propagate all over a room > >lit with these bulbs. Next question is - How do you detect them? > > > >Hank > > > > Scalars are virtual potentials, created by cancellation of vectors. In the > above example, there is obviously no such translation as the ions are > moving past each other toward the electrodes. > > Peter Nielsen I don't think I'm following your point, Peter - translation or cancellation - and how would you generate scalar fields/waves? And Hank, in a fluorescent tube, isn't it probable that the electron current is greater than the positive ion current? I still like simple matter in motion - the current from both + and - carriers is exactly the same and all external magnetic fields exactly cancel. There is no electric field because moving matter is a "ghost" superconductor and can carry huge currents with zero potential gradient - they just happen to sum to zero - exactly for neutral matter. But, I agree, Hank - how do you detect such things? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 21:07:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA21107; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:04:26 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:04:26 -0700 Message-ID: <3578C059.1C7B77F9 microtronics.com.au> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:36:49 +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: smot 5 References: <2.2.32.19980606010811.006a1964 mail.wincom.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Vctq-2.0.d95.8_BUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19562 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: wood wrote: > > I just tried building a Mk 5 smot ramp. Of course I made a few > modifications do to the materials available.I also didn't try to go uphill I > just was just hoping for a roll through. The ramp is very necessary as the down and out exit path has very little drag back. > I set up the magnetic array as per > plans with metal keepers on the back.The ball rolled into the array and was > trapped at the first set of magnets.Starting the ball from the other end > gave the usual smot performance. > I can't see how the minor modifications I made will give me absolutely no > results.Does any one see how the ball will get past the first set of magnets? > > Woody HI Woody, I will be posting a set of hints and photos on the SMOT Mk5 on Tuesday (when I get my scanner back). I will also post several QF sims showing how the flux return guides (Steel backing plates) assist the exit. I have found that the geometry of the magnets to ball size on the Mk5 is more critical that the older SMOT designs. My magnet length is 13mm and the ball dia is 12.5mm. Seems others who used longer magnets have had problems. I will advise when the hints are up. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 5 21:21:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA24089; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:19:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:19:25 -0700 Message-ID: <3578C3CD.65C9C9B4 microtronics.com.au> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:51:33 +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: Cause for optimisim with SMOT. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cnFSh3.0.zt5.5DCUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19563 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Martin Sevior wrote: > > HI everyone, > well I certainly have not been Greg Watson's biggest fan but I've > tried his SMOT mark 5 and I do get solid roll-aways. I followed his design > quite closely but my implementation is a real hack. My 4 mm release curve > is very poor approximation to a a circular arc. The magnets are held in > place with sticky tape the the thing is mounted on balsa wood pieces that > vibrate when the ball drops of the end. I take it that you are using the same Jcar magnets that I use and a 12.5mm ball? The geometry of the magnet to ball size DOES seem to be more important in the Mk5 than older SMOT designs. > Never-the-less I do get roll aways in excess of 100 mm pretty reproducibally. > I'm concerned at this stage that my bench is not level, there may be a > fraction of a mm drop. I'm also concerned that I may be inadvertantly be > putting a bit of a push to the ball when I place the ball at the start > of the ramp. Two comments: 1) Remove the magnets & see if the ball still rollaways. 2) A slight nudge WILL NOT propel the ball along 100mm of track. > As I said my system right now can not really be rotated 180 degrees with > ease, it might fall apart! You don't need to rotate it. Just try test 1 as above. > Still this Mark 5 is far closer to anomalus behaviour than my previous > attempts and as I said I do get sold roll-aways already. Based on this, > I will get our workshop to build a really nice system and put two in a > row. If I get acceleration I'll know we've finally got something here. > > So I suggest that it would be worth all you frustrated SMOTTERS to dust > off your magnets and balls and try the Mark 5. > > Cheers! > > Martin Hi Martin, Thanks for the input. I will be posting photos and adjustment hints for the Mk5 on Tuesday. Will advise when they are up. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 00:59:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA21922; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 23:56:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Scalar waves -Peter & Hank Resent-Message-ID: <"OKy2g2.0.OM5.4QFUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19564 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:28 PM 6/5/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Peter Nielsen wrote: >> >> >Francis >> > The mundane fluorescent bulb meets your criteria. Electrons and >> >negative ions flow towards the anode, positive ions torwards the cathode >> >in the plasma. The scalar waves generated must propagate all over a room >> >lit with these bulbs. Next question is - How do you detect them? >> > >> >Hank >> > >> >> Scalars are virtual potentials, created by cancellation of vectors. In the >> above example, there is obviously no such translation as the ions are >> moving past each other toward the electrodes. >> >> Peter Nielsen > >I don't think I'm following your point, Peter - translation or >cancellation - and how would you generate scalar fields/waves? Oppositly charged particles moving opposite directions reinforce, not cancel. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 01:01:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA22067; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:59:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:59:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 23:56:24 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: TV Interference? Resent-Message-ID: <"8FPi7.0.jO5.8RFUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19565 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 1:59 PM 6/5/98, R. Wormus wrote: >On 05-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >>I was experimenting with a custom built RF receiver, driving it with a >>bifilar coil with a from 1 to 20 MHz square wave, when I discovered, > >Horace, >Were you sweeping with the Sq Wave Signal? Yes -- the signal generator has a rough and fine sweep knob, and digital frequency meter. I was slowly sweeping the frequency range with the rough sweep. >Maybe try driving the coil with >specific sq wave frequencies and see where the interference occures. Yes - need to move the rig into the living room. > >I have a RF system that fires a 1"x 24" argon plasma tube ( 7 torr). If I >modulate the plasma with a sq wave in the audio range I completely wipeout >chanels 2 and 9. > >I have been experimenting with micro-organisms (I am using protazoans) exposed >to the sq wave modulated RF at about 40 watts power. Different organisms are >affected at different unique sq- wave frequencies. Unmodulated RF CW has no >effect. I have also been able to affect (kill a large % of sample) while the >sample was stored in an all metal box several meters from the plasma tube. >This was an accidental discovery when I mistakenly killed my whole batch of >specimens. A very interesting bit of news you have there! > >Maybe, a scalar wave detector needs to be a living biological specimen? Ouch. Wonder if that's why I'm losing hair? 8^) > >I think I may try substituting a bifilar coil for the plasma tube. Do you have >any idea what size tube and how many turns I should start with? >Is your coil an air core? 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 end walls of the spool continue inwards towards the central axis to a 3/4" used hole for placing the spool on a shaft. This creates a hollow cylindrical metal walled chamber in the center of the spool with two 3/4" centered openings at the ends. I don't think this chamber is important but who knows. I would look into that only as a last resort I think. I don't have a good feel for how much of the coil is actually involved in the transmission. The power was applied to the inner leads. With the 10 ohm resistor placed across the outer leads neither the square waves, nor much else, went through the coil much at above 1 MHz. However, there were clear resonance ponts at 8.19 MHz and 16.31 MHz, where the signal went through the coil. At 16.31 the signal looked like it had a very strong beat frequency with itself, or was 100 percent amplitude modulated. Haven't had a chance to examine the TV interference effect either. Don't know if it is limited to square wave input. Do know the input waveform got a bit messed up at around 9 MHz. The only thing that might be relatively unique about the spool of wire I chose is the fact the cotton insluation is thicker than today's plastic insulation, so the separation of the twisted pair is much larger than usual, especially for 20 guage wire. Frank Stenger has pointed out there may be a difference between positive and negative current flow, and also bi-directional vs mono-directional flow, with respect to scalar wave production. For example, there could be quantum effects due to the differing masses of protons vs electrons, due to the differing deBroglie wavelengths. This could be true, but from what little experience and common sense I have had, I suspect the theory behind scalar waves is flawed. I just can't believe you can have it both ways - detectable yet infinitely penetrating. On the other hand, the classic scalar wave generators, the torus, the bifilar coil, and the Caduceus coil, all are imperfect in their field cancellation. They generate real EM radiation. Maybe there is something special about this kind of radiation, like a strong longitudinal component. I do have a 2" dia. 2' long piece of PVC pipe. Have been planning to wrap a bifilar Caduceous coil on it. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 01:20:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA25583; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 01:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 01:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3578FB0D.C330BB64 microtronics.com.au> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 17:47:17 +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: TV Interference? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M3TWi2.0.fF6.cjFUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19566 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > >Maybe, a scalar wave detector needs to be a living biological specimen? > > Ouch. Wonder if that's why I'm losing hair? 8^) Should try some APGL. Early days yet in my personal testing but it (APGL) is turning SOME of the bases of my white arm hairs dark brown. APGL may turn out to be a ANTI-Scalar wave human defense system! > Regards, > > Horace Heffner -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 02:03:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA00798; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:54:14 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Greg Watson Resent-Message-ID: <"VlaKa2.0.OC.sKGUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19567 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I guess I am out of touch with SMOT goings on, burt where are things going with SMOT? Why are people fiddling with rollaways when it was determined about a year ago that a 1/10000 slope can affect the results? Why fiddling around with custom made things when manufactured stuff is availablea nd people canall be working with the same parts? Why is anyone now fooling with rollaways when a manufactured prototype achieved a rollaround "first time out of the box". What's going on here? Re: SMOT Mk4 Rollaround Success At 8:35 PM 9/28/97, Greg Watson wrote: >Hi All, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> GREAT NEWS <<<<<<<<<<<< > > >Just got back and the first manufactured SMOT Mk4 rollaround ramp >worked first time out of the box. Well, it did need a little >polishing. > >The design is milled out of a solid 75 x 50 x 25mm perspex block. > >The magnet arrays just drop into place. > >The rolling surfaces need to be hand finished at this stage. > >I have today ordered 50 units. > >Will update by status page with the details. > >Dropped off a roll of film at the local store. Real photos soon. > >Now to the 1,200 emails. > >-- >Best Regards, > Greg Watson Http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson 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 Sat Jun 6 02:34:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA04262; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:31:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:31:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35790C57.1B7A7693 microtronics.com.au> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 19:01:03 +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: Greg Watson References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5EBl4.0.N21.bnGUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19568 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > I guess I am out of touch with SMOT goings on, burt where are things going > with SMOT? Why are people fiddling with rollaways when it was determined > about a year ago that a 1/10000 slope can affect the results? Why fiddling > around with custom made things when manufactured stuff is availablea nd > people canall be working with the same parts? Why is anyone now fooling > with rollaways when a manufactured prototype achieved a rollaround "first > time out of the box". What's going on here? HI Horace, Guess you missed ALL the DMEC mess. Wish I had! I did a deal with some money people to make something happen. Thought we could work with each other. Didn't work out that way. The deal is still keeping my solicitor's kids in private school. I hope the Mk5 will allow Hal, Barry & others to properly investigate the effect. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 02:54:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA07982; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:53:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:53:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <007501bd9130$21aebf40$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Scalar waves -Peter & Hank Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 03:47:26 -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: <"5KWVT2.0.ey1.z5HUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19569 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: Friday, June 05, 1998 9:29 PM Subject: Re: Scalar waves -Peter & Hank Frank Stenger wrote: > >I don't think I'm following your point, Peter - translation or >cancellation - and how would you generate scalar fields/waves? > >And Hank, in a fluorescent tube, isn't it probable that the electron >current is greater than the positive ion current? I still like simple >matter in motion - the current from both + and - carriers is exactly >the same and all external magnetic fields exactly cancel. There is no >electric field because moving matter is a "ghost" superconductor and >can carry huge currents with zero potential gradient - they just happen >to sum to zero - exactly for neutral matter. But, I agree, Hank - how >do you detect such things? Holy Mackerel Frank, a Red Herring? :-) Regards, Fred the fish monger.(no springs honest weight). > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 04:28:31 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA15073; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 04:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 04:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35792741.7FE6 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:25:53 -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: Scalar waves -Peter & Hank References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uhTD7.0.Rh3.TUIUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19570 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > > Oppositly charged particles moving opposite directions reinforce, not cancel. > Of course, Horace! - I need to stop those late-night comments. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 05:11:03 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA08330; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 05:07:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 05:07:04 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 05:06:47 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"G1Azn3.0.222.e3JUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19571 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: While playing with dry ice during tonight's Weird Science meeting, I stumbled across a VERY strange electrostatic effect. If several chips of dry ice are placed in a dark-bottomed pan with 1cm of hot water, a layer of moving white mist covers the water. This is fascinating to watch, especially if several chips are scattered around the pan. Complicated radial gas flows! They act like comets or like solar wind bow-shocks between neighboring stars. This isn't the interesting part though. On a whim I grabbed a 10KV high voltage DC supply, clamped a needle on the negative lead, and was directing ion wind at the mist and blowing it around. Here's the weird part. The thick high-voltage wire swung across the pan for a moment, and in the mist appeared a collection of parallel lines, as if the wire had been spewing a number of narrow "rays" which swept across the mist and cut furrows in it. I found that I could wiggle the wire around and draw an array of identical looping patterns as the tips of some sort of invisible "rays" made identical motions across the mist layer. I pulled the wire back several inches, and still the furrows would appear. These are Yost's "ion threads", I finally found an easy way to create and observe them! Brief experimentation showed that the entire wire was sending out these "rays" in all directions, maybe one or two of them per cm of wire. They reach out about 10cm to 15cm and terminate suddenly, and seem to be less than 1mm across. If my wire was a high-pressure hydralic hose, then any tiny oil leaks would behave much as do these "rays". This was the negative lead, the positive lead was grounded to the pan. The wire is fairly old test-probe wire, not designed for 10KV and has a bit of leakage. No obvious cracks though. Some of the "air-stream rays" appeared to originate at the tips of tiny pieces of lint which were clinging to the wire. The "rays" have extremely high speed. If I sweep the wire back and forth as fast as I can by hand, the "furrows" in the mist keep up with my motions. The streams must be moving outwards at least at 10mph. The big mystery: if these "rays" are simply charged wind, why do they form such narrow streams? Charged wind should self-repel and fan out! Charles Yost in Electric Spacecraft Journal observed something similar a few years ago. His "rays" radiated from polished sphere electrodes connected to a Wimshurst machine. He discovered them while working with a Schelieren photography setup and looking for distortions of air pressure caused by e-fields. UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE I found a better way to do this: electrify the dry-ice water pan, then use grounded objects. BTW, I'm using an old neg-ion generator as the power supply. It puts out 10uA maximum, and maybe 10KV to 15KV. Very safe. If you want to duplicate these phenomena, an electrostatic generator is best, don't electrocute yourself with a DC high voltage power supply! Results: - polarity doesn't seem to matter. Both + and - create the "rays." - they seem to move from small object to plate, regardless of polarity. They bore holes into the layer of mist above the water, creating little toroid-flows where they impact the surface. No mist is drawn upwards along the "ray" - my hands emit these "rays" when held near the charged plate! Only certain spots on my hands do this, only some fingertips do it, knuckle-hairs do, as do apparently flat areas of skin. Tiny fibers there? Or a large sweatgland pore? I can wipe the "ray emitters" away. Rubbing my hands on clothing or rug seems to restore the "emitters" but in new spots. - the small, weaker "rays" seem to be much narrower than 1mm. How can they move so fast! - if I tap on the HV wire, the furrow in the mist jerks after a short delay, maybe .05sec for 13cm, that's five MPH (can't visualize KMH) - If I interrupt the path of a "ray" by using a plastic pen, it is deflected by the pen depending on pen polarity. The plastic is damp, and I tried touching the tray and switching polarity, and found attraction or repulsion. When repelling, the ray is pushed farther and farther, then skips to the other side. If I "push" it with the pen tip, it swerves very fast around the tip. Like pushing an electron beam with a charged object! At 1-ATM! Cool! - rays seem to curve towards the charged plate. If I rotate my hand, the tracing of furrows in the mist are showing that the rays don't extend straight out from my skin. Perhaps they follow the lines of the electric field. (So if they could be made visible, they would be like electrostatic iron filings?) - I've seen pairs of "rays" from a fingernail top, which extend about 10cm and apparantly follow the field lines, all the while maintaining a distance from each other of about 1cm! Oops, just found a pair which are 15cm long, with under 1cm spacing. - The "fingernail pair" above, when I placed my finger so the emitter- points faced upwards, still curved around 180deg and impacted the mist layer. But now the separation between them grew to 4cm. Though invisible, I can almost "see" them curving and separating while spewing upwards from my fingernail, like two streams from an invisible fountain. - some "rays" are up to 40cm long! Very strange to wiggle the HV cable more than a foot away from the mist pool, yet see the trace of a ray-tip in the mist. The longer ones seem to fan out towards their far end, to maybe 1cm diameter. - each stream seems to fall apart at a particular distance. They are weaker near their tips, then they simply end. - I can't get a view of the streams by forcing them to flow across the mist. They refuse. They always curve down to the plate and hit it roughly at right angles. - I can see a tiny time-delay when I wiggle a long fingertip-ray, so the speed of the effect might be around 10mph or so, not instantaneous - A sewing needle does not generate an ion-ray. I suspect that their cause is tiny and very very sharp objects (or surface defects.) Perhaps the defects are atomically sharp, and this is an example of "field emission", particle emission which does not require a hot filament. - I connected a microamp meter in series with the plate. It indicated zero. When I let the other HV wire create one furrow in the mist, the meter indicated zero UA. When I brought the cable close, so there were maybe 50 to 70 furrows being drawn, the meter indicated 0.5uA. These ion-streams, if that's what they are, are delivering an electric current in the range of 10 nanoamperes or less. - with a good strong fingertip-ray I can write my first name quickly enough in the mist that the first letter hasn't faded before I complete it. :) Feels strange to be using an "invisible pencil" which extends about 2" off the end of my thumb! WHY do these stay together as narrow streams? If they were strongly charged, then they should spray outwards like a fan. Are they rows of Ken Shoulders' "EV" particles? I need to let them hit a high-impedance op amp terminal, then look at the waveform and perhaps listen to it on audio, see if it's pure DC or noisy. They move VERY fast. Anything this narrow should make instant turbulence. Something is binding them together so the alike-charges don't spread. Something is affecting their boundary layer and preventing immediate turbulent disruption. What the heck could these be used for? Graffitti launcher, ink-jet style? A giant one could do weird things to the airflow around a wing, or could be a silent electrostatic jet engine. Can you say "antigravity squadron?" Next: make a smoke-box and see if I can see the "jets" directly. Uh oh. 4AM... Too sleepy... central nervous system shutting down ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Sat Jun 6 05:33:10 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA24553; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 05:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 05:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: jack pop.centuryinter.net Message-ID: <3578DE88.561E72AD mail.pc.centuryinter.net> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 06:15:36 +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: would like Mk 4 References: <35790C57.1B7A7693@microtronics.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="y" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="y" Resent-Message-ID: <"Uu02z2.0.Y_5.bQJUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19572 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re: SMOT Mk4 Rollaround Success At 8:35 PM 9/28/97, Greg Watson wrote: Hi All, Just got back and the first manufactured SMOT Mk4 rollaround ramp worked first time out of the box. Well, it did need a little polishing. ... Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 19:01:03 +0930 From: Greg Watson HI Horace, Guess you missed ALL the DMEC mess. Wish I had! I did a deal with some money people to make something happen. Thought we could work with each other. Didn't work out that way. The deal is still keeping my solicitor's kids in private school. I hope the Mk5 will allow Hal, Barry & others to properly investigate the effect. Hi Greg, Regarding the kit you send me, please make it the SMOT Mk4 Rollaround kit. Thanks, Jack Smith From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 08:19:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17311; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:17:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:17:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: "R. Wormus" To: Horace Heffner Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:14:02 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: TV Interference? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"Z9ssQ1.0.PE4.6sLUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19573 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 06-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >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 end walls of the spool continue inwards towards the >central axis to a 3/4" used hole for placing the spool on a shaft. This >creates a hollow cylindrical metal walled chamber in the center of the >spool with two 3/4" centered openings at the ends. I don't think this >chamber is important but who knows. I would look into that only as a last >resort I think. I am switching a 27Mhz CW with sq waves. I think that the twisted pair would work as a tranmission line and so I need to calculate the total length to be a multiple of a 1/4 wavelength of the CW freq. >I don't have a good feel for how much of the coil is actually involved in >the transmission. The power was applied to the inner leads. With the 10 >ohm resistor placed across the outer leads neither the square waves, nor >much else, went through the coil much at above 1 MHz. However, there were >clear resonance ponts at 8.19 MHz and 16.31 MHz, where the signal went >through the coil. At 16.31 the signal looked like it had a very strong >beat frequency with itself, or was 100 percent amplitude modulated. How did you monitor (detect) the resonance points? >Haven't had a chance to examine the TV interference effect either. Don't >know if it is limited to square wave input. Do know the input waveform got >a bit messed up at around 9 MHz. I suspect that the sq waves are necessary due to their harmonic content. >The only thing that might be relatively unique about the spool of wire I >chose is the fact the cotton insluation is thicker than today's plastic >insulation, so the separation of the twisted pair is much larger than >usual, especially for 20 guage wire. I think this is probably important because usually in a coiled Transmission Line it is necessary to keep the coils seperated a bit. >Frank Stenger has pointed out there may be a difference between positive >and negative current flow, and also bi-directional vs mono-directional >flow, with respect to scalar wave production. For example, there could be >quantum effects due to the differing masses of protons vs electrons, due to >the differing deBroglie wavelengths. All of EM theory is developed and based upon the mass and charge of the electron. What if the charge carrier is an ion with many time the mass of the electron? I think this may be what is allowing the biological samples to be affected at wave lengths that are very long when compared to the size of the specimans. I am amazed that 40 watts of Ar plasma acan have such a dramatic biological effect. It seems very benign looking at it, just a soft purple light that can apparently trigger apoptosis in cells. Very interesting. >I suspect the theory behind >scalar waves is flawed. I just can't believe you can have it both ways - >detectable yet infinitely penetrating. On the other hand, the classic >scalar wave generators, the torus, the bifilar coil, and the Caduceus coil, >all are imperfect in their field cancellation. They generate real EM >radiation. Maybe there is something special about this kind of radiation, >like a strong longitudinal component. Maybe, I don't even pretend to understand it and I certainly can't explain my observations with my level of EM understanding. >I do have a 2" dia. 2' long piece of PVC pipe. Have been planning to wrap >a bifilar Caduceous coil on it. Let us know what you see when you do. Thanks, ___Ron. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 09:02:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA24292; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 07:58:49 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"_GDG-2.0.Tx5.CUMUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19574 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A A wild-eyed hypothesis: the "rays" are actually molecular threads of water. (Uh oh! Polywater again?!) They are put togther due to the charge polarization of water. The souce on the skin is water or charge polarized molecules which will start the chain. When the chain gets long enough it breaks, but quickly reforms. The chains can carry and transmit charge, so they line up with the electrostatic field. Would be interesting to see of the "chains" can be cut with metal sissors, or better, a small rotating metal blade. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 09:53:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02881; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:51:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:51:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980606114526.00852540 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 11:45:26 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Rdy_71.0.ti.IENUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19575 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Very interesting, Bill. I'd like to know if the "rays" can be blown around with moving air....e.g. a fan...or your breath. 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 Jun 6 10:45:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11974; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:41:24 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: TV Interference? Resent-Message-ID: <"lW2273.0.zw2.R-NUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19576 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 9:14 AM 6/6/98, R. Wormus wrote: [snip] >I am switching a 27Mhz CW with sq waves. I think that the twisted pair would >work as a tranmission line and so I need to calculate the total length to be a >multiple of a 1/4 wavelength of the CW freq. At 27 MHz your wavelength is 11.1 meters. A 1/4 wavelength is 2.7759 m. Looking at my lab book, it appears I estimated the number of turns by counting 48 on the outside layer, and estimated 16 layers in depth from the 4" thickness going from 2" dia to 6" dia, or 768 turns total. The average radius is 4", so there would be 2*Pi*4*768/12 = 1608 feet, or 490 m. If that is 1/4 wavelength the frequency is 153 KHz. Could be off 10 percent. If this turns out to be important, I can unravel the spool to measure it, but I'll never get it back together the same. 8^) Don't have anything to help with wire wrapping. It's best I get on with making a coil more easily replicated. Since I have a null experiment now, a bifilar caduceus coil seems like the wy to go, as it can then be used in either mode. [snip] > >How did you monitor (detect) the resonance points? I put the 10 ohm current sense resistor across the leads on the side opposite the signal generator. Was going to put the oscilloscope probe ground on the ground wire side and probe on the other side of the resistor, but then realized the I had not isolated the coil from the ground lead from the signal generator, so left the ground wire off. The voltage signal alone was used to determine resonance. The signal nearly disappeared when not resonant, at the scope gain used. A 1 GHz sample rate (TEK TDS220) digital scope was used, so a good picture of the output waveform was seen. When the resonance frequencies were determined, the other scope channel was hooked to a NTE455 MOSFET (UHF RF) amplifier circuit I thought might be used with a suitable antenna as a receiver. The power to the MOSFET was off. Nevertheless, the second probe obtained a nice picture of the input waveform to the coil at a distance of about 4 feet. The input side (as detected remotely, i.e the broadcast signal) remained fairly constant except at the resonance points, where it increased somewhat, while the output side of the coil (direct connect at the resistor) remained very low except at the resonanace points. [snip] >All of EM theory is developed and based upon the mass and charge of the >electron. What if the charge carrier is an ion with many time the mass of the >electron? I think this may be what is allowing the biological samples to be >affected at wave lengths that are very long when compared to the size of >the specimans. I am amazed that 40 watts of Ar plasma acan have such a >dramatic biological effect. It seems very benign looking at it, just a soft >purple light that can apparently trigger apoptosis in cells. Very interesting. [snip] I thought the paramecia were in steel box - were they somehow still exposed to the light? I take it you are just referring to the outward appearance of the light, not implying the effective agent *is* the purple light? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 10:46:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA12002; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:41:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: TV Interference? Resent-Message-ID: <"d2ysk3.0.Ox2.W-NUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19577 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 1:59 PM 6/5/98, R. Wormus wrote: >I have a RF system that fires a 1"x 24" argon plasma tube ( 7 torr). If I >modulate the plasma with a sq wave in the audio range I completely wipeout >chanels 2 and 9. Is this a commercial tube? Is it sealed? > >I have been experimenting with micro-organisms (I am using protazoans) exposed >to the sq wave modulated RF at about 40 watts power. That's a lot of broadcast power! Is it in a shielded room or metal building or something? What is the power supply used? Is it commercial? What is the percent modulation (100%)? What is the voltage? Could be generating x-rays. >Different organisms are >affected at different unique sq- wave frequencies. Unmodulated RF CW has no >effect. I have also been able to affect (kill a large % of sample) while the >sample was stored in an all metal box several meters from the plasma tube. Were the samples exposed to any light? How long does the effect take? >This was an accidental discovery when I mistakenly killed my whole batch of >specimens. > >Maybe, a scalar wave detector needs to be a living biological specimen? > >I think I may try substituting a bifilar coil for the plasma tube. Do you have >any idea what size tube and how many turns I should start with? >Is your coil an air core? If you are killing specimens in a steel box protected from RF, possibly you should stick with the bulb? Why move so far away from the effect? If Marinov got anything right, then it appears to me the longitudinal component generated by a transmitter is proportional to the *velocity* of the generating charge. The same charge motion at higher velocity has a bigger effect as v/c. The active ingredient may still be the electron, the difference in effect being caused by the electron velocity. It seems more logical to (1) Repeat the experiment a number of times to be sure the effect is real. (2) Quantify the results - percent killed, exposure time, modulation frequency, modulation percent, etc. (3) Provide a control group at a much larger distance. (4) Check for ionizing radiation from the tube, especially x-rays. Could use a dosimeter. (5) Try other organisms. (6) Improve the RF shielding and try again. Start off with lots of layers of aluminum foil. Maybe consider shielding the light, as a matter of safety? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 10:59:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA27226; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:56:06 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 10:56:06 -0700 Message-ID: <357982C5.6C40 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:56:21 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ecfMJ1.0.Ff6.rAOUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19578 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > > While playing with dry ice during tonight's Weird Science meeting, I > stumbled across a VERY strange electrostatic effect. Yes, very interesting, Bill. I wonder if the filaments are related to the "stepped-leader" that preceeds lightning return strokes? Uman recounts: "It is thought by most investigators that the stepped- leader current flows down a narrow conducting core at the center of the observed leader, and that the large luminous diameter is due to a corona sheath surrounding the core." (Luminous diameters measured at 1 to 10 meters) Average velocity of propagation of a stepped-leader is about 1.5 X 10^5 meters/sec. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 11:15:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA17963; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:13:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:13:32 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: Horace Heffner Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 12:14:56 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: TV Interference? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"p_1BQ3.0.VO4.8ROUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19579 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 06-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: BIG SNIP Horace thanks for the input I will build a coil and see what happens. >I thought the paramecia were in steel box - were they somehow still exposed >to the light? I take it you are just referring to the outward appearance >of the light, not implying the effective agent *is* the purple light? They (euglena actually) were in a steel tool box in that case, but typically I have the specimens on a microscope slide about two meters from the tube. The effect seems to go away or be reduced in the near field of the tube. The actual light is not important as I have easily gotten the effect while keeping slide sheilded with cardboard. I have some other observations that are odd but I want to replicate before I make any further comments. Thanks, __Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 11:31:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA20518; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:28:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:28:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: Horace Heffner Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 12:29:47 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: TV Interference? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"mbK4j3.0.U05.-eOUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19580 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 06-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 1:59 PM 6/5/98, R. Wormus wrote: >>I have a RF system that fires a 1"x 24" argon plasma tube ( 7 torr). If I >>modulate the plasma with a sq wave in the audio range I completely wipeout >>chanels 2 and 9. >Is this a commercial tube? I hade it made by a neon light guy. >Is it sealed? yes >> >>I have been experimenting with micro-organisms (I am using protazoans) >exposed >>to the sq wave modulated RF at about 40 watts power. >That's a lot of broadcast power! Is it in a shielded room or metal >building or something? I have the tube in a faraday cage(?) but the plasma makes a poor transmitter. I am stopping the RF but not the higher frequencie harmonics. >What is the power supply used? Is it commercial? I am using a 30 amp 15 volt DC supply. >What is the percent modulation (100%)? Actually I am switching the CW with a sq wave as I found that sq waves don't modulate very well. >What is the voltage? Could be generating x-rays. Tube voltage is between 200 and 300 Pt0P depending on freq power level etc. I had system checked for X-rays and none were found. >>Different organisms are >>affected at different unique sq- wave frequencies. Unmodulated RF CW has no >>effect. I have also been able to affect (kill a large % of sample) while the >>sample was stored in an all metal box several meters from the plasma tube. >Were the samples exposed to any light? Not in this case. >How long does the effect take? 5 to 15 minutes. I have fiund a difference between different batcheds of specimens some seem to be hardier than others. >>This was an accidental discovery when I mistakenly killed my whole batch of >>specimens. >> >>Maybe, a scalar wave detector needs to be a living biological specimen? >> >>I think I may try substituting a bifilar coil for the plasma tube. Do you >have >>any idea what size tube and how many turns I should start with? >>Is your coil an air core? >If you are killing specimens in a steel box protected from RF, possibly you >should stick with the bulb? Why move so far away from the effect? If >Marinov got anything right, then it appears to me the longitudinal >component generated by a transmitter is proportional to the *velocity* of >the generating charge. The same charge motion at higher velocity has a >bigger effect as v/c. The active ingredient may still be the electron, the >difference in effect being caused by the electron velocity. >It seems more logical to >(1) Repeat the experiment a number of times to be sure the effect is real. I've done this. I've been messing wiyh tis over a year now. >(2) Quantify the results - percent killed, exposure time, modulation >frequency, modulation percent, etc. >(3) Provide a control group at a much larger distance. I want to do this and also check orientation with Earths magnetic field to see if cycletron resonance has any thing to do wiyh the effect. >(4) Check for ionizing radiation from the tube, especially x-rays. Could >use a dosimeter. Done >(5) Try other organisms. I'll do this this summer, I borrow the microscope from the local high school. >(6) Improve the RF shielding and try again. Start off with lots of layers >of aluminum foil. Maybe consider shielding the light, as a matter of >safety? It is a leaded glass tube so I don't think UV is a factor. It seems that the way that I fire the tube makes a difference but there are so many variables that it is hard to tell. ___Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 11:53:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA32625; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:49:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:49:01 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:48:46 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: vortex-L fixed! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"neDNb.0.hz7.TyOUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19581 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just received an announcement that email at eskimo.com is OK again. Apparantly there were lots of complaints. Turned out that some machine here had bad memory, and was flaking out and bouncing things. Maybe even making messages evaporate completely. Anyone who suspects they've missed any good messages should take a look at the current archive: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird2/vtx Since the darn thing has grown to 500K already, I've made a .zip for those who need it: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird2/vtx.zip (only 150K) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Sat Jun 6 14:06:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA14238; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:59:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: hheffner corecom.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:57:42 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Caduceus coil questions, thoughts, ERRORS Resent-Message-ID: <"v6oDJ3.0.KU3.QsQUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19582 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:06 PM 6/4/98, ehammond pacbell.net wrote: >Try putting ferrite magnets in center of coil. A magnetic core for the bifilar coil was made by taping together 38 round ceramic or ferrite magnets. Not certain what they are made of, but it is a hard brittle black ferrite looking type material, typical of refrigerator magnets. The magnet dimensions: 11/16" dia., 1/5" thick. This made a 11/16" dia., 7 5/8" long core that fit nicely into the 3/4" holes. When calibrated so the beep sound matched the station volume, actually slightly exceeded the station volume, a negative result was still obtained. All sound completely disappeared when the lid was placed on the cookie tin, covering the radio. There might have been some changes in signal strength based on coil orientation, but the changes were subtle, and not worth pursuing due to the fact the waves did not penetrate the shielding at all. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 14:18:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16671; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:16:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 13:15:21 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: TV Interference? Resent-Message-ID: <"6n-Se2.0.O44.y6RUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19583 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:29 PM 6/6/98, R. Wormus wrote: >On 06-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] > >>What is the power supply used? Is it commercial? >I am using a 30 amp 15 volt DC supply. Oh - I mean the power supply that feeds the tube, that puts out the 40 W, 27 MHz, 200 and 300 V pk-pk signal. Is it a commercial flourescent light driver? I guess not if it requires 30 V input. What is it? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 14:42:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA10657; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:37:07 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:37:07 -0700 X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0966 xch-cpc-02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 11:35:52 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: RE: Scalar waves Resent-Message-ID: <"IY_0L3.0.Lc2.2QRUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19584 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hank - > Why not use battery operated A/D converters > for your instruments, fiber optically coupled > to the outside world, [...] Don't have time for that much tinkering, but thanks anyway! I'll just stick the shielded caps, DMM, and thermometer in a pan floating in a cooler full of cool water when I get time for it. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 16:23:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05521; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 16:18:45 -0700 (PDT) From: "R. Wormus" Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com To: Horace Heffner Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 17:20:18 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [040] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: LOCK+LOAD Subject: Re: TV Interference? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"PYg0Q.0.BM1.JvSUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19585 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 06-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >At 12:29 PM 6/6/98, R. Wormus wrote: >>On 06-Jun-98, Horace Heffner wrote: >[snip] >> >>>What is the power supply used? Is it commercial? >>I am using a 30 amp 15 volt DC supply. >Oh - I mean the power supply that feeds the tube, that puts out the 40 W, >27 MHz, 200 and 300 V pk-pk signal. Is it a commercial flourescent light >driver? I guess not if it requires 30 V input. What is it? Oh, Its bits and pieces of a CB radio run through a linear amp and a matching network. __Ron From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 6 21:20:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA25570; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:18:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 21:18:46 -0700 (PDT) From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199806070416.XAA08012 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: from William Beaty at "Jun 6, 98 05:06:47 am" To: billb eskimo.com Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 23:16:37 -0500 (CDT) Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com 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: <"3LwjW1.0.SF6.aIXUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19586 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > The big mystery: if these "rays" are simply charged wind, why do they > form such narrow streams? Charged wind should self-repel and fan out! > > WHY do these stay together as narrow streams? If they were strongly > charged, then they should spray outwards like a fan. I don't even know why those spherical "neon" globes seem to produce narrow channels from the central electrode to the glass globe. -- - 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 Sun Jun 7 06:11:35 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA11147; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 06:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 06:08:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00df01bd9213$fe7a3e20$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Colliding Particles and Pair Production Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 06:58:01 -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: <"dhmZa3.0.2k2.Y3fUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19587 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Given that "The Odd Man Out" Positive Quark in a Proton or Deuteron is an oscillating EM wave with a frequency f = c/2(pi)R where c is the velocity of light and R = kq^2/E,(1.04E25 Hz) and the electron frequency is 1.7E22 Hz, with the electron approaching the Proton or Deuteron at some velocity v at the favorable "resonance point" a Neutrino-Antineutrino pair each with an energy of 0.05 ev or a frequency of 1.66E15 Hertz is created. The "beat or heterodyne frequency" should be a sum or difference of the two. But, since the Doppler Blue Shift of the approaching electron (assuming the heavy particles are at rest)could be enough to increase the electron's frequency enough to get the beat (2*1.66E15 Hz)for the pair production and possibly account for the 90-270 degree phase shift - y = cos x and y = cos x with respect to the phase of the electron - y = sin x and the Quark phase, y = sin x. Got your pencils handy? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 08:56:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03204; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:54:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:47:16 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: air-thread Complexity-physics In-Reply-To: <199806070416.XAA08012 mirage.skypoint.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"7cxE61.0.zn.sUhUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19588 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, John Logajan wrote: > I don't even know why those spherical "neon" globes seem to produce > narrow channels from the central electrode to the glass globe. One way to ignore the issue is to lable it "plasma instability". :) Once classified, we "understand" it, and learning can stop. Actually, I think these plasma-globe streamers are akin to rivers: why does water move across the land in narrow channels, rather than inch-deep flows which are 10 miles wide? Because flow causes erosion, faster flow causes deeper erosion, and therefor a wide, shallow flow is unstable and tends to collapse into a river geometry. Rivers are built from nonlinearity where velocity of flow is affecting the resistance to flow. >From what I understand, plasma streamers are similar for very similar reasons. A big uniform plasma is an unstable shape, because higher electric currents bash atoms harder, releasing more electrons and positive ions, which lowers resistance. Any high-current, low-resistance spot will distort the voltage field, which "attracts" more current to the high-current spots, which bashes more atoms and lowers the resistance further, and soon the fuzzy discharge has collapsed into the form of dendritic rivers. So you could be saying that perhaps something about the "air thread" is excessively lowering the resistance of the air in that place, and then the voltage field and ohm's law will force the high current to take as narrow a path as possible? That could be it! I believe that a nonlinear relation between resistance and current is required. For example, electron clouds in a vacuum tube don't do this, do they? The higher- current paths can't just be higher in charge density, they also have to lower the resistance somehow. Otherwise, current in any resistor would collapse into a thread-shape. But current in a resistor is a motion of pre-existing charges, like tilting a pan full of marbles. If the air-thread is INJECTING charges into the insulating medium, then any spot which contains charges will also contain "charge mobility" not present in the rest of that medium. "Charge mobility" is another word for conductivity. But the charges self-repel, as well as acting as a resistor. Intuitivly I would say these linear processes cancel each other. Sheets of water cannot form rivers if erosion is not present, since humping-up of the sheet is acting to push water away from the hill of water. There has to be a nonlinear process present which is making the emitted cloud of charges collapse into the form of a dendrite. If the charges in the air-thread are partly neutral, then as with the plasma globe we can have self-assembling "wires", narrow conductive paths. However, a plasma globe is AC, and recombination of + and - particles in the plasma thread is offset by new charge pairs being created by electrons colliding with atoms. The "air thread" phenomenon is DC as far as I know. (I don't know if my power supply has any 60hz spikes, it might, but I don't hear any 60hz buzz at all.) Since it's DC, then opposite ions should be swept in opposite directions. If the air-thread is a combination of + and -, and if the emitter is the negative HV terminal, then while negative charge is flying outwards along the "thread", positive charge must be flying inwards. Impossible, for there would have to be a source of positive particles IN THE THREAD ITSELF. What if there is? Perhaps the air-thread tends to assemble itself as a coaxial tube of separated + and -. If so, then the voltage fields between the areas of charge would be enormous, and could be high enough to cause corona discharge in any neutral air which was entrained into the moving stream. On the other hand, the air-thread could simply be acting as a highly charged object, and the e-fields at its "surface" could be breaking down the air there. Either way, if there is electrical breakdown of air going on, then there is nitrogen and oxygen line spectra present, and the air-threads should dimly glow. I haven't tried observing them in total darkness. Maybe it's time to do a long-exposure photograph (if I can find a dark enough place!) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 7 09:10:45 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA05600; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:06:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:06:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <00fd01bd922c$ce6e66c0$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Pump Surge Problem Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:55:42 -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: <"NmlJg3.0.ON1.WghUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19589 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The 100 ft of 1/4" polyethylene tubing in series with the needle valve has been working like a champ on the 40-60 psi pump cycle for over four days. I pressurized my 80+ gallon bladder tank to 20 psi and I can draw about 30 gallons of water before the pump cycles. However, if I have any problems I'm going to run the Scott Little "hydraulic delay line" (beneath the frost line)from the pressure switch to the pressure tank or a saddle clamp-valve fitting on a water pipe. Now, why didn't I think of that? :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 09:36:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA10896; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:34:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 09:34:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Chuck Davis To: William Beaty Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 09:31:54 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: air-thread Complexity-physics MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"kOnLJ2.0.9g2.64iUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19590 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A On 07-Jun-98, William Beaty wrote: [...] >a path as possible? That could be it! I believe that a nonlinear >relation between resistance and current is required. [...] Bill, some time ago, I think I remember seeing a V-I conductivity curve for plasmas that looked something akin to a tunnel diode curve and was wondering if a plasma was regenerative on that negative R part of that curve, as is the tunnel diode??? Or, if it is even pertinant to this discussion :) -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 14:31:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23169; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 14:23:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980607145809.007cc810 post.queensu.ca> X-Sender: simonb post.queensu.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 14:58:09 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Bart Simon Subject: help with references Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9JaE_1.0.wf5.cJmUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19591 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi, I wonder if any of you can help me (maybe Jed, Mitch or Peter). I am almost at page proofs for my paper on cold fusion (the one from way back when) and the editor of the journal its being published in (Social Studies of Science) wants some more specific info on the references. Does anybody have a fuller reference for Ed Storm's "A critical review of the 'cold fusion' effect' - J. Sci. Exp. Vol. 10 (1996)? -- I need the page numbers because I only have a copy of his draft manuscript and the info isn't in Dieter Britz's bib or my oldish copy of Hal Fox's bib. And I can't find a library near me that carries that journal. Also, does anyone know if Hansen and Melich ever published their work on the Harwell data anyplace other than the transactions of ICCF-4? 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 Sun Jun 7 16:59:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29762; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 16:49:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 16:49:41 -0700 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:47:36 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Greg Watson In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"axgPc.0.tG7.LSoUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19592 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > I guess I am out of touch with SMOT goings on, burt where are things going > with SMOT? Why are people fiddling with rollaways when it was determined > about a year ago that a 1/10000 slope can affect the results? Why fiddling > around with custom made things when manufactured stuff is availablea nd > people canall be working with the same parts? Why is anyone now fooling > with rollaways when a manufactured prototype achieved a rollaround "first > time out of the box". What's going on here? Hi Horace, for myself, I find I like playing with SMOT's. It gives me something to do with my 4 year-old daughter and gives her a bit of exposure to Science. We both think they're fun. I no longer see roll-aways. As I said in my first message, my system is real hack. I use the same J-car magnets as Greg and my ball is exactly 12.5 mm, my field shaping plates are exactly the same as Greg's too. Unfortuantely my track does not have a sharp almost 90 degree turn at the top. It is much more rounded. I find I have to move the magnets much further forward to get a drop off the end. I think the reason I saw an effect first time was because my entrence level was slightly higher than the exit, even though the exit line was level. The ball would not roll in either direction un-assisted. I'll keep playing with the system but it is looking much more like the SMOT of old with the ball still trapped against the railings. I guess the demonstration SMOTs should reach people within the next week. We'll know the score pretty quickly after that. Cheers Martin From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 17:42:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA02234; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 17:38:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 17:38:49 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 16:39:11 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Greg Watson Resent-Message-ID: <"oBhAh1.0.qY.OApUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19593 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:47 AM 6/8/98, Martin Sevior wrote: >We'll know >the score pretty quickly after that. I doubt we'll know the score unless the loop is closed, unless there is a rollaround widely replicated. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 18:11:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA06459; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:07:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:07:32 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:07:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"kJlBi.0.la1.KbpUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19594 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > A wild-eyed hypothesis: the "rays" are actually molecular threads of water. > (Uh oh! Polywater again?!) They are put togther due to the charge > polarization of water. The souce on the skin is water or charge polarized > molecules which will start the chain. When the chain gets long enough it > breaks, but quickly reforms. The chains can carry and transmit charge, so > they line up with the electrostatic field. > > Would be interesting to see of the "chains" can be cut with metal sissors, > or better, a small rotating metal blade. Hard to do, since everything distorts the surrounding e-field and causes the thread to move off the mist. However, I can wave my hand back and forth through a very long thread, or cover and touch the finger which is generating it and it immediately restores itself when my hand has passed. It acts more like an invisible, thin, fast-moving stream of water than like a solid thread. Also, the threads turn on and off with voltage difference. An approaching hand can cause a thread to vanish without moving it off the mist. I suspect that the voltage gradient at the tip of the sharp points must exceed a threshold before it starts spitting ions and forming an air-thread. Charles Yost photographed tiny glows at the spots which emitted the air-threads, and I agree that they are probably created by the tuft of plasma on the tip of a tiny sharp point. I managed to create an air thread about 25in long extending from the edge of a fingernail. When I moved my hand suddenly, the dot in the mist did not move immediately. I could see about a 1/8sec delay. When I inspected the edge of my thumb, I found a tiny piece of lint trapped in a roughness there. It was almost invisibly thin, far thinner than hair. When I held my hand a few inches away from the mist, this fiber did not just cause a dot to form, instead it caused a massive roiling disruption of the mist, about 10cm diameter, while other threads were causing dots about 1/2cm across. When my hand was about a foot away, this disruption shrunk to a large dot. It faded away when I increased separation to more than two feet. I finally saw an air-thread directly. I had noticed several lint fibers standing on end in the water. By waving my fist over the water, I could move one of these lint fibers over into the mist from a dry ice chip. Sure enough, there was an air thread extending upward from the fiber, and it entrained a narrow needle-like stream of white mist which extended to my hand 1" away. Hard to see it, and the diameter was half a mm or less. The lint immediately vanished (probably lept up to my hand) and I couldn't find another. These things are very easy to reproduce, and if you don't want to track down some dry ice, you can use a modified humidifier (the ultrasonic "cool mist" type.) Lacking a dark pan, I'm using a cookie sheet with a piece of black paper and about a cm of water, with the whole thing lifted up on plastic cups. Charge the metal sheet either + or -, flood it with a thin mist layer, then wave your hand around a few inches above the surface. Numerous dark trails of disruption will follow your hand. If these air-threads only came from negative terminals, I would be absolutely convinced that they are Shoulders' EVs. They are created by sharp points in gas. They are unlike any well known phenomenon in electrostatics. Sharper points work better, and my urge is to try to find some sort of atomically sharp point (such as a needle edge wetted with mercury, as Shoulders described.) Or shoot them through a coil and see if RF is created. But how can POSITIVE terminals create them? Can EV particles have a net positive charge? ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 7 18:31:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA03132; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:14:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:14:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:13:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Ostrowski To: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Test , ignore Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"VLsml.0.lm.4ipUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19595 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: This is a test of my new email header . I just want to see what it looks like. If you've gone to the trouble of reading this even though it says "ignore", then Hi there! :-) Jim O. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 18:42:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA07001; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:33:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 18:33:19 -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: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:20:00 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Greg Watson Resent-Message-ID: <"0a2vF3.0.3j1.MzpUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19596 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace - > I doubt we'll know the score unless [...] I think most of us already know the score. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 19:33:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17384; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 19:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 19:26:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01a601bd9284$28a544e0$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Colliding Particles and Pair Production Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 20:20:59 -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: <"FJx4v1.0.VF4.glqUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19597 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex If one assumes that an electron can "fall" into and rebound out of a Proton or Deuteron, then it can gain energy and change radius/frequency in accordance with: R = kq^2/E or f = c*E/2(pi)*kq^2 during the close approach. Since the potential V = kq/R and the relativistic "gamma" = [q*V/(mo*c^2)+1] The electron rest frequency (1.7E22 Hz)with or without a Doppler Blue shift is increased to gamma*fo which momentarily allows it to "beat or heterodyne" with the positive quark (1.04E25 Hz)of the proton or deuteron and create a Neutrino-Antineutrino pair each having a rest energy of 0.05 ev or a frequency of about 1.66E15 Hz. It is also quite possible that the other two quarks in the proton or the other 5A - 2Z quarks in the Deuteron can momentarily share energy with the now relativistic electron, also. IOW, The electron-proton or electron deuteron interaction is a simple oscillating system that can occasionally create a Neutrino-Antineutrino Pair and become a bound neutral Quasi-Neutron or a Quasi-DiNeutron entity that releases energy when formed and participates in HOT or COLD FUSION reactions at specific resonance energies of 0.0992 ev, 13.6 ev, 1863 ev, and 255 Kev. I think. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 20:53:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA02075; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 20:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 20:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 19:38:26 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"pabN83.0.CW.turUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19598 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 6:07 PM 6/7/98, William Beaty wrote: >On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: [snip] >> Would be interesting to see of the "chains" can be cut with metal sissors, >> or better, a small rotating metal blade. > >Hard to do, since everything distorts the surrounding e-field and causes >the thread to move off the mist. However, I can wave my hand back and >forth through a very long thread, or cover and touch the finger which is >generating it and it immediately restores itself when my hand has passed. >It acts more like an invisible, thin, fast-moving stream of water than >like a solid thread. [snip] It would be interesting to see if a magnet can deflect a stream, to see if it carries a current. > But how can POSITIVE terminals create them? Can EV >particles have a net positive charge? A hadron condensate should be much smaller due to a smaller deBroglie wavelength, much more difficult to produce, much finer point required. I still think that if EV's exist, a sharp tipped proton conductor could make a proton condesed charge. My guess is a stream of water collects at a discharge point, and then also elongates, by attracting uncharged water vapor droplets due to the charge gradient about the thin tendril. That's what makes the hole in the vapor cloud. If the water is flowing it should then accumulate drops at some point, like a hose creates a pool of water on the ground. BTW - Shoulders documents a destructive effect of strong magnetic fields on EV's. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 21:10:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA06873; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 21:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 21:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357C6C7F.502D4CF9 ihug.co.nz> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 15:58:08 -0700 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GQXgz2.0.Ih1.FEsUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19599 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Does the other end of the air-thread have to be grounded in water? Does the water play any importance except to make the mist? Someone asked if blowing on the threads moves them, what was the answer? What could they be if a magnet won't cause a deflection? John Berry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 21:22:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA26136; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 21:12:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 21:12:56 -0700 Message-ID: <357C6F56.8B5E889D ihug.co.nz> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 16:10:14 -0700 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads\Unidentified subject! References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8VPtt2.0.IO6.7JsUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19600 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Heffner wrote: > It would be interesting to see if a magnet can deflect a stream, to see if > it carries a current. Re: Unidentified subject! On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, davelook wrote: > Bill, > Don't forget to see how the mist reacts around a perm magnet!! Forgot that one! I just tried a .75" x 3/8" neodymium cylinder magnet, rotating it near an air-thread while shielding it within my hand. No motion of the dot in the mist, except for wiggles caused by my hand (I mean, the dot did not move in and out as the magnet rotated, as far as I could see) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 22:27:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA20548; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:14:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:14:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:07:23 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Fz3u73.0.z05.3DtUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19601 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 7 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote: > It would be interesting to see if a magnet can deflect a stream, to see if > it carries a current. Tried a crude test. Nothing. An NIB magnet .75"dia x .375"thick acts just like a metal object. I tried holding it clutched in my hand, my hand next to a "thread", then rotating the magnet end over end. My hand wiggled, the thread wiggled the same, but the thread did not make any sideways motion in time with the rotating magnet. If the thread current is 1/100 of a microamp, then magnetic effects are going to be small. > My guess is a stream of water collects at a discharge point, and then also > elongates, by attracting uncharged water vapor droplets due to the charge > gradient about the thin tendril. That's what makes the hole in the vapor > cloud. If the water is flowing it should then accumulate drops at some > point, like a hose creates a pool of water on the ground. If it is water, its scattering should be visible with bright illumination. Even very tiny fog droplets are visible. I'll go try looking for scattering, using a flashlight and a laser... Nothing. I did find a couple of things: the dry ice pellets are emitting vertical columns of tiny ice crystals, because frost grows on them and then bits detach and are repelled upwards by the field. I also found yet another way to visualize the tips of the "threads": if I steer one so it crosses over a dry ice pellet, the electrified "frost forest" on the pellet jerks, and then a small spot melts. Apparently the "air threads" are delivering warm air downwards towards the water. With a very small thread, I can melt little furrows in the fuzzy frost on top of the dry ice. An ant-sized civilization would see a mysterious crop-circle forming for no reason! I looked down the beam of a laser pointer in the dark. This makes all sorts of airborne crak visible. I repeatedly crossed a major "thread" through the beam. I couldn't see any flashes at the point where the thread crossed the beam. If it is water, then it might be a fair bit thinner than wavelengths of red light. Two unexpected dots appeared in the mist. One was associated with a small hair on my forhead (had to wet it down). The other was extending about 40cm from a nearby vase of flowers on the kitchen table! Confusing, since it would respond to my hand-waving (as I distorted the field) but I couldn't find the thread origin. Since these threads work with both polarities, I wonder if they can be generated by AC. If so, then it might be possible to feel them when they touch skin The tiny air flow is so far imperceptable, but it might not stay that way if it could be pulsed. Even though all this probably will lead nowhere, it is enormously entertaining. Anyone with dry ice (or an ultrasonic humidifier) and a high voltage source simply MUST try this. Wave your arm a foot over the thing, watch hundreds of parallel furrows slice across the mist layer, and you'll be hooked! ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 7 22:52:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA00916; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:44:03 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:44:03 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:43:48 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <357C6C7F.502D4CF9 ihug.co.nz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"6HBa53.0.9E.ZetUr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19602 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 8 Jun 1998, John Berry wrote: > Does the other end of the air-thread have to be grounded in water? > Does the water play any importance except to make the mist? I don't know. I doubt it. Charles Yost in ESJ was finding them radiating from polished brass terminals of his sectorless Wimshurst machines. No water except environmental vapor. > Someone asked if blowing on the threads moves them, what was the answer? Never tried it, so... I found a plastic drinking straw. With a 15cm air-thread extending vertically downward from my knuckle, and sweeping the air blast from the straw across the thread about 5cm below my knuckle, the dot in the mist jerks slightly. When I aim the straw directly at the thread and then blow as hard as I can, THE DOT DOESN'T VANISH! It moves about 3cm in the direction of my blowing, and changes from a 5mm dot into an oblong blotch about 1cm in the narrow direction, 3cm long. The tip of the plastic straw is about 3cm from the thread. It's as if the blast of air causes the thread to smear out into a narrow fan. Either that, or it's vibrating extremely fast and tracing out the blotch-shape. I'm impressed. I knew these things were very robust, but this is ridiculous. They aren't like smoke, they are more like a carbon fiber! Hey, I wonder what would happen if a slightly conductive fiber was constructed like coax cable, with a dielectric layer separating the sheath from the core, and then it was given a large voltage between the parts. Would it become stronger? > What could they be if a magnet won't cause a deflection? If the current is a fraction of a microamp, then the deflection wouldn't be visible using my crude techniques. An AC magnet coil might wiggle the fiber tip and be measurable with a voltage probe My vote is for a self-assembling structure caused by nonlinearities in voltage response of charged matter. Where nonlinear dynamics is involved, all sorts of weird things pop up with no real cause. Snowflakes and ice needles are nonlinear processes, as are biological forms. Perhaps the same mathematics controls the creation of all sorts of bio-fibers, but with chemical gradients and protein machinery rather than voltage gradients and ions. There was some talk at the turn of the century about water-threads which will extend between metal electrodes and which appear to contain coaxial flows moving in opposite directions. I imagine that the sheath contains one polarity of ion, the core the other. Hey, I just discovered that this is in NOT YOUR AVERAGE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/wasser.txt. I remember that years ago I tried that procedure several times but never saw the phenomenon. If something in the coaxial distribution of opposite ions gives the thread-shape a high structural strength, then perhaps the same thing applies both to water and to air. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 7 23:14:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA00342; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:09:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:08:28 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"kAh4U.0.D5.j0uUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19604 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another experiment idea: expose the filaments (or emitting elecrode) to high intensity noise. Sweep the frequency. It might be possible to see harmonic effects - node points developing on the filaments. Also might help set the filament length by breaking the filamnent at a point of maximum vibration. This might enable computation of the density/tension of the filaments. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 23:15:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA28851; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 21:59:41 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"CzNhc2.0.d27.ZutUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19603 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: An even more wild-eyed hypothesis: The filaments offer the first tangible evidence that electrons are not points, but strings. Another experiment idea: expose the filaments (or emitting elecrode) to high intensity noise. Look for EM radiation, filament breakage. At 3:58 PM 6/8/98, John Berry wrote: [snip] >What could they be if a magnet won't cause a deflection? A first impression is they are simply streams of water, probably condensed around ions from an ion jet protruding from a sharp point on a conductor surface. The low current, or charge per mass moved, is just not enough to deflect the stream. If this is a correct impression, then it is amazing there is enough water to produce a continuous, or nearly continuous steam like that. It appears that water surface tension would be required to maintain the integrity of the stream. Individual droplets would slow pretty fast, and spread or "atomize." To prove it is a stream, maybe a sheet of black paper over a metal electrode (at same voltage as the water) would produce (more) water droplets from the stream? This doesn't sound like a likey explanation, as the water droplets and the streams should be visible in strong light. Alternately, maybe an ion leader forms, like Frank Stenger suggests. Such a leader, carring a high charge, should condense droplets out of the fog due to the charge gradient, making the holes in the fog. However, an ion path to the water should short out the power supply - yet almost no current flows. It is an interesting question then as to how much current is required to exactly maintain the leader without it breaking. The ionization/deionization rate would have to be almost exactly in equilibrium. Impinging water droplets would complicate this situation severly, via changing surface area and and greatly reducing temperature in the vicinity of water droplets. It would be interesting to see if such ion paths exist without the water vapor present. Maybe it would be possible to cover a flat metal electrode with phosphors from a flourescent light, and look for traveling spots? If this worked, it would be a major step towords examining the phenomenon in differing gasses and pressures. It is especially notable that additional filaments form as the electrodes (hands etc.) approach each other. This is very reminiscent of how cathode and anode spots act. The spots have an upper limit in size. When the current density reaches a critical point, a single cathode spot branches of into a double cathode spot, and they drift apart. Maybe there is a very fundamental quantum effect that involves both cathode spots and these charge filaments. Maybe the filaments, invisible in most circumstances, create and are directly linked to the cathode (or anode) spots, like flux lines to a solar flare. This may be an indication of electrons exisiting as stings, vs electrons as points. An interesting experiment would be to modulate the DC voltage and use a highly polished (or maybe a very rough) spherical electrode. This might cause filaments to branch as the current increases and then some to break as current decreases. It is interesting that the DC field is probably *already* higly modulated due to lack of an effective filter in the DC power supply. The modulation is probably at a very high frequency, and this might be a key ingredient in creating the filaments. Would be interesting to see if a van de Graff also generates the filaments. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 23:29:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04141; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:19:33 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"LSDGC3.0.b01.qFuUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19605 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another experiment idea: make an electrode out of a wide circular piece of metal, like a sanding disk chuck, that fits into a variable speed drill chuck. Mount a number of needles on the wheel to form filaments. Use electrified water, grounded drill. Slowly increase rotation speed of the drill and monitor hole motion in the fog. See if filaments break at high speed, or can be twisted towards the center like threads. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 7 23:44:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA06890; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 23:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 22:33:03 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"XghGE2.0.ah1.TSuUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19606 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another experiment idea: make an electrode out of a wide circular piece of metal, like a sanding disk chuck, that fits into a variable speed drill chuck. Mount a number of needles on the wheel to form filaments. Use electrified water, grounded drill. Slowly increase rotation speed of the drill and monitor hole motion in the fog. See if filaments break at high speed, or can be twisted towards the center like threads. If the above works at high speed, it might be possible to pit centrifugal force against electrostatic charge by building a circular water tank (say as charge anode) and using grounded wheel with needles as cathode. A central insulated electrode could then be used to pit a central charge against the centrifugal force: II ================ | | | | | HH | HH HH I I HH I I IXXXXI HH IXXXXI IXXXXI HH IXXXXI ------ HH ------ | - Needles HH - Variable voltage, insulated central electrode II - Shaft X - Water = - Conductive spinning wheel It would be much superior to be able to replace the water with a phospor indicator plate of soime kind. Would also be nice to be able to do the experiment in a vacuum. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 02:04:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA25900; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 02:02:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 02:02:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357CB2D8.BB0BD709 ihug.co.nz> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 20:58:17 -0700 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"dcRiM1.0.aK6.vYwUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19607 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A If I understand it the dry ice and water is only to make mist right? And the mist is only to make the effect visible so you could start the experiment without the mist and blow in smoke instead, this would show the effect not to be linked to the water or mist. John Berry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 02:15:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA27744; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 02:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 02:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 01:12:56 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Atom in a Box - treat for Mac Power PC users Resent-Message-ID: <"H5RsI.0.On6.hjwUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19608 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The following URL can be used to obtain the shareware "Atom in a Box", by Dean Dauger, size 378K compressed. It is for Mac Power PC's only. The documentation states: "Unlike other tools in this category, this program raytraces through a three-dimensional cloud density that represents the wavefunction's probability density ... It contains all 140 eigenstates up to the n=7 energy level and the allowed spectral transitions between those eigenstates. It also allows a state formed by a superposition of up to eight of those eigenstates allowing for over 3 trillion possible states. The program can display a wavefunction as a picture of a cloud, use color as phase, plot in red-cyan left/right for 3D glasses, and slice the wavefunction." Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 03:11:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA04867; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:10:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01f001bd92c4$e48971a0$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Missing Neutrinos or Different Solar Model? Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 04:04:22 -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: <"O6DdY1.0.zB1.OYxUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19609 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex If the Quasi-Neutron containing a Neutrino-AntiNeutrino Pair or a Quasi-DiNeutron formed from a deuteron and an electron, and also containing a Neutrino-AntiNeutrino Pair is formed, a Hydrogen Burning Model based on the Solar Energy output: "Standard Model" 4P ---> He4 + 4 neutrinos, Might Be: 1, 2 P + 2 e- ---> 2 Quasi-Neutrons + Energy 2, 2 Q-Ns + 2 P ---> 2 D + 2 Neutrinos + Energy 3, 2 D + 2 e- ---> 2 Quasi-DiNeutrons + Energy 4, Q-DiN + Q-DiN ---> He4 + 24 Mev + 2 Neutrinos The Neutrino count is the same as the 4P-->He4, chain and the energy output is nearly the same: D + D ---> He3 + n + 3.3 Mev D + He3 ---> He4 + P + 18.3 Mev or D + D ---> T + P + 4.0 Mev D + T ---> He4 + n + 18.6 Mev So, either the neutrinos are "changing stripes" or there are highly energetic reactions of Q-Ns or Q-DiNs with the Helium, Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen, or other heavier elements on the Sun? Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 03:22:17 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA06454; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:19:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 03:19:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <01ff01bd92c6$34335080$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Subject: CNN - EPA investigating radioactive cooking pots sent to Navy - June 7, 1998 (h Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 04:13:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000E_01BD9293.D0B65520" 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: <"fPcPP3.0.ma1.tgxUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19610 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_000E_01BD9293.D0B65520 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bean Pots Hot, Bean Pots Cold.....? :-) http://www.cnn.com/US/9806/07/radioactive.pots.ap/ ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BD9293.D0B65520 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="CNN - EPA investigating radioactive cooking pots sent to Navy - June 7, 1998.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CNN - EPA investigating radioactive cooking pots sent to Navy - June 7, 1998.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.cnn.com/US/9806/07/radioactive.pots.ap/ Modified=C09B41EBC592BD019C ------=_NextPart_000_000E_01BD9293.D0B65520-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 05:45:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA26410; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 05:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 05:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:40:56 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980608204417.208fe448 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: RFA: classical physics Resent-Message-ID: <"htf3P.0.aS6.WnzUr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19611 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Is there someone here who can help me to solve a physics problem ? I am having a problem solving a problem which, I suspect, is a fault in my own calculations. I do not wish to take up bandwidth on Vortex with this. Thanx pa From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 07:34:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA15268; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357BF56D.DFD interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 10:30:06 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"lHbr03.0.Sk3.IN_Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19613 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Hmmmm... Maybe the threads are a chain of molecular (or just small) entities electrically polarized like so: +O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O where the "O"s are the "entities" and the +'s and -'s are their charged ends. This would be like a linear "herd" of elephants with any "front" elephant followed by a "rear" elephant with the front's tail in it's trunk. A few "herder" charges roam along the length of the herd to keep it in line and jump in to replenish the polarization if it fails anywhere. The herder charges work shifts, so they go to work at one end of the thread and migrate along the thread until quitting time at the other end. This causes a small current to flow. But, the main structure (herd) is just a string of polarized entities with + hooked to -. I guess I've been away from the circus way too long? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 07:34:59 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA15239; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:31:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:31:43 -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: <357BF410.7CDE735C css.mot.com> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 09:24:16 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: New Universe Computer Model Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"m5bg31.0.zj3.BN_Ur" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19612 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: 08:50 PM ET 06/04/98 Wonder how the universe looks? Computer shows it By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A computer program has shown for the first time how the universe grew and evolved from a flat and boring waste to the colorful expanse of stars and galaxies we know today, scientists said Thursday. Full Story John E. Steck --------------------------------o]{: Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 08:30:11 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA00640; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 08:27:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 08:27:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <022801bd92f1$3f1bc4c0$8ab4bfa8 default> Reply-To: "Frederick J. Sparber" From: "Frederick J. Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:22:17 -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: <"LN4UF3.0.t9.dB0Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19614 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: Monday, June 08, 1998 8:31 AM Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads You been hitting the peanut butter jar again, Frank? :-) Regards, Frederick ------------------------------------------------ Frank (The Barker) Stenger wrote: >Hmmmm... > >Maybe the threads are a chain of molecular (or just small) entities >electrically polarized like so: > > > +O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O > >where the "O"s are the "entities" and the +'s and -'s are their charged >ends. This would be like a linear "herd" of elephants with any "front" >elephant followed by a "rear" elephant with the front's tail in it's >trunk. A few "herder" charges roam along the length of the herd to >keep it in line and jump in to replenish the polarization if it fails >anywhere. The herder charges work shifts, so they go to work at one end >of the thread and migrate along the thread until quitting time at the >other end. This causes a small current to flow. But, the main >structure (herd) is just a string of polarized entities with + hooked >to -. > >I guess I've been away from the circus way too long? > >Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 09:57:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA20524; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:50:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:50:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0967 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:47:49 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"K-4dj2.0.Z05.bP1Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19615 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Not away from it, your part of it. Hank (riding an electric Zebra to work) > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Monday, June 08, 1998 7:30 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads > > Hmmmm... > > Maybe the threads are a chain of molecular (or just small) entities > electrically polarized like so: > > > +O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O > > where the "O"s are the "entities" and the +'s and -'s are their > charged > ends. This would be like a linear "herd" of elephants with any > "front" > elephant followed by a "rear" elephant with the front's tail in it's > trunk. A few "herder" charges roam along the length of the herd to > keep it in line and jump in to replenish the polarization if it fails > anywhere. The herder charges work shifts, so they go to work at one > end > of the thread and migrate along the thread until quitting time at the > other end. This causes a small current to flow. But, the main > structure (herd) is just a string of polarized entities with + hooked > to -. > > I guess I've been away from the circus way too long? > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 10:07:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA24350; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:04:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357C194E.11D2 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 13:03:10 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0967 xch-cpc-02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ePUE-3.0.Iy5.nc1Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19616 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > Frank > Not away from it, your part of it. > Hank > (riding an electric Zebra to work) Hey, Hank - how's that electric Zebra been performing for you? Do you get to recharge at work, or do you need to? Frank S. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 10:38:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29681; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F096A xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:21:30 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"mNj1J1.0.hF7.hz1Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19617 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank I finally have it working relatively reliably. I am not allowed to charge at work. Rocketdyne/Boeing says if they give me electricity they would have to give it to everybody and they can't figure out how to let me pay for it.. :>( I am waiting for a cold fusion engine to generate power. I need about 20 Amp-hours to get to work, 40 to get home (uphill, about 1000 feet in one mile) I have a 4 mile commute on the level, one on the hill, so I can get there and back on a single charge. A 72 volt system. Hank > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Monday, June 08, 1998 10:03 AM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads > > Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > > > Frank > > Not away from it, your part of it. > > Hank > > (riding an electric Zebra to work) > > Hey, Hank - how's that electric Zebra been performing for you? Do you > get to recharge at work, or do you need to? > > Frank S. > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 11:16:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA07544; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:50:02 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"w9Txt1.0.ir1.yR2Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19618 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:30 AM 6/8/98, Francis J. Stenger wrote: >Hmmmm... > >Maybe the threads are a chain of molecular (or just small) entities >electrically polarized like so: > > > +O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O > >where the "O"s are the "entities" and the +'s and -'s are their charged >ends. This would be like a linear "herd" of elephants with any "front" >elephant followed by a "rear" elephant with the front's tail in it's >trunk. A few "herder" charges roam along the length of the herd to >keep it in line and jump in to replenish the polarization if it fails >anywhere. The herder charges work shifts, so they go to work at one end >of the thread and migrate along the thread until quitting time at the >other end. This causes a small current to flow. But, the main >structure (herd) is just a string of polarized entities with + hooked >to -. > >I guess I've been away from the circus way too long? > >Frank Stenger The above is what I was getting at when I posted: "A wild-eyed hypothesis: the "rays" are actually molecular threads of water. (Uh oh! Polywater again?!) They are put togther due to the charge polarization of water. The souce on the skin is water or charge polarized molecules which will start the chain. When the chain gets long enough it breaks, but quickly reforms. The chains can carry and transmit charge, so they line up with the electrostatic field. Would be interesting to see if the "chains" can be cut with metal sissors, or better, a small rotating metal blade." However, now that you mention it - maybe the CO2 is involved. Possibly there is something to be seen with infra-red? A rotating piece of plastic might work better than metal for chopping the chain? The molecular thread idea may have some support and meaning regarding the action of sparks on insulator surfaces. It has long been known that sparks can jump over much longer distances on insulator surfaces than in air, and that this phenomenon is not due to dirt, especially conductive dirt, on the insulator surface. It occurs in both dry air and wet air, but more so in wet air. This could be due to the fact water is involved in molecular chain formation *but is not required* due to the presence of CO2 in air. CO2 may be the principle ingredient in leader formation when water is not present. Compressed N2 is used as an "insulator" in van de Graff accelerator chambers. Possibly N2 works well because it is a non-polarized molecule, and becuase, especially under the several atmospheres *increased pressure* used, brownian motion prevents chain formation and thus leader formation. The surface of the insulator may facilitate long leader formation by providing a matrix to keep the molecular chain stable. It would be intersting to determine if there is a CO2- to CO2 electron tunneling mechanism. A number of months back I posted some experiments (10 meter electrolytic cell experimants thread) demonstrating that water carries charge (current) via the electron in addition to carrying charge via the proton. This charge carrying mechanism is *very fast*, but also *very limited* in current carrying capability. It was the speed of charge equalization that proved that protons could not be charge carrier in my experiments. However, the current carried at the high speed was highly limited. This could explain the low current (microamperes) exhibited in Bill Beaty's experiment. I think tunneling between H2O and H2O- molecules could explain electron conductivity in water, and charge crrying in the molecular chains. Some of Ken Shoulders' work could be due to misinterpretation of the signatures of molecular chains - especially molecular chains breaking apart when a full scale avelance brakdon occurs along a molecular chain. It is especially interesting that much his work was carried out in xenon gas. Perhaps xenon is especially good at forming molecular, even atomic, chains, by dislocating the nucleus to form an atomic dipole, or by electron sharing. Xenon must have a special ability to conduct electrons in this circumstance. Xenon is known to form clusters as well, and these clusters make for terrific x-ray sources when properly stimulated. These attributes could provide an alternative explanation to various of Shoulders' EV claims. The clusters he observed could have been molecular or atomic clusters. In replicating one of Shoulders earliest experiments, it was most notable to me that the cluster formation required a conductive anode. Without the anode *direcly exposed to the gas* the EV would not form. The witness plate had to be large enough that its own capacitance was sufficient to generate the observed discharge with the cathode. It seemed to me that the mechanisms Shoulders proposed should work fine with an insulated anode, but yet experimentally, they did not. Some of Shoulder's claims of high seem to revolve around the EV oscilloscope. It appeared to me that possibly the high speed events in the oscilloscope might be explained by an initial leader, conducitve path, forming on the oscilloscope charge carrying surface due to electron motion, this setting the shape observed on the oscilloscope, and that the bigger (slower) destructive atomic or molecular events might follow that path formation, but still lie in the high speed formed path, and thus masquerade as high speed events. This would give the EV balls or chains the appearance of being composed entirely of electrons, as the electron leader itself would respond as a low mass negative entity. I think Shoulders' work should be reviewed in this context, to see which experiments have alternate explanations based on leader formation. This is not to say that condensed charge does not exist (or does exist for that matter), but rather that there may be important reults missed due to the EV interpretation. It strikes me as especially interesting the prospect that electrons might exhibit string-like characteristics, especially in high voltage leader formation. String-like characteristics might go a very long way towards a more common sense explanation of electron tunneling as well. I believe evidence has been found for distibution of electron charge in conduction bands. A string model could fit this concept nicely. Same goes for the extension of conduction bands into space at the tip of a charged needle. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 12:32:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA10476; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:25:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 12:25:34 -0700 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:22:55 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Comments from Dennis Cravens Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806081524_MC2-3F8A-3451 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"v6BCr.0.bZ2.kg3Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19619 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 quoted a short message from Dennis Cravens: Hi, I'm Dennis Cravens with CETI Christian Ismert forwarded your email for my comments. I think you have some interesting points. You refer to a paper. I would love to see more on the subject. Dennis Cravens PS. at least one group saw a delta temp in the fluid flow but not the average of the whole device, as seen within a closed test chamber. >From this tiny seed Wharton grew a mighty tree. He think that CETI ran a secret experiment with a dual calorimeter, and this experiment proved that the inside flow calorimeter, did not actually produce heat. None of this is true. Wharton should ask for a clarification from the source before spreading confusion and false rumors for a month. I had a brief exchange of e-mail messages and a short conversation with Cravens. Let me try to clear up some of this confusion. First, unfortunately, Cravens does not recall sending this particular message. The only dual calorimeter he recalls is with the recent Storms experiments. If that is what he meant, he has it backwards: Storms used an isoperibolic calorimeter inside a flow calorimeter. Wracking his brain and trying to remember what he meant, Cravens wrote: I don't think I ever claimed that a PPC was used in a double cal. method. I cannot remember ever doing such a test. (on PPC cells it is usually flow calorimeter within a constant temp/humidity environment) However, I think that a Ni - normal water cell (R. Mills like) was run in a closed configuration and that no heat was observed then. (but did in an open configuration) ---- (Note: this does not mean that two systems were used together or even a flow system was used). He refers to the fact that low power, low surface area Ni tests reportedly sometimes show marginal excess heat beyond recombination with an open cell, but none with a closed cell. This bothers me too. If the excess in the first case was below recombination I would assume this is a recombination problem, but I do not know what to make of the reported results. The results are marginal in any case, and I suspect some kind of error. I have not seen enough details to judge. Mills says there is no error and his theory predicts this behavior. Cravens adds an important point that I have made countless times, which unfortunately always eludes Wharton: PS Please realize that I work on a lot of other kinds of cell that the CETI PPC [Patterson Power Cell] and that I use more than flow calorimetry. My guess is that Wharton just assumes that all things are about the PPC., and flow systems.... that ain't so. As I have pointed out countless times, Patterson himself demonstrated convincing isoperibolic calorimetry long before he built the PPC. I sometimes wish he had stuck with that mode, although if he had people like Wharton would be clamoring for flow calorimetry instead. Cravens writes: I have mixed views on double calorimetry methods (you might want to talk to Scott Little or Ed Storms). The idea sounds good, but I worry that the outer system is always more likely to give errors than the inter one (many would disagree). The reason is that the outer one is more removed from the experiment and that if you make it big enough it will always be less sensitive and read zero (extreme example - place the entire lab in a calorimeter and you would likely see zero even with a heat source inside.) I agree. I see little justification for a dual calorimeter. Twice as many things will go wrong. I think it is enough to monitor the cell internal temperature, which rises and falls in proportion to the heat, although not as much as it does with an isoperibolic calorimeter. The only reason to build a dual calorimeter is to test marginal results the way Storms did, and I have no use for marginal results in the first place. Storms agrees the technique would serve no purpose when electrolysis produces enough stirring, as it will with a small cell above ~500 milliamps. Cravens concludes: Again rumor is not a good thing. It just confuses things. People try to read to much in to things instead of taking just what is said. Exactly! Always ask for clarification. In this case, there is little clarification to be had, because this was an offhand comment and Cravens has forgotten why he made it, and what exactly he had in mind. Since it is not part of a published paper he should be forgiven. We all make mistakes. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 14:47:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA32115; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:40:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:40:34 -0700 From: DColling vines.gems.gov.bc.ca Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 14:12:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: air-thread Complexity-physics 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: <"AZAEg1.0.hr7.Hf5Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19620 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yup - this is how the original "continuous wave" radio transmitter worked. It was invented by Paulsen, I think, and used a carbon arc burning in alchohol vapour. Cool, huh? ---------- Original Text ---------- From: Chuck Davis , on 6/7/98 2:34 AM: On 07-Jun-98, William Beaty wrote: [...] >a path as possible? That could be it! I believe that a nonlinear >relation between resistance and current is required. [...] Bill, some time ago, I think I remember seeing a V-I conductivity curve for plasmas that looked something akin to a tunnel diode curve and was wondering if a plasma was regenerative on that negative R part of that curve, as is the tunnel diode??? Or, if it is even pertinant to this discussion :) -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 14:54:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA18992; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:50:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <022801bd92f1$3f1bc4c0$8ab4bfa8 default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:03:56 -1000 To: Vortex-L From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"93WnN1.0.de4.5o5Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19621 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank - Your chain-of-particles idea sounds like a good explanation; it works that way with larger easily polarized particles, like slightly moist bits of paper near an electrode. Schnurer once described to me something like this occuring in some much denser fluid dielectrics. Things link up in chains until the charge distributed among the synapses reaches a point too low to support adhesion. One of the things that seems to go against this is when Bill blew through a straw against the thread and it showed a lot of durability. There might be little windage to such a fine thread, or it could have high tensile strength as suggested. Perhaps the thread is able to reconstruct itself very quickly from the available materials constantly surrounding it. At any end point of a break where the interparticle potential is still strong enough, those end points of the chain could quickly source a replacement of the missing segment of the chain. If these threads could be engineered to be easily visible and form shapes or vibrate in a way that causes the eye to see specific shapes, they could be used to create advertising! Make 'em earn their keep, I say. Seriously though, to me something in this does vaguely suggest 'display technology'. Possibly 3D display of some sort. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 15:37:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA27709; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 17:40:47 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: [OFF TOPIC] Instructions on airplane Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806081742_MC2-3F92-4202 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"yCeF02.0.nm6._O6Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19623 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex On a recent trip I was idly fiddling with the in-flight telephone mounted on the back of the middle seat. You pull it out, and then to put it back, you are supposed to tug on the cord and let it roll up, like the power cord on a vacuum cleaner or an old fashioned roll-up window blind. A pawl releases when you pull Just So. I enjoyed many hours playing with those window blinds as a child. Although these have been around for decades, they never quite work right. In this case a whimsical little notice was neatly typeset and pasted inside the handset holder: Gently pull the cord to retract it when finished with call. (If cord does not retract after several attempts, place phone in seatback pocket.) Things like this tell a story. I imagine pitched battles during product design meetings, and angry calls from aircraft maintenance personnel. This tells a story about our culture and technology too, like the potsherds and arrowheads from ancient dwellings. This is an example of a weird & unreliable kludge we put up with because nobody can think of a good alternative, or because we have lived with it so long we are inured to its shortcomings. Other examples are the internal combustion engine, the clutch, the QWERTY typewriter keyboard, shoelaces, staircases, MS DOS and Windows, and of course, fossil fuel. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 15:53:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA00809; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:46:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:38:12 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <357BF56D.DFD interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Rnh4T3.0.XC.cc6Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19624 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 8 Jun 1998, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > Hmmmm... > > Maybe the threads are a chain of molecular (or just small) entities > electrically polarized like so: > > > +O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O > > where the "O"s are the "entities" and the +'s and -'s are their charged > ends. This could be true. Since a sharp point is required, and presumably a tiny corona is necessary, then perhaps the above string-structure is "knitted" by the tiny tuft of plasma, an electrical spider spinnerette, and composed of positive and negative nitrogen and oxygen molecules. Plasmas do chemistry, so it could even be made from various oxides of nitrogen. If a bit of "thread matter" was produced by the plasma tuft, then the e-fields would tend to drag it away, allowing the plasma to add more to the tip which remains in the plasma. Very much like a spider spinnerette. If I set up a way to view the threads, and to rapidly discharge the fields, I can see if the threads drift away or vanish instantly. The threads respond to e-fields, but it seems to me like they only have a slight net charge themselves. They respond to the e-fields, but don't distort those fields much, and don't repel each other strongly. Therefor I would say that they are composed of neutral material with a bit of excess charge. That, or they are a combination of + and - ions or ion-clouds. I was wondering whether a coaxial geometry of + and - ions would turn out to be stable. But perhaps a "stacked disks" geometry would also tend to make long strings. Hmmm. Threads in the sky, woven from ions and oxides of nitrogen, falling in masses onto the ground, then evaporating back into their component parts after minutes or hours. Familiar? The H.H. idea with the rotating needles might end up weaving a visible rope! The threads don't respond instantly, so a few revolutions per second would be enough to force them to cross each other. WIll they be disrupted, or will they weave? Needles probably won't work, but a wad of fuzzy, somewhat conductive cloth would do it. A method of producing shadowgrams: put a 1cm mirror chip outside in the sun. Aim the spot of sunlight into your house so it lands on a wall. The distance between the mirror and the wall should be 50ft or more. The spot of light is somewhat spatially coherent, and density-changes in the air are easily visible as shadows in the splotch of light. Fingers wetted with solvent and held in the sunbeam will show rising plumes of vapor in the splotch of light. This setup might make it possible to view the shadows of the air-threads. Aside: I've never received answers to my questions on sci.physics regarding the micro-scale recombination of nitrogen ions. I have no idea where to look for such info. If a + and a - nitrogen ion fall together, do they exchange an electron and spring apart? Or do they remain as an ion pair for any long time scale? If the latter, then it may be possible to form a solid "electropolymer" made from ions. It might have a short half-life (or a zero life, making it impossible to form.) Another delirious vision: scalablity. If it isn't molecular scale only, if some "threads" can have larger diameter, perhaps the phenomena appears at a range of scales. I did see thicker "super-threads" which could be drawn out to two feet, and which created severe disruption of the mist when shortened to a few inches. Perhaps radio antennas and hi-rise buildings have giant "threads" several feet in diameter extending upwards during thunderstorms. Rather than dry ice fog, perhaps a huge thread could impact another wind-sensitive surface, say, a wheatfield, and the resulting torus-shaped termination flow could make a sort of... donut shaped imprint, yeaaah, that's the ticket! What would those superstitious natives make of donut stamped circles appearing in their croplands? Worship them, embellish them, etc. I don't see any spiral-shaped flows in the mist though. If I had, I'd have had to leap from my bath and run down the street shouting "I've found it! The engine which drives tornadoes!" :) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 8 15:55:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA01138; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 15:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD9304.E4CC7A00 pm3-121.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: Frequency generator chip Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 17:42:56 -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 PAA01087 Resent-Message-ID: <"-Beb-2.0.WH.7e6Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19625 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hello all: I mentioned before that I needed something cheap capable of generating AC of about 20Mhz. I tried getting a MAX038 chip, but the have to back order it, and it will probably be 5 weeks until I can get it. I cannot wait this long. If anyone can tell me a pa rticular device to get, and assist me in constructing the circuitry to produce the 20Mhz AC, please let me know. Thanks, 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 Mon Jun 8 17:44:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA27970; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 17:37:02 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 17:37:02 -0700 Message-ID: <357C8ED2.4F12 bellsouth.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 18:24:34 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rQH042.0.xq6.jE8Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19626 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > Seriously > though, to me something in this does vaguely suggest 'display technology'. > Possibly 3D display of some sort. Or maybe a level 3 containment field. Terry "Ready to beam up." From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 18:15:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA02830; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 17:12:38 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"-yXLX.0.7i.Nn8Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19627 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:38 PM 6/8/98, William Beaty wrote: [snip] >Hmmm. Threads in the sky, woven from ions and oxides of nitrogen, falling >in masses onto the ground, then evaporating back into their component >parts after minutes or hours. Familiar? Doubly interesting in that the threads could be maintained much longer under refrigeration. Maybe put the water tray in the bottom of a cooler while weaving? Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 18:19:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA00993; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:15:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:15:05 -0700 From: "Paul Brown" To: Subject: Re: Frequency generator chip Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 19:14:28 -0600 Message-ID: <01bd9343$f307aba0$68a99bcf default> 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: <"r6y6h.0.MF.Oo8Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19628 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Buy a CB radio. -----Original Message----- From: Kyle R. Mcallister To: 'vortex-l eskimo.com' Date: Monday, June 08, 1998 6:29 PM Subject: Frequency generator chip >Hello all: > >I mentioned before that I needed something cheap capable of generating AC of about 20Mhz. I tried getting a MAX038 chip, but the have to back order it, and it will probably be 5 weeks until I can get it. I cannot wait this long. If anyone can tell me a particular device to get, and assist me in constructing the circuitry to produce the 20Mhz AC, please let me know. > >Thanks, >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 Mon Jun 8 18:38:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA07560; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:36:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:36:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357C8EF7.74DD interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:25:11 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YXZYO.0.2s1._59Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19629 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde wrote: > > Frank - > > Your chain-of-particles idea sounds like a good explanation; it works that > way with larger easily polarized particles, like slightly moist bits of > paper near an electrode. Yes, I see this idea was what Horace was trying to put fourth with his "molecular threads of water" point in his recent post. If Horace waits long enough, I sometimes get his idea! :-) Schnurer once described to me something like this > occuring in some much denser fluid dielectrics. Things link up in chains > until the charge distributed among the synapses reaches a point too low to > support adhesion. > > One of the things that seems to go against this is when Bill blew through a > straw against the thread and it showed a lot of durability. There might be > little windage to such a fine thread, or it could have high tensile > strength as suggested. Perhaps the thread is able to reconstruct itself > very quickly from the available materials constantly surrounding it. Well, Rick, Bill Beaty has already mastered the critical parts of a magic act - a stage full of mist, a mysterious waving of hands, and wispy tendrills that obey his every gesture - now if he can incorporate a scantily clad member of the opposite gender I think he can take this act on the road. Your 3d display sounds tough to do but I don't really believe in 4-stroke engines either! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 18:50:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA04900; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:40:34 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:40:34 -0700 Message-ID: <357C92A8.4A11 interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:40:56 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"iKDQl2.0.UC1.HA9Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19630 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A William Beaty wrote: > (snip more interesting "thread" detail) If I had, I'd > have had to leap from my bath and run down the street shouting "I've found > it! Bill, just this one vision is all I need to make my day! :-) Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 18:53:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA10623; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:51:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357C94B0.5BFF interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:49:36 -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: Frequency generator chip References: <01BD9304.E4CC7A00 pm3-121.gpt.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FQmqC1.0.tb2.EK9Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19631 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > If anyone can tell me a particular device to get, and assist me in constructing the circuitry to produce the 20Mhz AC, please let me know. > Kyle, does it have to be 20 MHz? How about 27 MHz? If 27 MHz would do, then any CB radio transmitter will put out a carrier signal of a fraction of a watt at that frequency. Also, one of those cheap "kid" walky-talkies should also do the job. Just don't use or disconnect the mike and you will get the carrier only. If you need more power, you'll have to use a booster amplifier - just shield the rig from emissions or the FCC will come knocking at your door! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 19:24:52 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17190; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 19:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 19:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD9322.1ED6B2C0 pm3-121.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Frequency generator chip Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:12:17 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD9322.1EDFDA80" Resent-Message-ID: <"n1vrM1.0.UC4.4n9Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19632 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD9322.1EDFDA80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] Sent: Monday, June 08, 1998 8:49 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Frequency generator chip >Kyle, does it have to be 20 MHz? How about 27 MHz? If 27 MHz would >do, then any CB radio transmitter will put out a carrier signal of a >fraction of a watt at that frequency. Also, one of those cheap "kid" >walky-talkies should also do the job. Just don't use or disconnect the >mike and you will get the carrier only. Hey, now thats an idea. I will try this out. >If you need more power, you'll >have to use a booster amplifier - just shield the rig from emissions or >the FCC will come knocking at your door! Ah, the FCC. Yes, I will need to shield it anyways because of the experiments I am performing. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD9322.1EDFDA80 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhMCAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABAB0AAABSRTogRnJl cXVlbmN5IGdlbmVyYXRvciBjaGlwAE4KAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcGAAgAFQAMABEAAQAWAQEggAMADgAA AM4HBgAIABUACQAzAAEANQEBCYABACEAAAA4NzdDQzRDNEIyRkVEMTExQTc1RUU4RTAwQUMxMDAw MAA2BwEDkAYAQAUAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAA QAA5ACCv2wZMk70BHgBwAAEAAAAdAAAAUkU6IEZyZXF1ZW5jeSBnZW5lcmF0b3IgY2hpcAAAAAAC AXEAAQAAABYAAAABvZNMBtuOUjbC/w8R0ade6OAKwQAAAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4A HwwBAAAAFwAAAHN0a0BzdW5oZXJhbGQuaW5maS5uZXQAAAMABhDF5EsFAwAHEHICAAAeAAgQAQAA AGUAAAAtLS0tLS0tLS0tRlJPTTpGUkFOQ0lTSlNURU5HRVJTTVRQOkZTVEVOR0VSQElOVEVSTEFD RURORVRTRU5UOk1PTkRBWSxKVU5FMDgsMTk5ODg6NDlQTVRPOlZPUlRFWC1MQEVTAAAAAAIBCRAB AAAArAMAAKgDAABkBwAATFpGdVGiWhj/AAoBDwIVAqQD5AXrAoMAUBMDVAIAY2gKwHNldO4yBgAG wwKDMgPGBxMCg7ozEw19CoAIzwnZOxX/eDI1NQKACoENsQtgbvBnMTAzFCALChQiDAEaYwBAIAqF CotsaTEEODAC0WktMTQ0zw3wDNAcwwtZMTYKoANg9nQFkAVALR7nCocdmwww9R5mRgNhOh/uHmYM giFxxQBwYwQAIEouBgAekAMZAASQW1NNVFA6WwPQJGRAC4AekHILYGPpCYAubhIAXR+PIJ0GYBcC MCHPIttNAiBkYXmKLCQQdSZgIDA4KyAAMTk5OCA4OjQwOSBQTSavIJ1Ubwso7yLbdhWhZXgtbEpA B5BrB3BvLgWgbeMsnye+dWJqHqEuvyLbzFJlNDAhgGVxClAj0Nx5ICSQJmAjsHQFsRGwzwUgCo8a DxuKMzYdZzkZhj467R5mS3lsZSsgtGRvB5FpBUARwHYrcDk3UCBiK3AB0AXQSHrgPyAgSG8H4AGg CGBJBUAyNz9FSWZARSDydwhgbGQxzTtvPH894VkrIHRoCfA/4G420EOkQiAjsGRpPtB0I7F8c20+ QCXRQXADEAMgcLtAIUASYTeACsAIgiAAkNxnbgdAR5BA8GFB30Lv9zyeA1AA0HRGIAOgSPJBcP83 QEfBBUBFME2BA1A2dSQw+RNwbHNFAQIgK3BI8UUwBm8R8DeBZWFwICJ5MUBkIkk/Sk88nk0wbHhr eS0BkFPgCJAEIHM/T6BBoT/gTtE94UUiIGo8b2JOkStAJTA94W4n/wVAVkBPQQXARhAE8AIgJmC/ HrFFMVCvUb88nkagaytw+wBwVPB5CGBHBCSQV+NH9z0CIGxOgjffOO9eEkhl/SsRbj/BTbIEIAOR UHBQEP0kMElHBEZQNtBFMCPxQBH+LhrvOm9ZP1pPQOFb4iZg7wmAW0AFsCtwcD/ABJArIP1b4SdH MFg/ZT88nj52VuLPR+AG4E+wRtJhbQtQBpD9SEItVcBWQlSgCJBU4VWSzQUQZ0xBA3AgZUagBBB7 TKFioXJpL2o/PJ5VkkZcQ0NHBDGRK3BrYJBjPzFAGQBNclvhVzFtMHIh513vXv92gkFoRRN0AiQw /lkHkCsgYcVnsz7BbrU+QftFgU0weQQgPvBIAFbjT3L7K3Aw0HAGcQeAAjAEIGHA722gR1AEkAIQ ckagGQBi/fc9kgfwJDBNSABHMAQAJdEvdl93b4DCFSEAgzADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAAQAAHMECn rK9Lk70BQAAIMECnrK9Lk70BHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAAAuR ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD9322.1EDFDA80-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 19:28:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06498; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:58:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:58:45 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 14:29:34 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <357CB2D8.BB0BD709 ihug.co.nz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nhOg1.0.1b1.Iw5Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19622 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 8 Jun 1998, John Berry wrote: > If I understand it the dry ice and water is only to make mist right? > And the mist is only to make the effect visible so you could start the > experiment without the mist and blow in smoke instead, this would show > the effect not to be linked to the water or mist. Last of the dry ice has evaporated. While playing with the pen-laser, I noticed that dust motes in the air did not seem to be disturbed by close proximity to the invisible threads. Perhaps they aren't an air flow. Or maybe they create a flow only at their termination opoints on the water. Or maybe they are a coaxial flow structure, with a slow-moving outer sheath which surrounds a fast moving core. Another speculation: here we have a semi-solid structure which might be composed of gas, ions, and fields. If the threadlike version could also appear as a spherical version, then we have a possible mechanism for ball lightning stability, ion-shell phenomena reported by Farnsworth, etc. While using no mist, I looked for distortions in the surface of the water. I'm sure I see some. They appear to be dimples, not humps, as if a tiny air stream was impacting the surface. I need a sunny evening, so I can reflect light from the water tray and look for dimple shadows in the image of the surface. Can somebody else try this one? No dry ice needed. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 8 20:12:26 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26209; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 22:30:27 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Re: Frequency generator chip (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"A2l1J2.0.PP6.pTAVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19633 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 22:26:34 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: John Schnurer Subject: Re: Frequency generator chip Oscillators The MAX 038 is their version of the 8038 .... check Digi Key. Best to find a book on electronics and teach yourself oscillators. For square wavew you have many options from logic chips to digital oscillators to op amps. Get a copy of the CMOS Cookbook by Don Lancaster... there are also many other such 'cookbooks' ...check the library. Amateur Radio Handbook will show a number of designs and single transistor oscillators come in many designs. You will then maybe want to mave the thing put out some power..... you might want to invest in a used ham radio transmitter in the band you want. The 8038 is a very low power part. You can also get a set of databooks, no charge, osemiconducf linear semicondmotouctors AND the applications handbooks from Nat'l Semiconductor, Motorola, TI, Harris ... you get the idea ... Linear Tech, Maxim, Exar, Burr Brown, Analog Devices, ... anyone else any vos can think of? J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 21:43:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA03420; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:37:01 -0700 Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:37:01 -0700 Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:36:42 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980609124005.2cd7b0ac 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: Re: Frequency generator chip Resent-Message-ID: <"N3Z3R3.0.Gr.jlBVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19634 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Francis J. Stenger posted the following (edited for brevity) at 21:49 1998.06.08 -0400: >Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: >> > If anyone can tell me a particular device to get, and assist me in >constructing the circuitry to produce the 20Mhz AC, please let me know. >> > >Kyle, does it have to be 20 MHz? How about 27 MHz? If 27 MHz would >do, then any CB radio transmitter will put out a carrier signal of a >fraction of a watt at that frequency. The Yaesu FT80 C is a programmable SSB which can be set for CW, SSB, FM AM usage in the range from 2 MHz to 30 MHz, 20 or 30 watts maybe (I forget). It has a nice feature for continuous broadcast if that's what you need. We use these when we set up in deep jungle locales. But then, you were after a chip, weren't you ? cheers From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 8 23:42:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA05796; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357CD62F.C122A202 gorge.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 23:29:03 -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: Air threads-- 1/2 baked theory References: <199806082254.PAA02556 mx2.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ASST52.0.RQ1.LZDVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19635 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Consider: 1. threads emit from non conductors/poor conductors: insulated lead, hair lint, skin(?) BUT 2. do not emit from very good conductor--needle. 3. threads carry VERY little charge--only apparent when close (short threads) and, therefore, a multiplicity of threads. 4. threads "...are emitted in all directions..." (from wire) maybe... 5. threads apparently will follow a curve, if required. 6. threads "...act...like a stream of water..." 7. threads do not seem to be composed of charged particles. 8. threads "Apperently...are delivering warm air to the water." (ice) 9. "thread extending upward from the fiber, and it entrained a narrow needle-like stream of white mist which extended to my hand 1 " away." 10. threads act a lot like magnetic field lines, when interrupted by a plastic pen. 11. threads do not (apparently) react with a permanent magnet. 12. (relatively) strong airflow can both move, and shape threads. What if-- "Air threads" are merely flows of aether which mediates the concept we call "charge." What if-- This aether flow will normally not carry charged particles, rather, it will influence nearby air molecules to follow. What if-- The flow of aether consists of a vortex, so the influenced air will swirl like a micro-tornado. What if-- when voltage is high enough, a dialectric breakdown (spark) would follow an aether vortex. If this idea is valid, it leads inevitably to an alternate view of subatomic particles. Suggested experiments: 1. Hold a very strong permanent magnet near the fog. Do the magnetic field lines have an effect similar to the threads? when the plate is charged, and uncharged? 2. Have the water not charged. Place the charged plate across the water/mist, perpendicular to the water. Assuming the treads make "tunnels" through the fog, does the thread mmake the mist "swirl?" Does the swirl rotate oppositely with opposite charge? Does the fog move toward/away from the charged plate, based on charge? Comments? Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 07:26:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA18079; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 07:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 07:22:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980609091620.00c5cf30 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 09:16:20 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: HV water dimples Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"2fxLt.0.OQ4.-KKVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19636 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I charged a 9"x12" metal pan of water to 20kV thru an 80 Mohm R. I then approached the surface of the water with a sharp grounded metal point. At about 6", you begin to see "stirrings" on the surface as if an erratic wind was blowing gently down onto the water. At 2" there is a distinct depression in the water below the point, still rather erratic. At 3/4", just before breakdown, the depression becomes very localized and deep...about 1/8-1/4" deep. The whole phenomenon is essentially independent of polarity! I tried using my finger tips from a distance of 6-8" looking for evidence of Bill's air threads and didn't see much of anything (I don't have dry ice yet). Once, however, I succeeded in getting a dust mote on the surface of the water to start following my finger tip around sluggishly. With the 80 Mohm R in place, breakdown is a benign event. With the R removed from the circuit, it is quite violent...but the dimples are the same. My DC power supply has significant output filter caps in 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 Tue Jun 9 07:53:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA23452; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 07:50:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 07:50:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003801bd93b5$2b6bf160$9ab4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: American Stirling Company - How Do They Work? (http://www.stirlingcycle.com/how Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 08:44:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD9382.D0D69FC0" 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: <"WfUqR1.0.Lk5.nkKVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19637 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_01BD9382.D0D69FC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Upside-down Displacr Stirling Engine, with animation capability. http://www.stirlingcycle.com/how_do.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD9382.D0D69FC0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="American Stirling Company - How Do They Work.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="American Stirling Company - How Do They Work.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.stirlingcycle.com/how_do.htm Modified=A02807D3B493BD01A7 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BD9382.D0D69FC0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 08:00:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA23868; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 07:52:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 07:52:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <003001bd93b4$9a105580$9ab4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Solar Powered Stirling, Cheap? Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 08:40:45 -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: <"ilvjc.0.nq5.GmKVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19638 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex I have an 8 ft diameter stock watering tank and a couple of sheets of gypsum board to make a displacer "piston" with. I figure that using the tank bottom-up as a solar collector at 100 watts/ft2 and 5%-10% efficiency 1/2-1.0 horsepower for a few hours/day, for about $200.00? If I could float this on Frank Stenger's pond it would make the cold-side design easier too. :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 09:40:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14449; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:32:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:32:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff aol.com Message-ID: <9eeab4d5.357d6191 aol.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:23:44 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re: Predictions Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78 Resent-Message-ID: <"zeL6N.0.gX3.rEMVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19639 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 6/5/98 3:03:07 PM, you wrote: <<>The Neutrino or Antineutrino rest mass-energy is determined as 0.07 ev +/- >0.04 ev.>> If this is in regard to the recent announcement in Japan, it was that the mass DIFFERENCE between two different neutrino masses was 0.07 eV. The actual masses were not determined. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 09:48:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA06554; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:41:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:41:45 -0700 X-Complaints-To: abuse sprintmail.com Message-ID: <008701bd93c5$08d10b80$9ab4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Subject: Re: Re: Predictions Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:38:25 -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: <"rtOq13.0.Kc1.9NMVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19640 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Puthoff aol.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 10:32 AM Subject: Re: Re: Predictions Au Contraire, Hal. Other sources tie it down to "less than 5 millionths of the mass of the electron" . Best, Fred > >In a message dated 6/5/98 3:03:07 PM, you wrote: > ><<>The Neutrino or Antineutrino rest mass-energy is determined as 0.07 ev +/- >>0.04 ev.>> > >If this is in regard to the recent announcement in Japan, it was that the mass >DIFFERENCE between two different neutrino masses was 0.07 eV. The actual >masses were not determined. > >Hal Puthoff > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 10:19:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA23713; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:15:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:15:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <01BD939D.C110E3A0 pm3-133.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Frequency generator chip Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 11:48:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD939D.C110E3A0" Resent-Message-ID: <"GSsSu1.0.No5.psMVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19641 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD939D.C110E3A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Mpowers Consultants[SMTP:mpowers8 pacific.net.sg] Sent: Monday, June 08, 1998 11:36 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Frequency generator chip >The Yaesu FT80 C is a programmable SSB which can be set for CW, SSB, FM > AM usage in the range from 2 MHz to 30 MHz, 20 or 30 watts maybe (I forget). >It has a nice feature for continuous broadcast if that's what you need. >We use these when we set up in deep jungle locales. >But then, you were after a chip, weren't you ? Well, if it does the same ting, that will work too. Something cheap preferably. Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD939D.C110E3A0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhMQAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABAB0AAABSRTogRnJl cXVlbmN5IGdlbmVyYXRvciBjaGlwAE4KAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcGAAkACwAwAAoAAgArAQEggAMADgAA AM4HBgAJAAsALwAkAAIARAEBCYABACEAAAA5NjI1NkE0NzhGRkZEMTExQTc1RUU4RTAwQUMxMDAw MAAiBwEDkAYAqAQAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAA QAA5AMDdfGLGk70BHgBwAAEAAAAdAAAAUkU6IEZyZXF1ZW5jeSBnZW5lcmF0b3IgY2hpcAAAAAAC AXEAAQAAABYAAAABvZPGYnxjxMCi/48R0ade6OAKwQAAAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4A HwwBAAAAFwAAAHN0a0BzdW5oZXJhbGQuaW5maS5uZXQAAAMABhBa8xKDAwAHENUBAAAeAAgQAQAA AGUAAAAtLS0tLS0tLS0tRlJPTTpNUE9XRVJTQ09OU1VMVEFOVFNTTVRQOk1QT1dFUlM4QFBBQ0lG SUNORVRTR1NFTlQ6TU9OREFZLEpVTkUwOCwxOTk4MTE6MzZQTVRPOlZPUlRFWC1MAAAAAAIBCRAB AAAAEQMAAA0DAADABQAATFpGdT+2bzv/AAoBDwIVAqQD5AXrAoMAUBMDVAIAY2gKwHNldO4yBgAG wwKDMgPGBxMCg7ozEw19CoAIzwnZOxX/eDI1NQKACoENsQtgbvBnMTAzFCALChQiDAEaYwBAIAqF CotsaTEEODAC0WktMTQ0zw3wDNAcwwtZMTYKoANg9nQFkAVALR7nCocdmwww9R5mRgNhOh/uHmYM ggXQeHBvdwSQBCAIUACAdQZsAZACMHNbU01USFA6bSO0OEAKsGMhBpBpYy5uEgAuc/xnXR+PIJ0G YAIwIc8i3AECIGRheSwgSnURJkAgMDgrMDE5OQI4K9AxOjM2IFBmTSa/IJ1Ubyj/Itt2QRWhZXgt bEAHkGtpB3BvLgWgbSy/J851nGJqHqEu3yLbUmU0UAkhgGVxClBuY3kg5mcJ8ASQYXQFsRGwBSDf Gu8b8yxgHWcaOT45jS43UmgrgFlhB5B1IXBUixxQJBAgBAAgYSAeYTkJwGFtAMACYCuAU1N4QiB3 N8ARsDegA5FimyuAEfEgAhAFwENXKzC7PmErMEYsrjoPOx8gE3DgTSB1c2E3ED0wA6C+dDxBN1AZ ACuAA1IgEiCITUh6RIBvIDM9ALdFoSswAdAgBbFGEXc3YJUksCAAwHk/QShJP6JxNxB0KS5Ar0G/ Oz5JrwVAEcA9UgMAY0URZTdg3whwRRE3ggIhC4B1CGAEINJiA2BhZD8AcwVABpA7RIE3YCcEID6g N2AgefcIYEwwCeBkSIZIn0mvOz7+VyuARAArgESRU/E+oAnwsz6QP1R1cERSDbBlVVB6aitgZz4x FZA/AD4wc89QH1EvUj8edUJ1BUBEkd5uKzBPkiPRK4BhAYAEkE89YTeyKzBbUm4nT3Q/fzhvHWcS 8kaRCo8aDFOwbJZsKzBOoWkFQGRvB5HfRJJEEAeARIALgGcrME7S1z6QAxADIHcFsGtF0TGQ/wYA A3ASADfAGQA3oUygVVAvHmANwDdBAmB5Vt1LefU+MVJkcE1WgRwgTnAEkAtfZRUhAGjwAAAAAwAQ EAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzBgpYNOxpO9AUAACDBgpYNOxpO9AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAA AwANNP03AADeSg== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD939D.C110E3A0-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 11:02:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01094; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 10:51:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357D6869.884DB308 ro.com> Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 11:52:57 -0500 From: "Patrick V. Reavis" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Frequency generator chip References: <01BD9304.E4CC7A00 pm3-121.gpt.infi.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1ZcoJ1.0.vG.XONVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19642 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Kyle R. Mcallister wrote: > Hello all: > > I mentioned before that I needed something cheap capable of generating AC of about 20Mhz. I tried getting a MAX038 chip, but the have to back order it, and it will probably be 5 weeks until I can get it. I cannot wait this long. If anyone can tell me a particular device to get, and assist me in constructing the circuitry to produce the 20Mhz AC, please let me know. > > Thanks, > Kyle R. mcallister > Email: stk sunherald.infi.net > Phone: 228-875-0629 > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257 Kyle, I guess it's time to come clean; I have an extra MAX038 chip in hand. It's a surface mount chip, but you are welcome to it. Where would you like it sent? ( The schematic I drew for you is base on this rascal) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 12:09:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA16564; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:00:51 -0500 Message-Id: <199806091900.OAA06251 beta2.dejanews.com> From: billb eskimo.com To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Let's talk... Reply-To: billb eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"vW8FJ3.0.i24.5SOVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19643 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Hello, Today, I created our own forum at Deja News where we can discuss things online. It is called dejanews.members.tech.wbeaty.amasci and I described it like this: A discussion area for users of SCIENCE HOBBYIST page, http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Topics are limited to: 1. Discussion of anything on the website 2. Amateur Science topics of every kind. No advertizing by outsiders is allowed. On-topic ads by longtime users is OK. Warning: I will not tolerate "flamers." Please remain civil. If you are already registered for My Deja News, go here to join our new forum http://beta2.dejanews.com/=zzz_mem/rg_join.xp?u=vortex-l eskimo.com&g=dejanews.members.tech.wbeaty.amasci&m=1 Or, if you haven't registered for My Deja News, go here http://beta2.dejanews.com/=zzz_mem/rg_join.xp?u=vortex-l eskimo.com&g=dejanews.members.tech.wbeaty.amasci Now, here's some stuff Deja News wants to tell you to help you out. By joining william's new discussion forum you will automatically get a Free My Deja News account. This means you will also be able to read and participate in more than 50,000 other high quality discussions on almost every conceivable topic, from sports to parenting to java development. We will also give you a free email account you can use to participate in any discussion on the Internet without worrying about people sending spam email to your permanent account. You can even create your own free discussion forum. Deja News was recently named one of the Top 10 Essential Web Sites by Yahoo! Internet Life magazine. We look forward to seeing you soon! The Deja News Team :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Deja News - The Discussion Network http://www.dejanews.com/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 12:56:22 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA25145; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:46:53 -0700 (PDT) From: John Logajan Message-Id: <199806091944.OAA29264 mirage.skypoint.com> Subject: Re: HV water dimples In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980609091620.00c5cf30 mail.eden.com> from Scott Little at "Jun 9, 98 09:16:20 am" To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:44:22 -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: <"0bszN2.0.b86.Z4PVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19644 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Scott Little wrote: > I charged a 9"x12" metal pan of water to 20kV thru an 80 Mohm R. I then > approached the surface of the water with a sharp grounded metal point. At > about 6", you begin to see "stirrings" on the surface as if an erratic wind > was blowing gently down onto the water. At 2" there is a distinct > depression in the water below the point, still rather erratic. At 3/4", > just before breakdown, the depression becomes very localized and > deep...about 1/8-1/4" deep. The whole phenomenon is essentially > independent of polarity! Water molecules are a lot easier to ionize than air molecules, which is why you get a lot of static build up in the winter but not much in the humid summer -- the water vapor in the air will "bleed" off and distribute static charges that collect on surfaces. Your pan of water has plenty of donor water molecules as vapor near the surface/air interface. The newly ionized water vapor molecules will have the same charge as the bulk of the water in the pan, and therefore will be repelled away -- a water vapor wind, which by viscous drag will pull/ knock air molecules along with them. This induced wind will have a action/reaction effect on the water surface, likely causing some of the disturbance on the surface and the feel of wind above. -- - 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 Tue Jun 9 13:14:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11101; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:08:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:08:16 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:00:58 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Let's talk... In-Reply-To: <199806091900.OAA06251 beta2.dejanews.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"X1cBb3.0.Mj2.lOPVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19645 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 9 Jun 1998 billb eskimo.com wrote: > Today, I created our own forum at Deja News where we can discuss > things online. It is called dejanews.members.tech.wbeaty.amasci > and I described it like this: A discussion area for users of > SCIENCE HOBBYIST page, Oops, I expected this auto-generated Dejanews advertizing message to bounce. Instead it has me as the "from" address, so vortex-L accepted it. Obviously I'm messing around again. For those with interest, "Science Hobbyist" has an internal Dejanews newsgroup now on the WWW. Click on "forum" on the top page of my site to access it. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 9 13:47:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15953; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:40:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:40:41 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:39:39 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <357C92A8.4A11 interlaced.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"g1fkk3.0.xu3.8tPVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19646 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Updates: Electrostatic Air-threads http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/unusual/airthred.html On Mon, 8 Jun 1998, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > billb wrote: > > If I had, I'd > > have had to leap from my bath and run down the street shouting "I've > > found it! > > Bill, just this one vision is all I need to make my day! :-) Allova Sudden it hit me! Suck, not blow! EUREKA! What drives the air flow? Not polarity apparently (maybe I should double check though.) It seems to be driven by the direction of the e-field's gradient. Perhaps when an electrostatic air-thread is between identical electrodes, it can still exist but without transporting any air. Or perhaps the shapes of any e-fields can be manipulated so that the air is drawn FROM the surface of the mist, rather than blowing down into it. After all, air is (possibly) being drawn from the sharp tip of the emitter fiber and entering the mouth of the invisible vacuum cleaner hose. Maybe both ends blow air outwards, rather than drawing air in at one end and emitting it from the other. So, if air-threads should turn out to be scale-independant in the same way that turbulence, sparks, etc., are scale independant, then I am not ENTIRELY crazy if I jump up screaming: BERNIE VONNEGUT WAS RIGHT! TORNADOES ARE ELECTROSTATIC ENGINES! What if this is true? What if ten-meter air-threads extend invisibly for miles out of certain thunderstorms, and a certain rare shape of e-field causes them to transport air from the ground towards the sky? The e-field of the thunderstorm would drive them, and so they would constitute a type of invisible corona streamer which discharges the electrical energy in the thunderstorm while also transporting ionized air. I've always wondered what would happen if lightning had high resistance, so it could stay "turned on" for many minutes as it wandered over the ground. Maybe the answer is "phenomenon called tornado." If the velocity of air in the air-thread "tube" was a few hundred KPH, then a terrific whirlpool of air would form at the termination point of the air thread. Higher up, there would be no vortex, there would just be the usual (if bizarre) transparent air-thread and it's constrained laminar flowing core (plus timber, cattle, witches on bicycles.) WHAT DO THE TOPS OF REAL TORNADOES LOOK LIKE? Like a trash fountain? Or like a laminar stream that extends all the way to the thundercloud? I never would have considered something like this if I had not seen an air-thread shrug off my high-velocity saliva-laden air blast. A gigantic air-thread might not even SEE the physical motion of the immense tornado at its termination point on the earth's surface. So... snip an air-thread, kill a tornado? They do seem a bit robust though. Might not be so easy. I'll have to try spraying an electrolyte solution fog at an air thread, see if it notices. Maybe that's why tornadoes are weaker when crossing water. Or maybe this is insane, and has nothing at all to do with tornadoes. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 9 13:53:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA18403; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:48:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:48:27 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 12:24:15 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: H4 Resent-Message-ID: <"1xXR72.0.SV4.Q-PVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19647 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Noticed in passing (again) at: Is this H4 decay exothermic? Nuclear Wallet Card - Z( 1) Isotope[1] delta T1/2 or Z El A Jpi[2] (MeV)[3] Abundance[4] Decay Mode[5] === === ==== ======= ========= ============= ===================== 1 H 1 1/2+ 7.289 99.985% 1 2 1+ 13.136 0.015% 1 3 1/2+ 14.950 12.33 y 6 B- 4 2- 26.0 5.42 MeV N Introduction This is an updated edition of the 1990 booklet of the same name . This booklet presents selected properties of all known nuclides and their known isomeric states. The data given here are taken mostly from the adopted properties of the various nuclides as given in the Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File (ENSDF)[1]. The data in ENSDF are based on experimental results and are published in Nuclear Data Sheets[2] for A>44 and in Nuclear Physics[3,4] for A<45. For nuclides for which either there are no data in ENSDF or those data have since been superseded, the half-life and the decay modes are taken either from recent literature[5] or from other sources[e.g., 6,7,8]. The ground-state mass excesses are from the mass adjustments by G. Audi and A. H. Wapstra[9]. The isotopic abundances are those of N. E. Holden[10]. For other references, experimental data, and information on the data measurements, please refer to the original evaluations [1-4]. The data[1] were updated to June 30, 1995. Explanation of Table Column 1, Isotope (Z, El, A) Nuclides are listed in order of increasing atomic number (Z), and are subordered by increasing mass number (A). All isotopic species are included as well as all isomers with half-life> or =0.1 s, and some other isomers which decay by SF or alpha emissions. A nuclide is included even if only its mass estimate or its production cross section is available. For the latter nuclides T? limit is given[8] . Isomeric states are denoted by the symbol "m" after the mass number and are given in the order of increasing excitation energy. The 235U thermal fission products, with fractional cumulative yields>or=10-6, are italicized in the table. The information on fission products is taken from the ENDF/B-VI fission products file[11]. The names for elements Z=104-109 are those adopted by the American Chemical Society Nomenclature Committee. The symbols Rf (Rutherfordium) and Ha (Hahnium) have, not been accepted internationally due to conflicting claims about the discovery of these elements. Column 2, Jpi Spin and parity assignments, without and with parentheses, are based upon strong and weak arguments, respectively. See the introductory pages of any January issue of Nuclear Data Sheets[2] for description of strong and weak arguments for Jpi assignments. Column 3, Mass Excess, Delta Mass excesses, M-A, are given in MeV with Delta(12C)=0, by definition. For isomers the values are obtained by adding the excitation energy to the Delta(g.s.) values. Wherever the excitation energy is not known, the mass excess for the next lower isomer (or g.s.) is given. The values are given to the accuracy determined by uncertainty in Delta(g.s.) (maximum of three figures after the decimal). The uncertainty is >or=9 in the last significant figure. An appended "s" denotes that the value is obtained from systematics. Column 4, T? or Abundance The half-life and the abundance (in bold face) are shown followed by their units ("%" symbol in the case of abundance) which are followed by the uncertainty, in italics,in the last significant figure. For example, 8.1 s 10 means 8.1+-1.0 s. For some very short-lived nuclei, level widths rather than half-lives are given. There also, the width is followed by units (e.g., eV, keV, or MeV) which are followed by the uncertainty in Nitalics, if known. Column 5, Decay Mode Decay modes are given in decreasing strength from left to right, followed by the percentage branching, if known ("w" indicates a weak branch). The percentage branching is omitted where there is no competing mode of decay or no other mode has been observed. The various modes of decay are given below: B- beta- decay E epsilon (electron capture), or epsilon+beta+, or beta+ decay IT isomeric transition (through gamma or conver- sion-electron decay) n, p, A, ... neutron, proton, alpha, ... decay SF spontaneous fission 2B-, 3A, ... double beta- decay (beta-beta-), decay through emission of 3 alpha's, ... B-N, B-P, delayed n, p, alpha, ... B-A, ... emission following beta- decay EP, EA, ESF, ... delayed p, alpha, SF, ... decay following epsilon or beta+ decay Appendices: The appendices have been updated to conform to the Fundamental Physical Constants[13]. For properties of the elementary particles and for the astrophysical constants please see the Review of Particle Properties, Physical Review D50, 1173 (1994) and its subsequent biennial updates. See also the World Wide Web at URL: http://pdg.lbl.gov/ Acknowledgements The appendix on Lambda hypernuclides has been prepared by R. Chrien, BNL. The author is thankful to many colleagues, especially D. Alburger, R. Casten, R. Chrien, and J. Millener, all at BNL, P. Endt at Utrecht, R. Tilley at TUNL, and G. Audi, O. Bersillon, and J. Blachot in France for many helpful suggestions. Special thanks are due to M. Bhat, T. Burrows, R. Kinsey, and V. McLane for help with scanning recent literature. The help received in production of the booklet from other members of NNDC, particularly, M. Blennau, P. Dixon, Y. Sanborn, and J. Tallarine is gratefully acknowledged. The author is grateful for encour- agement and support received from M. Bhat, C. Dunford, and R. Meyer. This research was supported by the Division of Nuclear Physics, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, US Department of Energy. References 1.Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File- a computer file of evaluated experimental nuclear structure data maintained by the National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory (file as of June 1995). 2.Nuclear Data Sheets - Academic Press, San Diego. Evaluations published by mass number for A = 45 to 266. See page ii of any issue for the index to A-chains. 3.Nuclear Physics - North Holland Pub- lishing Co., Amsterdam - Evaluations by F. Ajzenberg-Selove and by D. R. Tilley, H. R. Weller, C. M. Cheves, and R. M. Chasteler for A = 3 to 20. 4.Energy Levels of A = 21-44 Nuclei (VII), P. M. Endt, Nuclear Physics A521, 1 (1990). 5.Nuclear Science Reference File- a bibliographic computer file of nuclear science references continually updated and maintained by the National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory. Recent literature scanned by S. Ramavataram. 6.Table of Isotopes, 8th edition, R. B. Firestone, et al. (under preparation). 7.Spontaneous Fission, D. C. Hoffman, T. M. Hamilton, and M. R. Lane, Rept. LBL-33001 (1992). 8.NUBASE: A Database of Nuclear and Decay Properties, G. Audi, O. Bersillon, J. Blachot, and A. H. Wapstra, Intl. Symposium on Radionuclide Metrology and its Applications (1995). 9.The 1993 Atomic Mass Evaluation, G. Audi and A. H. Wapstra, computerized list of recommended values based on authors' publica- tion Nuclear Physics A565, 1 (1993) 10.Table of the Isotopes, N. E. Holden, Rept BNL-61460 (1995) and private communication. 11.Evaluation and Compilation of Fission Product Yields 1993, T. R. England and B. F. Rider; Rept. LA-UR-94-3106 (1994). ENDF/B-VI evaluation; MAT #9228, Revision 1. 12.Table of Isotopes (1978), 7th edition, Editors: C. M. Lederer, V. S. Shirley, Authors: E. Browne, J. M. Dairiki, R. E. Doebler, A. A. Shihab-Eldin, J. Jardine, J. K. Tuli, and A. B. Buyrn, John Wiley, New York. 13.The Fundamental Physical Constants, E. R. Taylor and B. N. Taylor, Physics Today BG9 (August, 1995). Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 14:08:04 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA20949; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:55:27 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:55:27 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 13:49:30 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HV water dimples In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980609091620.00c5cf30 mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"fwER4.0.875._4QVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19648 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 9 Jun 1998, Scott Little wrote: > I tried using my finger tips from a distance of 6-8" looking for evidence > of Bill's air threads and didn't see much of anything (I don't have dry ice > yet). Once, however, I succeeded in getting a dust mote on the surface of > the water to start following my finger tip around sluggishly. This is what I see when my hands are very clean. I'm convinced that air-threads originate on the tips of hairs and bits of lint. But when my fingers do nothing, I can turn the hairy back of my hand towards the water and suddenly see scores of dots in the mist. Your lab is too clean! If the air is dusty, then insulated HV cables grow a tiny forest, and many of the fibers seem to be air-thread emitters. I haven't tried it yet, but perhaps air-threads will be visible where they touch a soap film. Blow some large bubbles in soapy water on the tray? I hope your resistor is rated for lots more than 20KV. It should be many inches long. 20KV resistors are rare, I usually find 5KV resistors in surplus sources. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 9 14:21:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23671; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:17:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:17:00 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:16:46 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: air-threads and plasma globes Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"bWqgE2.0.kn5.BPQVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19649 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Somebody (Horace?) pointed out the similarity between air-threads and the plasma streamers found inside a "plasma globe". Other than being high-freq AC and noble gases, the phenomena could be identical. Maybe an air-thread is a glow discharge streamer. Glow discharge in nitrogen is far dimmer than in argon or neon. If I could transport my whole mist-tray setup into an argon atmosphere, maybe I would see the dots in the fog AND the glowing white plasma filaments as well. In an argon-filled glove box, I could try pushing the visible filaments around with a pen. Maybe try hanging a tiny circle of charged hair on one of them, see if it can support a small weight. There are some (rare) eyewitness reports that the insides of tornados glow purple. One person who looked upwards as the center of a funnel passed over his body reported that the core was clear and glowing, with lightning filaments covering the rotating walls surrounding it. Nice that he was able to avoid experiencing an even closer inspection, eh? When somebody on (sci.geo.meteorology?) newsgroup brought up this story, he was attacked and ridiculed. After all, such ideas are totally unprofessional, and all researchers know that it is base pseudoscience, fit only for ignorant TV shows like "Unexplained Mysteries" (and forums like this one!) ;) Hey, maybe if this does turn out to explain tornadoes, traffic on vortex-L will increase a bit. Then we can hit on new members for funding, build a lab complex, etc. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 9 18:26:18 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA24371; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 18:21:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 18:21:24 -0700 Message-ID: <19980609231452.12083.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 16:14:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Anton Rager Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads To: vortex-l eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"BTYdg1.0.jy5.K-TVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19650 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Bill/All, Couple questions/comments. Very cool and interesting stuff BTW! 1 - How did you go about estimating the output of your ion generator? If I can find one somewhere, how do I know it's output.... 2 - Your WWW mentioned the following: >I need to let them hit a high-impedance op amp >terminal, then look at the waveform and perhaps listen >to it on audio, see if it's pure DC or noisy. Have you tried this yet? Would a FFT/Spectral proggie and a soundcard/microphone work? [no -- I'm not volunteering my laptop!!!! ;) ] 3 - I like the tornado idea.....wonder if it can drive a stick thru glass as well....? 4 - Finally.....an explantion for crop circles besides grain crop graffiti artists [local and intergalatic]. But....why only grain crops? Why not sand or other sorts of crops? Keep at it -- things are looking fun there!! == 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 Jun 9 18:53:56 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA13992; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 18:49:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 18:49:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357EEF16.AE29FDF6 ihug.co.nz> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:39:51 -0700 From: John Berry X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HV water dimples References: <3.0.1.32.19980609091620.00c5cf30 mail.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"r-QXT2.0.XQ3.kOUVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19651 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Why don't you try blowing smoke (as a substitute to mist) to see if they are there? John Berry Scott Little wrote: > I charged a 9"x12" metal pan of water to 20kV thru an 80 Mohm R. I then > approached the surface of the water with a sharp grounded metal point. At > about 6", you begin to see "stirrings" on the surface as if an erratic wind > was blowing gently down onto the water. At 2" there is a distinct > depression in the water below the point, still rather erratic. At 3/4", > just before breakdown, the depression becomes very localized and > deep...about 1/8-1/4" deep. The whole phenomenon is essentially > independent of polarity! > > I tried using my finger tips from a distance of 6-8" looking for evidence > of Bill's air threads and didn't see much of anything (I don't have dry ice > yet). Once, however, I succeeded in getting a dust mote on the surface of > the water to start following my finger tip around sluggishly. > > With the 80 Mohm R in place, breakdown is a benign event. With the R > removed from the circuit, it is quite violent...but the dimples are the > same. My DC power supply has significant output filter caps in 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 Tue Jun 9 22:24:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA26166; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:20:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:20:17 -0700 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: <99b31f75.357e174f aol.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 01:19:10 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Cc: gwatson microtronics.com.au Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re : Re: Cause for optimisim with SMOT. Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 116 Resent-Message-ID: <"I8NqM2.0.eO6.FUXVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19652 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 06/06/1998 06:21:13 , gwatson microtronics.com.au a wrote: << Thanks for the input. I will be posting photos and adjustment hints for the Mk5 on Tuesday. Will advise when they are up. -- Best Regards, Greg Watson http://www.microtronics.com.au/~gwatson >> Hi Greg, We are on 06-10-98 (Wednesday) and nothing updated.... :-( Jean-Louis Naudin (France) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 23:08:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA06111; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:06:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357E1435.7873 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:05:58 -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: Ohmori Au transmutation March, 1997 10.19.97 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"H3W6A1.0.PV1.O9YVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19653 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: October 19, 1997 Dear all, A number of remarkable electrolytic transmutation reports have been given by a group of researchers at Hokkaido University. I will examine these by focussing on a recent work by T Ohmori, M Enyo, T Mizuno, Y Nodasaka, and H Minagawa, "Transmutation in the Electrolysis of Light Water-- Excess Energy and Iron Production in a Gold Electrode," Fusion Technology, 31, (March, 1997) 210-218. It derives from earlier work, T Ohmori and M Enyo, "Excess Heat Evolution During Electrolysis of H2O With Nickel, Gold, Silver, and Tin Cathodes," Fusion Technology, 24, (Nov., 1993) 293-295. I will call these "Transmutation" and "Excess". I spent some days picking over "Excess" in November, 1995, five years ago, finding so many flaws that I left a message on Ed Storms' answering machine suggesting that it might be a deliberate hoax. Even the abstract has a typo, confusing K2CO3 as K2SO4. Apparent excess heats were claimed from 0.2 to 26%. No attempts were made to determine the loading, if any, in the unusual cathode metals. With a low current density of 8.3 to 25 mA/cm2, the runs fall into the range thoroughly debunked by Zvi Shkedi et al, Bose Corp., "Calorimetry, Excess Heat, and Farady Efficiency in Ni-H2O Electrolytic Cells, Fusion Technology, 28, (Nov., 1995) 1720-31. They did not even bother to cite "Excess" in their 15 references. Shkedi ran four light-water Ni cells at 180 to 600 mA for up to 4 days a run with an average power accuracy of 0.6 mW. All released H2 and O2 were carefully recombined and returned to the cells. Assuming 100 % Faraday efficiency, as did most studies of this reaction, he found apparent excess power of 15 to 37 %, reduced to zero when the actual recombination efficiency was factored in. Shkedi also ran, but did not describe in detail, 154 palladium D2O cells, with the same null results. Confirming was a report by JE Jones et all at Brigham Young U., "Faradaic Efficiencies Less Than 100 % during Electrolysis of Water Can Account for Reports of Excess Heat in "Cold Fusion" Cells," J. Physical Chem., 99, (1995) 6973-79. They also did not cite "Excess" in their 20 references. They used low current densities of 1-2 mA/cm2. "Excess", as did other similar studies, seemed to find more excess heat with K2CO3 than with Na2CO3. Jones wrote on page 6978: "In agreement with a recent report (20) showing that different electrolytes produce differing bubble sizes in aqueous solution, our experiments show that the difference between Na2CO3 and K2CO3 as electrolytes probably is due to differences in interfacial properties of the solutions at the electrodes. The H2 bubbles were smaller when K2CO3 was the electrolyte than when Na2CO3 was the electrolyte in the same cell. Smaller bubbles allow better mobility of gases in the electrolyte and contact between the electrolyte and the electrode surface, thus allowing more frequent reaction of dissolved gases. When detergent was aded to the Na2CO3 electrolyte, the bubbles became much smaller, did not adhere to the electrode, and resulted in about the same rate of apparent excess heat as was observed with the K2CO3 electrolyte." This shows how subtle and unexpected the artifacts can be in these deceptively simple experiments. "Transmutation", submitted Jan. 29,1996, blindly builds on this sandy foundation. Five fused quartz (SiO2) cells were run a week at 1 A between Pt mesh anode and Au cathodes, 5 or 10 cm2 area, with Na2SO4, K2CO3, KOH, K2SO4, or H2SO4 electrolytes, a current density of 100-200 mA/cm2. Page 211, "The counter electrode was a 1 X 7 cm 80-mesh platinum net...The working and the counter electrodes were placed at the bottom of the cell to minimize the temperature gradient in the electrolyte solution by vigorously stirring with H2 and O2 bubbles evolved from these electrodes." Hardly a more ideal set-up for promoting recombination and reducing Faradaic efficiency could hardly be devised. Of course, they found apparent excess heats of 4 to 22%. Page 212, "Measurement of the current efficiency was made repeatedly at a given time during the electrolysis, the result of which was 100.6, 100.1, and 101.1%. This fact shows that there is no conceivable possibility of the recombination of H2 and O2 as another cause of the excess energy production." Interestingly, they found about the same results for Na2SO4 and K2CO3, I suppose, because of the "vigorously stirring". More exciting, they found, (abstract) "In every case, a notable amount of iron atoms in the range of 1.0 X 10exp16 to 1.8 X 10exp17 atom/cm2 (true area) are detected together with the generation of a certain amount of excess energy evolution." AES was with 3.0 keV electron beam energy at 2.5 A current. One of the 12 runs with Na2SO4 was graphed twice, showing one O, two Pt, and three Fe peaks. They estimated Fe atoms occupied 44% of the top surface, about 100 Au layers, exposed by 5 minutes of Ar+ ion bombardment time. An EPMA image, scale not given, shows the Fe was distributed uniformly over the entire electrode. They estimated the Fe on this electrode was ~17 micrograms. On page 214, "Figure 8 shows the relationship between the total amount of iron atoms and the mean Rex [excess heat] obtained in every electrode/electrolyte system. Although the data were rather scattered, there seemed to be a linear relationship between these two parameters. This strongly supports the notion that iron atom production is related to excess energy evolution." This seems to me a good case of attempting to extract correlations from random fluctuations. One of the highest heat values has one of the lowest values of Fe atoms. The straight lines drawn through the points seem very arbitrary, and for the cathode areas 5 and 10 cm2, are given the same slope, although the input energy density is obviously half for the larger area, implying half the slope. Moreover, so much is left undone. Why not a simple chemical extraction and assey to determine the exact microgram amounts of Fe on each gold plate? Why not introduce controlled trace amounts of Fe into the electrolyte to study deposition patterns and the accuracy of the measurements? What is the precision and sensitivity of AES in this setting? What might be the estimated errors of all the numbers claimed? Why not collect evolved H2 and O2 and recombine them to settle the Faradaic efficiency issue? Now, we come to the Holy Grail of cold fusion transmutation research-- isotopic anomaly-- put in the singular, since only Fe-57, normally 2.1% is the most substantial claim, 14.5%, seemingly a 7-fold increase. The usual ratio of Fe-57 to Fe-56 is 0.023 . SIMS is used with a 12 keV, 100 nA O2+ primary beam. Page 214, "The SIMS measurement was made with an electrode after the electrolysis in the Na2SO4 solution...spectra of Na+, Al+, Si+, K+, Ca+, Ti+, and Cr+...Fe+. This is probably due to the high sensitivity of SIMS for these elements. The spectrum of Cs+ is attributed to a trace of cesium that remained in the vacuum chamber itself." So, it is not clear if this data refers to the same electrode studied by AES. It is not said whether SIMS was done on other plates, and whether any such data was comparable. Also, we know from the EPMA image that the Fe distribution is in tiny spots. Since SIMS operates by vaporizing micron size areas, it is crucial to know how many spots were studied, how they were selected, and how varied were the resulting data sets, 1 to 200 amu. So, clearly, we are being served a generous portion of data stew. Page 216, "The isotopic content of magnesium, silicon, potassium, calcium, titanium, chromium, and iron...Table 3...As one can see, the isotopic contents of the elements other than iron are in agreement with these natural isotopic abundances within the limits of error. Therefore, these elements can be regarded as the impurities accumulated from the electrolyte solution." Well, in that case, why doesn't the Fe have the same source? They argue that the Fe produced is "at least one to two orders of magnitude" greater than all Fe sources in the solution and the electrodes. However, this production data is highly suspect, based on estimates from AES data, not based on direct chemical extraction and physical weighing, not checked by adding controlled Fe sources to the electrolyte, not qualified by error estimates, and with no pre-run SIMS scan of the cathode. Furthermore, a huge source of impurities, including Fe, is totally ignored, the SiO2 cells in which electrolysis operates for a week. Jed Rothwell in Infinite Energy #11, Nov-Dec., 1996, in a long, detailed review of McKubre's EPRI Final Report, page 64, in the box "Fifty Sigma Results" quotes McKubre's EPRI Perspective, "The conditions in the successful cells were not entirely under experimental control because the closed cells slowly leach silica and other materials from the anode and the cathode and its supports as well as from the cell walls..," and, from the box, "Overkill Example," "Other solid parts are Al2O3, SiO2, and PTFE [Teflon], which are considered in this analysis to be nonreactive." Nonreactive? So, indeed, in "Transmutations", the actual Fe present can readily be accounted for by obvious impurity sources. In a feeble way, the issue is mentioned, page 215, "The content of the particles with mass number 54 is also increased to some extent-- perhaps because of the mixing of Cr-54." Table III has a footnote about Ni-58 in Fe-58. The argument is pressed that the ratios of FeO for mass 73 and 72 confirm the ratio of mass 57 and 56, in Fig 11. "Although the plots are scattered, these two ratios can be seen on the whole to be in agreement. Therefore...not due to FeH+ formation. From this fact, one may safely say that "heavy iron" was produced and that its production was the result of some nuclear transmutation ocurring by the light water electrolysis." Whew! We just barely got by that one! Now, "Transmutations" does contain a veritable pot of data stew, Fig. 9, the entire SIMS spectrum of the uppermost layers of the gold after electrolysis in the Na2SO4 solution. Suitably doubled by zerox, it is a wonderful sight, a Himalayan vista, the main reason I selected this work for study. Prominent peaks, with notes: Na-23 100,000 intensity counts. Cs-133 10,000 (Ni-58)2OH? (SiO)3H? The Cincinatti Group's four ICP/MS scans by Robert Liversage offer no clues. >1,000 counts Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti, Cr, Fe-56, TiO. Could Fe-56 be (Si-28)2 or CaO? >100 counts Mg, "Fe-57", FeO, ZrO (106), Au, some others. Could Fe-57 be (Si-28)2H or CaOH? ~50 counts O2, Zr-90, Rh, In, Br, Kr, Pd, Xe, Gd ?? Why isn't there more S-32 from the Na2SO4? Given all the possibilites for diatomic molecules, hydrides, nitrides, and oxides, there is plenty of room to prove just about anything. That's why data stew is so seductively tasty. Hey, experts, since we have O2, why not Si2? That'd explain away a lot of Fe! "Transmutation" establishes to my mind the amount of attention we should pay to the other recent papers by this team on transmutation. In the Cincinnati Group's ICP/MS data, Infinite Energy #13-14, we can sip some more data stew. In the four scans, we find the computer program in the first two scans assigns to mass 57 in large part 5,052 counts and then in small part 24,390 counts as ArOH, while in the last two runs, it gives mass 57 as in huge part an unknown with 2,882,095 counts and then also in huge part 446 counts. Ar is very plentiful, since it is the carrier gas in the apparatus. Should we not leap at this as more proof of the transmutation production of Fe-57? Clearly, the computer data analysis program is overwhelmed even by the simplest scan, #1 the unprocessed reagent blank, listing large unknown counts for these masses: 30 2,216,930 35 288,002 42 45,836 74 43,215 238 738,673 I spent hours today fooling around with all that data, getting nowhere, and that itself is the significant result. George Miley's famous report, "Nuclear Transmutations in Thin-Film Nickel Coatings Undergoing Electrolysis," 1996, has a "Typical low resultion SIMS scan after the run (average of microspheres in 3 layers in the cell)," which after doubling via zerox, indicates a ratio of mass 57 to 56 of about 200 to 3,000, about .075, far more than the original 0.023. R Bush and R Eagleton, "Evidence for Electrolytically Induced Transmutation and Radioactivity Correlated with Excess Heat in Electrolytic Cells with Light Water Rubidium Salt Electrolytes," Trans. Fusion Technology, Dec., 1994, 26, p. 344-54, has a more adaquate pyrex closed cell with an internal platinum black recombiner, at 1.0 mA/cm2, but gives no data about the run history, except to say that the total excess heat for Cell 53 is (4.0 +- 0.8) X 10exp19 MeV. He does give four SIMS graphs: for mass 57 vs 56 we, after the obligatory doubling of the graphs via zerox, find pre-run values, about 60,000 to 300,000, ratio .2, and post-run, 200 to 6,000, ratio .03. So, the pre-run ratio is many times more anomalous than the post-run. Now, that's efficient research! No need to even run the electrolysis! This is a much more significant result than the claimed transmutation of rubidium to strontium, eh? In my surveys, I have not noticed any evidence as to the actual loading achieved in nickel or gold. But nor have I found any claims that null results are due to using inferior sources of nickel. The experiments are simple. No secret recipes are invoked. Yet, there are no independent replications, and it's getting to be years. So, at this point, after all this hassle, there seems to me to be no convincing evidence that low energy nuclear transmutations exist. Wayne Green's Elemental Energy (Cold Fusion) # 23, Sept., 1997, has an abstract by Prof. Hiroshi Yamada, Dept. Electrical Engineering, Iwate U., Morioka 020, Japan: "Products on Gold-plate Cathode in Water Electrolysis System (poster presentation) In an Au/H2O electrolysis system with an Na2SO4 solution, the electrolysis was carried out for 16-40 days with a current density of 0.5 A/cm2. The elements on the gold-plate cathode were identified by means of secondary ion mass spectrometry and X-ray photo-electron spectroscopy. A large amount of carbon and iron were observed to have been deposited on the gold-plate." Any takers? Rich Murray rmforall earthlink.net Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 23:17:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA04118; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:08:59 -0700 Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:08:59 -0700 Message-ID: <357E154B.4F97 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:10:35 -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: Miley SIMS data 4.8.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"7_lRZ3.0.B01.wBYVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19654 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: April 8, 1998 Dear all, Here is a summary of some of the interesting isotopic shift SIMS data for Run #3, 800 A Ni film on plastic beads in Li2SO4, found by Little with chemical analysis to contain about [General Engineering] Fe 14 mcg, Zn 147 mcg, and Pb 43 mcg, which could well have plated onto the beads, while the fresh beads by XRF were found to have 130+-9 mcg Fe. Standard data from CRC tables contains the uncertainty of the last digits in parenthesis. Element CRC CRC error Run #3 SIMS Production Rate % +-% % counts atoms/sec-cc film, rounded Li-6 7.5(2) 3. -1. 184 7E12 Li-7 92.5(2) 2. 1. 2724 1E14 So the SIMS data is two to three times more accurate than CRC tables, proving no isotopic shifts in the Li, which of course comes from the electrolyte. Ti-46 8.0(1) 1. .03 1695 7E14 Ti-47 7.3(1) 1. .26 1606 7E14 Ti-48 73.8(1) .1 -2. 15264 6E15 Ti-49 5.5(1) 2. 2. 1595 6E14 Ti-50 5.4(1) 2. -.03 1131 5E14 Again, the SIMS shifts are as accurate or far more accurate than CRC data, except for Ti-48. The -2% shift for Ti-48 must be an analysis artifact from the computer program used, since a 2% shift in Ti-49, which is present at 5.5%, does not logically compel ascribing a -2% shift in Ti-48, present at 73.8%. So, the data for Ti, the only multi-isotope element to have all SIMS counts above 1000, show normal isotopic ratios: more accurate SIMS could not establish isotopic anomalies for Ti, because the accuracy of the CRC tables has already been matched. And so, an impurity source for Ti is thus strongly indicated. The failings of the software analysis program are evident. My Eighth Miley Critique uses Miley's before and after data for Run #8, the only run for which he has provided this essential data. We aren't given the raw SIMS counts, so the value of the data can not be established. For V and Cu, the before and after isotopic ratios are absolutely unchanged. Rothwell reported that at LENR-2 in Sept., 1996, Miley claimed transmutations from runs with Au and Ti film, which would be excellent controls, if he would release the raw data. Cr-50 4.345(13) .3 -.04 28 1E13 Cr-52 83.789(18) .02 -.8 532 2E14 Cr-53 9.501(17) .2 -.8 56 2E13 Cr-54 2.365(7) .3 1.6 26 1E13 Again, the computer program gives puzzling outcomes: For Cr-50 [4%], 28 counts gives -.04% shift. For Cr-54 [2%], 26 counts gives 1.6% shift. It seems that the shifts in the decreased isotopes are added to get the opposite shift in the increased isotope; this is obviously not an adequate procedure. A better approach would compare ratios, not differences. Fe-54 5.8(1) 2. .2 72 7E14 Fe-56 91.72(30) .3 -.2 1136 1E16 Fe-57 2.1(1) 5. -.04 54 3E14 Fe-58 .28(1) 4. -.01 4 4E13 Again, we find obvious problems in the computer program. It appears that the SIMS is far more accurate than the CRC standards. But the value for Fe-58 [.3% abundance] is based on only 4 counts-- how does that lead to a -.01 % shift? And the Production Rate for Fe-58 is listed as precisely 3.72E13-- an absurd and misleading claim. The five values of Ni, with counts from 216 to 132569, are all losses, with exactly zero isotopic shifts. This proves that the data was, to some degree, created, rather than computed from the counts by an adaquate, standardized procedure. Cu-63 69.17(3) .04 -17. 149 3E14 Cu-65 30.83(3) .1 +17. 135 3E14 Here is, on the face of it, strong evidence for a large isotopic shift. But Ni-64 has a count of 216, while Zn-64 has a count of 467, so their hydrides could easily have inflated the smaller count expected for Cu-65. More tests of this element are warrented. Does the same isotopic shift exist in the other seven runs of Miley's data? Zn-64 48.6(3) .6 1. 467 5E14 Zn-66 27.9(2) .7 -.3 72 3E14 Zn_67 4.1(1) 2. -.1 24 4E13 Zn_68 18.8(4) 2. 2. 9 9E11 Zn-70 .6(1) 17. -.04 1 6E12 Here are more absurd results. For Zn-70, a count of 1 gives -.04% shift, compared to +-17% CRC value. For Zn-68, a count of 9 gives 2% shift, compared to CRC +-2% value. With XRF, Little found Cu to be 17.4 ppm of Run #3 whole used 800 A beads, which, multiplied by 300, gives 5220 ppm in the Ni film, and 11.6 mcg for a bed mass of .67 gm. Miley's second paper has NAA value in Table 4b for Cu as 64.2 ppm whole beads without Ni film, or 43 mcg for a bed mass of Little's value of .67 gm. Table 4a lists NAA value for Cu in whole fresh beads with 650 A Ni film as 27.0 ppm, or 18.1 mcg for a mass mass of .67 gm. Table 3 lists NAA data, computed for about 1000 fresh 650 A beads: Cu-63 3.57E15 62.93 amu 1.66E-24 gm/amu = 373E-9 = .373 mcg Cu-65 1.54E15 64.93 amu .166 mcg .539 mcg Cu So, the amount of Cu in the whole bed of about 1000 fresh beads is variously: 43, 18.1, and .539 mcg fresh, and 11.6 mcg used. Table 3, the NAA data for Run #8 for 650 A Ni film on used beads for Cu, very similar to Little's Run #3 800 A beads, allows us to calculate: Cu-63 .117 mcg/10 beads 11.7 mcg/ 1000 beads Cu-65 .0519 5.19 16.9 mcg Cu used beads We remember that NAA is always for different samples of 10 beads for each measurement. The above data shows that there is extreme variation from bead to bead. Little measured 100 beads, and found a mean of .863 mm, with half-peak values of .75 and .85 mm [eyeball]: the mass of a bead will vary according to the cube of the diameter. He observed that: "Some of them [used Run #3 beads] were clear and had apparently lost their coatings but most of them retained a metallic appearance." Likewise, Table 3 in Miley's second paper shows that 3 of 48 NAA values for 8 NAA elements in six runs had a drop from new to used 10 bead samples. Therefore, we are justified in making only rough, qualitative conclusions from this data about apparent "Production Rates". Table 4a in Miley's first paper give NAA for a sample of 10 Run #8 650 A used beads for Cu as 1840.9 ppm, which for a bead mass of .670 gm, gives 1233 mcg = 1.233 mg. This is an increase of 68.2 times. The ll.6 mcg value in Little's Run #3 used beads is a hundred-fold less. Little suggests that Cu might be an impurity in the solid Li2SO4 at about the 1 ppm level. Miley in his first paper in Table 4a lists Cu as .8 ppm of the Li2SO4 electrolyte, or 80 mcg. This establishes the electrolyte as the Cu source. This in turn establishes that if there are apparent isotopic shifts for Cu, they are not likely to be from nuclear transmutations. However, the NAA data, Cu atoms per 1000 beads, fresh and used, from Table 3 in Miley's first paper for Run #8 for the two Cu isotopes, calculated in my First and Eighth Miley Critiques, shows no isotopic shift in this increase: 29-Cu63 3.57E15 116E15 32.5 ratio 29-Cu65 1.54E15 49.7E15 32.3 Note that the Cu increase by this NAA test is half the increase of the above quoted NAA result, each based on a different samples of 10 beads each, fresh and used, so that four sample sets are involved in these figures. NiH and TiO could provide molecular interferences with Ni-62 (765 counts) and 64 (216 counts) and Ti-47 (1606 counts) and 49 (1595 counts) [The SIMS counts are for Run #3 used beads.]. Table 3 in Miley's second paper gives NAA yields [used minus fresh} for six runs, and I add Production Rates via SIMS for these and for Run #15 and Little's Run #3 for both isotopes, from Miley's graph of this data: #5 #7A #8 #11 #13 #18C #15 #3 3E3 1.24E2 1E3 3E2 -4E2 3E1 mcg/1000 beads 3000 124 1000 300 -400 30 5E15 4E15 1E15 1E16 1E15 0 1E14 3E14 atoms/sec-cc bead 3E15 2E15 1E15 5E15 5E14 0 1E14 3E14 Only runs # 11, 15, and 3 have strong apparent isotopic shifts, while # 18C, the ultra-clean run, has zero Cu by SIMS, and only 30 mcg Cu per 1000 beads by NAA. Run #13 has an actual loss of 400 mcg. The 1000 mcg yield of Cu for Run #8 indicates that the used beads have at least 1000 mcg Cu, close to the value of 1223 mcg from table 4a. Little's Run #3 was designed to be as similar as possible to Miley's Run #8. The SIMS data shows that Run #8 has three times the Production Rate for Cu as does Little's Run #3, while above we found that the related ratio for amount of Cu in the used beads, Run #8 vs Run #3, was about a hundred, comparing Miley's NAA data for a sample of 10 beads, with Little's XRF data for the whole bead bed, over 1000 beads, mass .67 gm. Miley has a Table 1, for Run # 18C, the ultra-clean run, which had the lowest values for Cu, "Trace Metal concentrations in Lithium Sulfate Electrolyte Solution, ng/mL (ppb)": Cu is given as <20 ppb before run, and detected, but below quantitation range, after ten days and at the end of the run. So, the data indicates the commonsense conclusion that higher levels of Cu after a run results from Cu inpurities, and that this contamination can vary greatly in different runs. The source for Zr is not known, but Little points out that it could well be an impurity at the 1ppm level in the Li2SO4: Zr-90 51.45(3) .06% 1.6% 1934 8E14 Zr-91 11.22(4) .4 1.4 459 2E14 Zr-92 17.15(2) .1 -.2 617 3E14 Zr-94 17.38(4) .2 -2.3 549 2E14 Zr-96 2.80(2) .7 -.5 84 4E13 Three of the shifts are many times the CRC error bars, while one is practically zero. The counts are high. I can't find any obvious molecular interferences. Further investigation of this apparent anomaly is warrented. Pd-102 1.02(1) 1. -.5 4 3E13 Pd-104 11.14(8) .7 -8. 29 2E14 Pd-105 22.33(8) .4 -16. 54 3E14 Pd-106 27.33(3) .1 24. 458 2E15 Pd-108 26.46(9) .3 -5. 196 1E15 Pd-110 11.72(9) .8 .05 162 8E14 Pd clearly comes from the anode lead: therefore, the apparent large isotopic shifts are not likely to be from transmutation. There is certainly a problem with the data analysis program, and may be some kind of artifact in the SIMS as well. Ag-107 51.839(7) .01 33. 136 2E14 Ag-109 48.161(7) .01 -33. 24 4E13 With very low counts, there is a possible issue about Ag isotopic shift. PdH with Pd-106 and 108 may offer interferences. Pb-204 1.4(1) 7. .02 0 1E13 Pb-206 24.1(1) .4 .15 22 2E14 Pb-207 22.1(1) .4 .03 18 1E14 Pb-208 52.4(1) .002 -.18 39 3E14 With very low counts and one zero, the results for Pb seem capriciously close to CRC values, with three isotopic shifts far less than CRC error bars. I decided to check to see if there is a systematic pattern in the plus and minus isotopic shifts, comparing Run #3 with Run #8, for the elements with SIMS counts above about 20. The results for V, Cr, Fe, Cu, Zn, Zr, Pd are quite different. Of the more abundant, "NAA elements", only Ag has the same plus and minus pattern. So do the three most abundant isotopes of Pb. I did not compare Ni. This certainly confirms the random scatter interpretation of the data soup. Neither nuclear transmutations nor a subtle SIMS artifact can be traced. Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Tue Jun 9 23:33:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA09959; Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 23:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357E19E2.5F31 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:30:10 -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: Forsley & Little points 6.9.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"HQ-bC.0.QR2.DWYVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19655 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 9, 1998 Hello All, I will apply pertinent comments from Forsley's "Analyzing Nuclear Ash" and Little's "Search for Evidence of Nuclear Transmutations" to "Transmutation In a Gold-Light Water Electrolysis System," Ohmori, Mizuno, Nodasaka, Enyo, Fusion Technology, 33, (May, 1998, received at LANL Library June 2) 367-382, received by FT March 31, 1997. Yoshinobu Nodasaka is from the School of Dentistry, not "Density". I will call Ohmori's 1998 paper, for brevity, "Electrolysis". All these reports were presented at ICCF-7 in April. tohmori cat.hokadai.ac.jp [not acljp] mizuno@hune.hokudai.ac.jp Many details are available in Ohmori, Mizuno, Enyo, "Isotopic Distributions of Heavy Metal Elements Produced During the Light Water Electrolysis on Gold Electrodes," J. New Energy, 1 (3), (Fall, 1996), 90-105, which I will term, "Isotopic", as well as T Ohmori, M Enyo, T Mizuno, Y Nodasaka, and H Minagawa, "Transmutation in the Electrolysis of Light Water-- Excess Energy and Iron Production in a Gold Electrode," Fusion Technology, 31, (March, 1997), 210-218, and their earlier report, T Ohmori and M Enyo, "Excess Heat Evolution During Electrolysis of H2O With Nickel, Gold, Silver, and Tin Cathodes," Fusion Technology, 24 (Nov., 1993), p. 293-295. I will call these "Transmutation" and "Excess". [post to Rich Murray from Larry Forsley, June 5] Please cite that this work was presented at the 1998 International Cold Fusion Conference VII, in Vancouver, BC, Canada, April 1998. The Conference Proceedings are available for $50. from Eneco in Salt Lake City, UT at 801-583-2000. Also, please send as a disclaimer, that regardless of Scott Little's comments, this paper by Forsley, et. al., doesn't explicitly refer to the CETI process, but rather, refers to anyone purporting to contrive the electrocatalytic reduction of radioactivity. Thanks. Good comments from various people by the way. I've enjoyed this bit of electronic scholarship. Larry Analyzing Nuclear Ash from the Electrocatalytic Reduction of Radioactivity in Uranium and Thorium Lawrence Forsley, Robert August, Jacob Jorne, Jay Khim, Fred Mis; and Gary Phillips 1 JWK International Corporation, Suite 800, 7617 Little River Turnpike, Annandale, VA 22003 USA LForsley jwk.com Abstract A proprietary electrolytic system for the reduction of radioactivity in uranium and thorium was evaluated from June through December 1996. An exhaustive analysis of reaction materials taken before, during and after the experiments was carried out. These tests involved trace metals analysis via Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA), Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray (EDAX) analysis and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS). Additional tests involved high resolution mass spectroscopy of evolved gasses and reaction products, allowing isotopic differentiation, and high resolution gamma spectroscopy. Neutrons were searched for via 235U fission fragments and n-g reactions. The results of over 10 series of runs were ambiguous. However, the definitive test: operating a system in a low background cave with high resolution gamma spectroscopy, failed to show any radioactive reduction of the system as a whole. Regardless of these results, the testing protocols developed define the standard and rigor by which any proposed catalytically reduced radioactive system must be subjected. It is crucial that statistically significant results be obtained, including the statistical uniformity of the matrix composition, as otherwise comparisons will be impossible and the conclusions drawn will be erroneous... One indication of elemental transmutation would be evidence of a K-capture of an electron or the X-ray emission which occurs when an electron fills a new shell formed during transmutation... Neutron activation analysis (NAA) requires subjecting a sample to an intense neutron flux for several minutes followed by successive counting periods where gamma ray emissions are recorded. Not all elements can be activated by this mechanism, but for those that can be, NAA provides an exquisitely sensitive technique accurate to parts per billion or better for some isotopes. NAA can also be used to give isotopic data. However, care must be taken, where assumptions of isotopic natural abundance are made, as well as where there is a variable abundance, such as with lead... Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS) compliments NAA. A sample is heated to several thousand degrees Celsius and injected into a mass spectrometer. The technique is typically sensitive to parts per billion. Unfortunately, three orders of magnitude in sensitivity is lost because of the small sample sizes employed. This results in a sensitivity of about 2-5 parts per million. Although this is sufficient for many of the candidate transmutation materials, it is insensitive at this level to the rare earths that are also candidate transmutation products. The argon isotope 40Ar, which is used as the feed gas in the instrument, interferes with the calcium isotope 40Ca, and compromises the sensitivity for this isotope. In addition, sample preparation compromises this technique. Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy (ICP/MS) requires that a sample be dissolved in a liquid for injection. Very corrosive acids are chosen such as perchloric acid. Unfortunately, another candidate transmutation element, silicon, does not dissolve in perchloric acid, so "wet" preparation is very important... A high resolution ICP/MS can be tuned to count specific ions with a particular mass. This can be used to accurately determine the isotopic abundance of various elements. Unfortunately, isotopes with the same mass, such as the nickel isotope 64Ni and the zinc isotope 64Zn are indistinguishable even with the highest resolution mass spectrometer. These isotopes require a chemical separation prior to the ICP/MS analysis. Energy Dispersive Atomic X-ray (EDAX) analysis provides a surface elemental scan by looking at secondary X-rays from a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) electron beam as it is directed across a sample. This technique is sensitive to parts per thousand. However, this low resolution is useful since an element must be in high concentration to be observed by this technique... The tubing, plastic housings and filter paper were also analyzed. The possible effects observed included reductions in radioactivity and elemental transmutation, however these were inconclusive because of inhomogeneous samples and statistically incomplete sampling... High resolution mass spectroscopy of the evolved gasses during experiments at the University of Rochester (UR) and NRL showed no isotopic or gas production anomalies. Curiously, the UR experiment, which was gas sampled, indicated radioactive reduction by matrix measurements, whereas the NRL gas sampled experiment showed no reduction during the real time gamma counting experiment. U and Th were found to apparently decrease by 50%-90%, as measured in the same sample before and after an experimental run, by alpha, beta and gamma counting. Very little U and no Th was on the filter paper or in the electrolyte, as measured by gamma counting and neutron activation of the electrolyte. However, it was difficult to accurately weigh the matrix after a run because of Li2SO4 coatings and the possibility of washing away the matrix while rinsing off the Li2SO4. It is suspected that matrix fines became distributed throughout the system, thereby resulting in an "apparent" reduction. ICP/MS showed an apparent increase in elemental Ba(+104x), Ca, Ni(+18.5x), Mg, Zn(+10x), Al, Pb (+15x) and decreases in U and Th. However, the material was not uniform, rendering before and after run comparisons statistically impossible. Further testing is also required to rule out contamination from handling and other sources. Various "inert" components, such as O-rings, have been shown to be contamination sources, especially barium [LITT98]. It is worth noting that due to the short time scales of the experiments, typically 4 hours, and the low current densities, less than 0.2 amps, an insignificant electrolytically induced contamination concentration should occur [BOCK96]. U and Th have a neutron excess. 238U has a ratio of 146:92 or 1.6:1, neutrons to protons. 232Th has a ratio of 142:90, also 1.6:1. Any transmutation of these elements must account for these surplus neutrons. ICP/MS data of possible transmuted Mg, Ni, Cu, Zn and Ba showed no change in their naturally occurring isotopic abundances within the statistical error of the measurement. Indeed, there were 1-2 percent changes between the used and unused samples, as well as natural abundances, but these were all within the error bars. The inability to distinguish between 64Ni and 64Zn leaves open the possibility that the heavy nickel isotope 64Ni may be in higher abundance and the light zinc isotope 64Zn in lower abundance, or vice versa. Similarly, 67Zn can not be reported because it overlaps with doubly charged 134Ba++ in the mass spectrometer. ICP/MS is accurate enough to correctly identify three uranium isotopes: 234U, 235U, and 238U in the samples. Since we used depleted 235U uranium, ICP/MS showed the samples contained 0.2% 235U, vs. a natural abundance of 0.7% 235U, which is consistent with commercially available uranium. EDAX analysis showed the initial matrix to consist of S, U, Cu, and Th. After a run there was a qualitative reduction in the U and Th line heights, along with the additional presence of Mg, Al, Si, Sb, Cr, Fe, Ni, Cu, Os, and Pt. Os may be confused with a Cu peak. S was in the original matrix, and in the Li2SO4 added to the electrolyte. There were trace amounts of Cr, Fe, Ni and Pt in the system, primarily in the electrical feed wires and Ti electrodes. Similarly, Al and Si were present in the alumina pump head used prior to the adoption of a contact-less peristaltic pump. However, Ti was notably absent, despite the Ti electrodes presenting the largest surface area for contact. This may be indicative of an oxide forming on the Ti, thereby sealing it from contact with the electrolyte, as well as reducing its electrical conductivity. It was suggested that under these conditions the Pt feed wire provides the majority of the surface area for electrolysis, and hence, an active source of contamination [LITT98]. It should also be noted that the U nucleus binding energy provides on the order of 200 MeV/nucleus fission. Although these experiments were run without calorimetry, there was no perceptible temperature increase (>5 degrees C) associated with liberating this energy. Thorium fission would also result in similar excess energy. 5. Statistical Sampling The major flaw in this study was the inability to establish a normal distribution for the radioactive matrix so as to allow random sampling to give statistically meaningful results of both radioactive and trace materials before and after experiments. A significant effort will be required in the future to determine the statistical distribution of the matrix components, since ICP/MS and NAA are destructive, and comparisons require a normal distribution. Similarly, the small sample size, coupled with the secular dis-equilibrium of the U and Th daughter decay products, gave rise to poor gamma counting statistics. 6. Conclusion These were the first exhaustive measurements of possible radioactive reduction attempting to account for mass, neutron and radiation balances. Although 50-90% apparent reductions in U and Th were indicated by a variety of analytic techniques comparing the matrix before and after an experiment, its inhomogeneous nature coupled with possible losses through handling, make statistically significant comparisons impossible. It is likely that fines with a high surface to volume ratio, and consequently increased U and Th uptake during matrix fabrication, were mechanically redistributed through the system, thereby accounting for observed radioactive reductions. Morrison [MORR98] suggested tagging future experiments with strong gamma emitters like 137Cs or 131I to track material transport. However, the tag’s chemistry will differ from that of U and Th, or their decay daughters. There were no isotope shifts from natural abundance within experimental error for Mg, Ni, Cu, Zn, Ba, or U. There was no evidence of >100 KeV radiation, indicating neither radioactive fission products nor neutrons observed by n-g reactions. No anomalous gases or isotopes were seen during two runs. Both the neutron surplus and the unseen excess binding energy present major experimental and theoretical difficulties for the proposed system. Similarly, the observed lack of radioactive reduction in a system undergoing real time gamma analysis challenges claims of radioactive reduction. These experimental protocols, monitoring energy, mass, neutron and radiation balances in a statistically significant way, are required of all systems purporting to reduce radioactivity using hitherto unknown physical processes.[end of Forsley quotes] [Pertinent comments from Scott R. Little and Hal Puthoff, "Search for Evidence of Nuclear Transmutations in the CETI RIFEX Kit," http://www.eden.com/~little/new.htm , 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 posted on Vortex-L and sci.physics.fusion by Rich Murray, June 2, available on Vortex-L archive: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html Tentative Conclusions Patterns in the XRF results suggest that the electrolyte circuit can become contaminated with an element during one run and then deliver that element to the beads in subsequent runs. Look at the Zn concentrations, for example. In Run 1, the system was probably contaminated with Zn from the buna O-rings and 122 micrograms of Zn were collected on the beads. In Run 2, with the buna O-rings removed, we got 45 micrograms of Zn and then in Run 3 we got 25 micrograms of Zn, as if the Zn was slowly being purged from the circuit. Also consider the Pt results. In Run 1 and Run 2 the system was probably contaminated with Pt from the Pt anode. In Run 3, with the Pt removed from the system we see a much smaller but still measurable quantity of Pt in the reacted beads, almost certainly due to Pt contamination of the circuit. With this perspective we decided to focus our attention on the remaining anomalies in the results from Run 3, i.e. where did the Fe, Zn, and Pb come from? Analysis of the Electrolyte We decided to have the fresh Li2SO4 analyzed for Fe, Zn and Pb. We sent samples of our well-blended Li2SO4 stock to Galbraith Laboratories and General Engineering Laboratories. The results are presented in Table 5. Table 5: Laboratory analysis of the Li2SO4 (in ppm) Lab Fe Zn Pb Galbraith <0.9 9 5 General Engineering 2.9 51 9 Aldrich lot analysis - 4 - The agreement among these results is, in our experience, fairly typical of such low-level analyses with the exception of the General Engineering Zn result. We asked them to repeat the Zn analysis on a fresh split of the Li2SO4 and their second result was 31 ppm Zn…not a lot better. A possible cause for their apparent error is the unusual sample matrix (i.e. pure Li2SO4). Using these results we calculated the mass of each element present in the RIFEX electrolyte circuit (i.e. the mass of each element in 86 ml of a 0.5M solution of this Li2SO4). The results, along with the increase in mass observed for each of these elements in the Run 3 reacted beads are presented in Table 6. Table 6: Total micrograms of element in fresh electrolyte and observed increase in element in the reacted beads Lab Fe Zn Pb Galbraith <4 43 24 General Engineering 14 147* 43 Aldrich lot analysis - 19 - Run 3 reacted beads 95 24 45 * based upon their second analysis Except for the Fe it was now apparent that the Li2SO4 contained sufficient quantities of these elements to explain their appearance in the reacted beads. There was only one thing left to do: analyze the used electrolyte to see if it had been depleted of these elements. We slowly evaporated (at 70° C) some of the Run 3 electrolyte to dryness and sent a measured sample to Galbraith Labs for analysis. We corrected the results they got for the fact that the used Li2SO4 was actually Li2SO4·H2O whereas the new Li2SO4 was anhydrous. The corrected results are presented in Table 7 along with their original results on the new Li2SO4 for comparison. Table 7: Galbraith Labs Analysis of New and Used Li2SO4 (in ppm) Sample Fe Zn Pb New Li2SO4 <0.9 9 5 Li2SO4 from Run 3 1.4 6 <1 Both Pb and Zn had indeed been depleted. In the case of Zn, the observed depletion would provide 14 micrograms to deposit on the beads, somewhat less than the 24 micrograms found in the Run 3 beads. In the case of Pb, the observed depletion would provide 19-24 micrograms, again somewhat less than the 45 micrograms of Pb found in the Run 3 beads. Interestingly the Fe content of the electrolyte appeared to increase slightly due to usage as if there was still a source of Fe in the system... Speculation We are convinced by the dramatic reduction in Pt in Run 3 (which used a Pd anode) that the Pt observed in the Run 1 and Run 2 beads came from the Pt anodes used in those runs. We spoke to several electrochemists about this issue and the general consensus was that Pt does indeed oxidize under anodic conditions but more slowly than any other metal. For Pb and Zn, the analyses of the new and used electrolyte strongly suggest to us that the appearance of these elements in the reacted beads is due to a simple electrodeposition process. The observed depletion of these two elements falls about a factor of 2 short of matching their concentration in the reacted beads but this difference is not likely to be significant. In the case of Zn, the data in Table 4 indicates that we could still be collecting Zn that was introduced into the circuit in Run 1. If only 10 of the 24 micrograms of Zn found in the Run 3 beads came from residual Zn in the circuit, the electrolyte depletion would explain the balance. In the case of Pb, perhaps Galbraith's analysis of the new Li2SO4 was low by a factor of 2. General Engineering Labs reported almost twice as much Pb in the new Li2SO4 as Galbraith. Finally we must consider the possibility of errors in our XRF results. The Fe content of the reacted beads is a bit more mysterious. All the electrolyte analyses agree that it is not coming from the Li2SO4. The iron powder in the JB-WELD epoxy clearly contaminated the system during Run 1 but the data in Table 4 suggests that the Fe content of the reacted beads would level off at about 200 ppm if more runs were performed. Since the uncoated beads contain 130 ppm Fe, this leaves about 70 ppm (47 micrograms in the bead bed) of Fe that somehow appears in the reacted beads. Possible identified sources for this iron include residual Fe deposited in the circuit during Run 1, the red silicone O-ring in the filter holder, and the ceramic piston and cylinder in the electrolyte pump. We believe that these elements appear in the reacted beads as a result of electrodeposition of cations in the electrolyte that were either present initially or were dissolved from various sources in the electrolyte circuit. However, our quantification of these elements and their potential sources does not balance precisely. In our opinion the possible explanations for this discrepancy in quantification should be prioritized as follows: 1.Errors in the laboratory analysis of the fresh and used electrolyte 2.Errors in the XRF analysis of the reacted beads 3.Residual contamination of the electrolyte circuit from Run 1 4.Known sources of contamination within the electrolyte circuit (in the case of Fe) 5.As yet unidentified sources of contamination within the electrolyte circuit 6.Creation of these elements by nuclear transmutations in the cell We do not lightly place nuclear transmutations last in this list. At the outset of this study, we were encouraged by reports of large excess heat from cells with similar beads. Indeed, Miley reported 3 observing low levels of excess heat (~0.5 watt) from beads virtually identical to those in the RIFEX kit. The existence of a strong excess heat phenomenon, exceeding all possible stored chemical energy limits, essentially demanded that nuclear reactions were involved. One must consider the possibility that the excess heat measurements were in error. If there were no excess heat, essentially all incentive to search for evidence of nuclear reactions would disappear. Further, we would no longer be tempted to interpret relatively minor discrepancies in the analysis of the cell components as such evidence. Our own calorimetric measurements on the beads in the RIFEX kit6 show no evidence of excess heat. This is at odds with Dr. Miley's experimental results 3 but consistent with the possibility that there are no nuclear reactions occurring in the RIFEX kit... Of primary interest is the production rate that corresponds to the minimum detectable amount of an element in the reacted beads. Using our XRF methods, the detection limit approaches 10 ppm under favorable conditions. Taking the element V for example, 10 ppm in the reacted beads (assuming the fresh beads contained no V) corresponds to a production rate of about 4x1014 atoms/sec-cc. This is quite a large value, near the top of the observed SIMS production rates. Does this mean that XRF is relatively insensitive? For comparison let's look at the various methods employed to analyze the electrolyte. In our case we submitted the dry Li2SO4 to the laboratory so they could control the sample preparation as needed to achieve the best possible detection limit. Galbraith Labs balked at our request to achieve 0.1 ppm accuracy in the analysis of Fe, Zn & Pb in Li2SO4. They estimated an accuracy of 0.5 ppm and they reported the results rounded to the nearest ppm. It is therefore reasonable to assume that their detection limit is about 1 ppm for such elements in Li2SO4. Our RIFEX runs used 4.5 g of Li2SO4. At a concentration of 1 ppm, there would be 4.5 micrograms of that element in the fresh electrolyte. If all of that element were deposited on the beads during the run, the resulting concentration in the reacted beads would be 7 ppm…very close to the XRF detection limit. What about direct analysis of the electrolyte? Here is an ICP-MS analysis performed by CETI on a 0.5M solution of the RIFEX Li2SO4 (data received via email from Maria Okuniewski on 12MAR97): Element Mass Concentration (mg/L) [equals ppm] Mg 25 <1000 Ca 44 <5000 Ti 49 617 V 51 <250 Cr 52 <150 Mn 55 <10 Fe 57 <1250 Co 59 <50 Ni 60 <20 Ni 62 <150 Cu 63 <400 Cu 65 <400 Zn 68 <500 Ge 73 <100 Se 82 <250 Zr 90 188.9 Zr 91 182.2 Nb 93 <100 Mo 97 <50 Ru 101 <100 Pd 102 105.2 Pd 104 <100 Pd 105 <100 Ag 107 <10 Ag 109 <10 Cd 114 <150 Sn 117 <50 Sn 118 <50 Sn 119 <50 Sn 120 <50 Yb 171 <100 Yb 172 <100 Yb 173 <100 Hf 177 <100 Hf 178 <100 Hf 179 <100 A report of "<50" tells us that the detection limit is 50 mg/L. [equals ppm] There are a few elements with detection limits better than 50 mg/L and many that are worse. Taking 50 mg/L as a typical detection limit, we can convert that into a total of 4.3 micrograms in the 86 ml of electrolyte used in our RIFEX runs. If all of that were deposited on the beads the resulting concentration would be about 6 ppm, again close to the XRF detection limit of 10 ppm. So all these analytical methods, except SIMS, have roughly equivalent detection limits. Using the production rate formula we can plot a line on the SIMS data from our Run 3 beads that represents the approximate detection limit of the other analytical methods. (The line has been labeled "1 ppm" because it represents that concentration in the dry Li2SO4). Most of the SIMS results are below the line! SIMS is a very sensitive analytical technique but, in this case, the effective sensitivity is greatly enhanced. The SIMS directly analyzes the thin bead coating upon which contaminants from the entire volume of electrolyte tend to be deposited by the electrolysis. In essence, the RIFEX experiment serves as a preconcentration step for SIMS analysis of trace elements in the electrolyte. This realization has an enormous impact on the matter at hand: *** Every SIMS element that sits below the 1 ppm line could possibly be coming from an undetectable trace contaminant in the electrolyte.*** For the purposes at hand, we will therefore ignore all of the SIMS results that are below the 1 ppm line. We simply do not have the means to prove that those elements were not present in the electrolyte at the start of the run. Even if we employed analytical methods with 10x better sensitivity only a handful of additional elements would be included. The majority of the SIMS results are several orders of magnitude below the 1 ppm line. What about the elements that are above the 1 ppm line? Several of them (Fe, Zn, Pb, Pt, & Pd) were detected in our analytical work and have been traced to identifiable sources within the RIFEX circuit. Some of them (C, S, Zr, & Cd) are not in our XRF analytical range. The remainder (Ti, As, & Hg) warrant some discussion. The total SIMS Ti result is equivalent to 213 ppm Ti in the Run 3 beads. Our XRF results showed little or no Ti and our detection limit for Ti is probably ~30 ppm. We cannot resolve this Ti discrepancy. Regarding As, the SIMS may well be correct. The SIMS result works out to 28 ppm As. Such an As peak could be hiding beneath the Pb La peak from the 68 ppm Pb; it's a classic XRF interference. The Hg is an interesting case. The point labeled Hg in Figure E2 is 204Hg. There were only 2 counts in that channel in the SIMS raw data…and there were zero counts in the channels for 196Hg, 198Hg, 199Hg, 200Hg, 201Hg, & 202Hg which comprise the other 70% of the naturally occurring Hg isotopes. Should we conclude that the run produced a small amount of 204Hg and none of the other Hg isotopes?…or should we suspect that noise or some other instrumental error is responsible for those 2 counts? Discussion As far as we are concerned, Miley's SIMS analysis of our Run 3 beads does not change the conclusions and speculations presented earlier in the main report. In our opinion further investigation into the possibility of nuclear reactions in the RIFEX kit should be contingent upon confirmation of the excess heat phenomenon. At this time, we have concluded our search for excess heat in the RIFEX kit with negative results 6. However, we stand ready to test new beads for excess heat if/when they become available. If we can confirm the excess heat phenomenon, we will eagerly reopen our search for evidence of nuclear reactions... Acknowledgements We would like to thank Dr. George Miley and Mike Williams of the University of Illinois for discussions. We are also indebted to Dr. Dennis Cravens and Maria Okuniewski of CETI for their patience and guidance with the RIFEX protocol. We would like to thank Dr. Peter F. Berry of TN Technologies, Inc., Round Rock TX, for his invaluable assistance with the standardless fundmental parameters XRF calibration. We would also like to thank Rick Comtois and Dr. Robert Tisdale of Jordan Valley Applied Research, Inc. Austin TX, for making the EX-6000 XRF system available for this study. [end of Little quotes] Rich Murray Room For All rmforall earthlink.net 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 00:26:06 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA20599; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:23:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:23:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357E3431.821364BF gorge.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:22:25 -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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <199806100617.XAA05272 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JFICv1.0.n15.xHZVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19656 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A BillB: > TORNADOES ARE ELECTROSTATIC ENGINES! Yes! Stormclouds exhibit a massive charge imbalance with "ground." In mild storms, the charge can be balanced by precipitation. In more severe storms, threads (stepped leaders?) can dissipate charge via lightning. When conditions are not appropriate for lightning , either in the atmosphere, or on the ground, either one thread encreases in size, or many threads combine. This huge aether flow carries air, etc. upward. Of course, aether doesn't exist, so we should call it "space-time." Since atoms are made up of spinning space-time (vacuum, aether) a flow of space-time will interact with atoms of air. If lightning is space-time surounded by electrons, ball lightning must be a broken of fragment of space time, probably swirling, like an eddy, surrounded by electrons. The electrons make it visible by ionizing some of the surrounding air. It has no weight, except that of the electrons, and no bouyancy since it is not a gas. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 01:05:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA25535; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 01:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 01:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357E2F82.7480 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 02:02:26 -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: Murray: Ohmori: Au transmutation critique 6.9.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"smrm61.0.uE6.YsZVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19657 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 9, 1998 Hello All, I will apply pertinent comments from Forsley's "Analyzing Nuclear Ash" and Little's "Search for Evidence of Nuclear Transmutations" to "Transmutation In a Gold-Light Water Electrolysis System," Ohmori, Mizuno, Nodasaka, Enyo, Fusion Technology, 33, (May, 1998, received at LANL Library June 2) 367-382, received by FT March 31, 1997. Yoshinobu Nodasaka is from the School of Dentistry, not "Density". I will call Ohmori's 1998 paper, for brevity, "Electrolysis". I can snail mail this report, if anyone wants to critique it and post the critique. Sadly, nine photos are black. All these reports were presented at ICCF-7 in April. tohmori cat.hokadai.ac.jp [not acljp] mizuno@hune.hokudai.ac.jp Many details are available in Ohmori, Mizuno, Enyo, "Isotopic Distributions of Heavy Metal Elements Produced During the Light Water Electrolysis on Gold Electrodes," J. New Energy, 1 (3), (Fall, 1996), 90-105, which I will term, "Isotopic", as well as T Ohmori, M Enyo, T Mizuno, Y Nodasaka, and H Minagawa, "Transmutation in the Electrolysis of Light Water-- Excess Energy and Iron Production in a Gold Electrode," Fusion Technology, 31, (March, 1997), 210-218, and their earlier report, T Ohmori and M Enyo, "Excess Heat Evolution During Electrolysis of H2O With Nickel, Gold, Silver, and Tin Cathodes," Fusion Technology, 24 (Nov., 1993), p. 293-295. I will call these "Transmutation" and "Excess". I am also reposting my October 19, 1997 critique of Ohmori's March, 1997 report of Au transmutation, since my plaints are all relevant to the new report: No chemical analysis is used to confirm the results. No mass balances are attempted. No account is taken of contaminants from the silica cell itself. The calorimetry is not described in sufficient detail. SIMS and ICP/MS are very susceptible to interferences; for instance, in 1994 Bush and Eagleton published SIMS data for an unused Ni cathode that shows a substantial apparent Fe-57 anomaly, not noticed by them. All four Ohmori reports, from 1993 to 1998, describe essentially the same type of experiments, except in "Excess" in 1993, submitted Nov. 13, 1992, the Au, 99.95 % pure, is .2 mm thick, and with dimensions 2X10 cm, area 20 cm2. Excess heat was claimed with Ni, Au, Ag, and Sb: I know of no other teams that claim excess heat with Au, Ag, or Sb, and the many claims about Ni are not substantiated in recent reports. In the more recent work, the Au is described in "Electrolysis" in 1998 as: "2.5 to 5.0 cm2 apparent area [But, Table I lists two cathodes of area 2 cm2.]; 0.1 mm thick; 99.99 % pure; Ag: 21 ppm; Pd: 3 ppm; Cu: 1 ppm; Fe, Rh, Pt, Si: <1 ppm; Hg and Os: not detected)[But "Transmutation" in 1997 states that "Fe < 16 ppm".]...The counter electrode was a 1 X 7 cm, 80-mesh platinum net (99.98 % pure; Rh: 18 ppm; Pd, Cr, Si: 2 ppm; Cu, Fe, B, Ca: <1 ppm; Hg and Os not detected.) Nowhere are the electrode masses given, but at least we can estimate that in the three recent reports, the Au volume was .00025 and .0005 cm3, and so, since Au has specific gravity 19.3, we have masses of 4.825 and 9.65 mg. At 99.99 % purity, then .01 % is impurities, 100 ppm, giving in round numbers 500 and 1000 microgram impurities in the Au. How much might these be redistributed into concentrated spots on the 100 micron thick Au and as the 100 to 1000 microgram precipitates, considering the days and weeks of electrolysis, with the current flow concentrated on tiny rough spots? Moreover, Little proved that the Pt anode wire in the CETI RIFEX cell, releases Pt, some of which reaches the Ni cathode surfaces. Obviously the 99.98 % pure Pt is .02 % impurities, 200 ppm, but since we do not know the mass, only Ohmori can estimate the amounts of Rh, Pd, Cr, and Si available. If the same Pt electrode was used in many successive runs, it might in complex ways accumulate and release impurites. Little also proved substantial impurities in many system components: epoxy (Ca, Ti, Fe, Ba), buna spacer O ring (Zn), orange silicone O-ring (Fe). It is now well known that SiO2 (silica) and glass release Si, Al, and other impurities during prolonged electrolysis. The fused quartz cells had Fe < 0.3 ppm, but their mass is not given. Their size was 19.6 cm2 by 15 cm high, with a silicone rubber stopper. With a radius of 2.5 cm, the total interior area is 275 cm2, all exposed to electrolyte, to bubbling and splashing, to evaporation and condensation, causing some leaching out of impurities over the days and weeks. Were the cells reused for successive runs? With a 20 mA current, at 70 degrees C, Little had to add 5-10 ml of water daily to the 86 ml electrolyte to make up for evaporative and electrolysis losses. In "Electrolysis" in 1998, Ohmori ran 7 to 30 days at 1 to 3 A, in an air thermostat at 21 degrees C, with water added daily to the 100 ml electrolyte. This is 50 to 150 times more current, so the total water added may have been as much as 1500 ml. Some impurities, perhaps leached from the container, may have been delivered. Moreover, in his Epilogue, Little points out that chemical analysis of the solid electrolyte only establishes each impurity to about a 1 ppm limit. So, the 14.2 gm of Na2SO4 could well have up to 14 microgram amounts each of a variety of impurities. Thus, the active microspots can concentrate electrolyte impurities, not discernable by chemical analysis of the solid at levels below about 1 ppm, to a level readily discernable by the fantastically sensitive SIMS and ICP/MS instruments. Ohmori uses data from tiny spots to make claims about the whole system. The variation and uncertainty of the data are not given. The only mass data is: page 374, "...current densities of >200mA/cm2. In most cases, the precipitates began to appear 2 to 3 days after the electrolysis, and gradually increased. The yield of the precipitates is in the range of from 0.1 to 1 mg and seems to be different, depending on a slight difference in the manner of the surface pretreatments of the electrode. [This refers to scraping the Au with a sharp piece of glass.]" "Transmutation" in 1997 reported that the scraped, rough Au electrodes had two orders of magnitude more Fe production than smooth Au. It seems reasonable to surmise that the 100 to 1000 micrograms of precipitates, which are at most 7E-5, or 70 ppm, of the 14.2 gm of Li2SO4 in 100 ml of .5 M electrolyte, are impurities electrolytically concentrated from various obvious sources on numerous tiny rough active spots on the Au. What about the famous lily volcano structures, the largest ~20 microns in diameter and 30 microns high, located along the scrape lines? I imagine any rough spot on the Au would concentrate current flow and the resulting deposition of impurities. So Pt, Pd, Os, and Ni impurities will be thus concentrated, and they in turn will load up H. The vigorous electrolysis, stirring the electrolyte, will bring tiny bubbles of O2 from the anode into contact with the hot spots, loaded with H. Pt, Pd, Os, and Ni all catalyze the powerful exothermic reaction of H and O, heating the metals so much that the stored H erupts, creating a metal foam that quickly solidifies. The resulting lily volcano continues to concentrate H and the metals, so that new eruptions ensue, creating a cluster of lily volcanos of various sizes. I invite the technically sophisticated to cast this play with appropriate numbers. "Transmutation" in 1997 does some good in admitting many problems with interpreting the SIMS data: "Page 214, "The SIMS measurement was made with an electrode after the electrolysis in the Na2SO4 solution...spectra of Na+, Al+, Si+, K+, Ca+, Ti+, and Cr+...Fe+. This is probably due to the high sensitivity of SIMS for these elements. The spectrum of Cs+ is attributed to a trace of cesium that remained in the vacuum chamber itself." So, it is not clear if this data refers to the same electrode studied by AES. It is not said whether SIMS was done on other plates, and whether any such data was comparable. Also, we know from the EPMA image that the Fe distribution is in tiny spots. Since SIMS operates by vaporizing micron size areas, it is crucial to know how many spots were studied, how they were selected, and how varied were the resulting data sets, 1 to 200 amu. So, clearly, we are being served a generous portion of data stew. Page 216, "The isotopic content of magnesium, silicon, potassium, calcium, titanium, chromium, and iron...Table 3...As one can see, the isotopic contents of the elements other than iron are in agreement with these natural isotopic abundances within the limits of error. Therefore, these elements can be regarded as the impurities accumulated from the electrolyte solution." Well, in that case, why doesn't the Fe have the same source? They argue that the Fe produced is "at least one to two orders of magnitude" greater than all Fe sources in the solution and the electrodes. However, this production data is highly suspect, based on estimates from AES data, not based on direct chemical extraction and physical weighing, not checked by adding controlled Fe sources to the electrolyte, not qualified by error estimates, and with no pre-run SIMS scan of the cathode. Furthermore, a huge source of impurities, including Fe, is totally ignored, the SiO2 cells in which electrolysis operates for a week. Jed Rothwell in Infinite Energy #11, Nov-Dec., 1996, in a long, detailed review of McKubre's EPRI Final Report, page 64, in the box "Fifty Sigma Results" quotes McKubre's EPRI Perspective, "The conditions in the successful cells were not entirely under experimental control because the closed cells slowly leach silica and other materials from the anode and the cathode and its supports as well as from the cell walls..," and, from the box, "Overkill Example," "Other solid parts are Al2O3, SiO2, and PTFE [Teflon], which are considered in this analysis to be nonreactive." Nonreactive? So, indeed, in "Transmutations", the actual Fe present can readily be accounted for by obvious impurity sources. In a feeble way, the issue is mentioned, page 215, "The content of the particles with mass number 54 is also increased to some extent-- perhaps because of the mixing of Cr-54." Table III has a footnote about Ni-58 in Fe-58." [end of quotes from "Transmutation" in 1997] "Electrolysis" in 1998 reduces the list of anomalous isotopes, ascribed to transmutation, to six: Hg, Kr, Ni, Fe, Si, Mg. The actual amounts claimed to be produced are not given. The impurity sources already considered are likely to supply enough Fe, Si, and Mg: Note the comments just above from "Transmutation" in 1997 about these elements. Page 368: "The precision of the measurement of the isotopic composition was checked with a sample consisting of various kinds of oxides with natural isotopic components and proved to be within +-0.5% for 208Pb, 107Ag, 39K, 24Mg, 7Li, and +-1% for 56Fe and 28Si." Were the counting totals in these tests equal to or greatly more than for the actual, far more complex mixtures in the precipitates? Page 369: "It is surprising that the atomic concentration of krypton reaches approximate ten times that of gold." Probably those "signals of mass numbers 82, 83, 84, and 86" are not from Kr. Couldn't optical spectra of the gas settle the issue? A glance at the CRC tables indicates possible interferences: 82Se, 82SeH, 68ZnO, 52CrO2, 70GeO, 72GeN, 85RbH. For the 58, 60, 61, 62, 64 "isotopes" of Ni, we have available: 59CoH, 63CuH, 64Zn, 60NiH, 61NiH, 32S2, 32SO2, 31P2, 44CaO, 44CaOH, 45ScO, 48TiN, and more. We only need a little interference to produce notable isotopic "anomalies", which would vary with depth. Page 369: "For the spectrum of mass number 32, signals of O2+ and S+ may overlap, and for the spectrum of mass numbers from 63 through 66, two or three kinds among TiO+, S2+, Cu+, and Zn+ signals are considered to be overlapping, so the quantification of sulfur, copper, and zinc could not be achieved by SIMS measurement, although some considerable amounts of these elements are known to be present from the analysis by AES and EPMA." Can anyone give me an email address or the report in Reference #7: H Yamada, M Ishida, Y Umezu, and H Hirahara, "Products in the Light Water Electrolysis on Gold Cathodes," Proc. Solid State Nuclear Transmutation Symp., The Society of Material Engineering for Resources of Japan, Morioka, Japan, 1996, p. 93 (1997)? This opaque, complex data stew does not and, indeed, can not sustain clear, convincing conclusions about the reality of low energy nuclear reactions. 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 Jun 10 01:14:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA27134; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 01:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 01:12:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <357E3431.821364BF gorge.net> References: <199806100617.XAA05272 mx1.eskimo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 22:09:12 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"qHZnB.0.qd6.a_ZVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19658 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Tom Miller wrote: >> > TORNADOES ARE ELECTROSTATIC ENGINES! > Yes! Isn't there quite a bit of compelling circumstantial evidence that large swirling cells of intense convection can pull air below it into a vortex more or less like the drain in a bathtub? With such a satisfying explanation on hand, why reach across all the conventional evidence for a new electrostatic one which, one rather bizarre personal account aside, has little if any evidence to support it? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 02:25:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA04226; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 02:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 02:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 03:17:00 -0600 (MDT) From: Steve Ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2 november To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"5pDbt2.0.w11.F1bVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19659 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 9 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: Tom Miller wrote: >> > TORNADOES ARE ELECTROSTATIC ENGINES! > Yes! Isn't there quite a bit of compelling circumstantial evidence that large swirling cells of intense convection can pull air below it into a vortex more or less like the drain in a bathtub? With such a satisfying explanation on hand, why reach across all the conventional evidence for a new electrostatic one which, one rather bizarre personal account aside, has little if any evidence to support it? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI ------------------------------------ Good points *ALL*, Go Vort's, Quote: "Thinking caps ON" - Tom Terrific Quote: "They are ill discoverers that think there is no land when they see nothing but sea." - Francis Bacon -=se=- steve (the answer is door #3???) ekwall From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 04:52:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA02015; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 04:51:00 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 04:51:00 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980610065156.00856680 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:51:56 -0500 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Murray: Miley SIMS data 4.8.98 In-Reply-To: <357E154B.4F97 earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"OY9Jv1.0.PV.ZCdVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19660 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:10 AM 6/10/98 -0500, Rich Murray wrote: >Here is a summary of some of the interesting isotopic shift SIMS data >for Run #3, 800 A Ni film on plastic beads in Li2SO4, found by Little >with chemical analysis to contain about [General Engineering] Fe 14 mcg, >Zn 147 mcg, and Pb 43 mcg.... You are not alone in reading that table incorrectly, Rich. The quantities represent the INCREASE observed in the beads from fresh to reacted....not the absolute amount. Read the title of the table again. I should have made that clearer. >The -2% shift for Ti-48 must be an analysis >artifact from the computer program used, since a 2% shift in Ti-49, >which is present at 5.5%, does not logically compel ascribing a -2% >shift in Ti-48, present at 73.8%. Amazing! I never noticed this problem before. How could they have done such a thing? >Fe-58 .28(1) 4. -.01 4 4E13 > >Again, we find obvious problems in the computer program. It appears >that the SIMS is far more accurate than the CRC standards. But the >value for Fe-58 [.3% abundance] is based on only 4 counts-- how does >that lead to a -.01 % shift? And the Production Rate for Fe-58 is >listed as precisely 3.72E13-- an absurd and misleading claim. Indeed. Why did Miley leave stuff like this in his papers!? It certainly doesn't bolster my confidence in his results. >Here are more absurd results. For Zn-70, a count of 1 gives -.04% >shift..... A count of 1! That's a good one (so to speak). 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 Jun 10 04:59:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA22633; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 04:57:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 04:57:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980610064258.00851280 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 06:42:58 -0500 To: Vortex-L eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Murray: Ohmori Au transmutation March, 1997 10.19.97 In-Reply-To: <357E1435.7873 earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"WUBhZ1.0.ZX5.3JdVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19661 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Wow, Rich...I am amazed at your stamina. At 12:05 AM 6/10/98 -0500, Rich Murray wrote: >Hardly a more ideal set-up for promoting recombination and reducing >Faradaic efficiency could hardly be devised. Of course, they found >apparent excess heats of 4 to 22%. Page 212, you're implying that their excess heats were due to recombination? >"Measurement of the current efficiency was made repeatedly at a given >time during the electrolysis, the result of which was 100.6, 100.1, and >101.1%. This fact shows that there is no conceivable possibility of the >recombination of H2 and O2 as another cause of the excess energy >production." but then they state that recombination is not occurring. So their excess heat is apparently real? >On page 214, "Figure 8 shows the relationship between the total amount >of iron atoms and the mean Rex [excess heat]... ...and for the cathode areas 5 and 10 cm2, are given >the same slope, although the input energy density is obviously half for >the larger area, implying half the slope. The plot is of heat vs Fe, right? Cathodes of different areas should all fall on the same line, I think. >Furthermore, a huge source of impurities, including Fe, is totally >ignored, the SiO2 cells in which electrolysis operates for a week. I doubt if the quartz cell is the source of the Fe. Typically, such silica is rather clean. At, say, 0.3 ppm Fe you'd have to dissolve ~50grams (ridiculously high) of quartz to provide the 17 micrograms of Fe they observed. >So, at this point, after all this hassle, there seems to me to be no >convincing evidence that low energy nuclear transmutations exist. That's the way it feels to me as well....but it is only a feeling. With the relatively ambiguous experimental data at hand, you can believe anything you want. Note also that there is no attainable number of negative replication attempts which will suffice to prove that the purported low-energy nuclear reactions do not exist. Once claimed, the possibility of their existence lives forever. 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 Jun 10 07:32:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA21859; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:30:41 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:30:41 -0700 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:20:00 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Murray: Au transmutation critique Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806101022_MC2-3FC9-B088 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"DmRXI1.0.NL5.HYfVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19662 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Murray's previous critiques of calorimetry showed that he does not understand the fundamentals of that field. This critique shows that he knows little about chemistry -- even less than me. I will confine myself to three paragraphs: He writes: It is now well known that SiO2 (silica) and glass release Si, Al, and other impurities during prolonged electrolysis. . . . With a radius of 2.5 cm, the total interior area is 275 cm2, all exposed to electrolyte, to bubbling and splashing, to evaporation and condensation, causing some leaching out of impurities over the days and weeks. Were the cells reused for successive runs? If the cells *were* reused, this would *reduce* the level of contamination released by the glass. The same impurities are not leached out twice, although new layers of glass and new impurities will be exposed. The standard method of reducing contamination from the container and electrolyte is to perform pre-electrolysis with a dummy cathode, which is removed and replaced by the target cathode. Repeatedly washing the glass in ultrapurified water is another method of reducing impurities. I believe Ohmori does, in fact, reuse quartz glass containers. I saw only a few of them in his lab, whereas I saw dozens of used cathodes. With a 20 mA current, at 70 degrees C, Little had to add 5-10 ml of water daily to the 86 ml electrolyte to make up for evaporative and electrolysis losses. In "Electrolysis" in 1998, Ohmori ran 7 to 30 days at 1 to 3 A, in an air thermostat at 21 degrees C, with water added daily to the 100 ml electrolyte. This is 50 to 150 times more current, so the total water added may have been as much as 1500 ml. Some impurities, perhaps leached from the container, may have been delivered. This is off by a factor of two, at least. Assume the current was 3 amps for 30 days. That's 7.8 million coulombs divided by 96,500 = 80.6 faradays. The equivalent weight of hydrogen is 1 and oxygen is 8, so that's 80 grams of hydrogen and 645 grams of oxygen, which works out to the correct ratio of 2:16, I am happy to say. So the mass of make-up water is 725 grams, in the worst case. At 20 deg C evaporation would be minimal, which is why Ohmori selected that temperature. In any case, the make-up water is ultrapurified before it is added. It is not held in a container; it is run through a lab purifier. It does not contain visible grains of iron, like the ones you see dropping off the cathode and collecting at the bottom of the cell every day. I do not think iron dissolves in water in the first place, but if it did, it would certainly ring the bell on the lab purifier impedance meter. And yes, that is iron, and it will remain iron despite Murray's weird and unfounded speculation about how mass spectroscopy does not work. What about the famous lily volcano structures, the largest ~20 microns in diameter and 30 microns high, located along the scrape lines? I imagine any rough spot on the Au would concentrate current flow and the resulting deposition of impurities. Yeah, and I suppose it would also spontaneously create 100 or 1000 times more impurities than there are in the cell to start with. The vigorous electrolysis, stirring the electrolyte, will bring tiny bubbles of O2 from the anode into contact with the hot spots, loaded with H. Pt, Pd, Os, and Ni all catalyze the powerful exothermic reaction of H and O, heating the metals so much that the stored H erupts, creating a metal foam that quickly solidifies. The resulting lily volcano continues to concentrate H and the metals, so that new eruptions ensue, creating a cluster of lily volcanos of various sizes. I invite the technically sophisticated to cast this play with appropriate numbers. And I invite the technically sophisticated to explain how hydrogen and oxygen manage to bury themselves 10 microns deep inside the cathode without touching one another, and then to spontaneously recombine and generate enough local heat to vaporize gold, which boils at 2966 deg C. Many cold fusion scientists have offered zany hypotheses to explain the observations, but none, I think, are as zany as this. Scott Little characterized one of these latest postings as "Rich's tireless and sometimes (excusably) abrasive critique." It is tireless and abrasive all right, and perhaps Scott Little will excuse it, but I say the claims are damn nonsense. I can only evaluate his statements relating to calorimetry and basic chemistry and physics. People who understand spectroscopy better than I do say that his claims about these subjects are also nonsense. Over and over again I have pointed out gross errors in his basic claims, and so has Mike Carrell, in much more sophisticated analyses. Murray has never responded or corrected his mistakes. He can dish it out in tireless, abrasive, meaningless critiques, but he cannot take it. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 09:31:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14903; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:29:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 09:29:20 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com Message-ID: <2f479efd.357eb35b aol.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:24:57 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Fwd: replicating yusmar Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_897495898_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38 Resent-Message-ID: <"wtSdA3.0.ne3.THhVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19663 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. --part0_897495898_boundary Content-ID: <0_897495898 inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII please advise this man. --part0_897495898_boundary Content-ID: <0_897495898 inet_out.mail.aol.com.2> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from relay27.mx.aol.com (relay27.mail.aol.com [172.31.109.27]) by air08.mail.aol.com (v43.25) with SMTP; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:03:45 2000 Received: from ns2.nets1.com.jo ([195.14.136.2]) by relay27.mx.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) with SMTP id AAA13116 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:03:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.nets1.com.jo by ns2.nets1.com.jo via ESMTP (950413.SGI.8.6.12/940406.SGI) for id HAA04052; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:01:55 +0100 Received: from safwan ([195.14.136.76] (may be forged)) by mail.nets1.com.jo (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id HAA02259 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by safwan with Microsoft Mail id <01BD89F9.8DEB1DE0 safwan>; Thu, 28 May 1998 05:29:15 +0300 Message-ID: <01BD89F9.8DEB1DE0 safwan> From: Safwan Husseini To: "'fznidarsic aol.com'" Subject: replicating yusmar Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 05:10:41 +0300 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit hello I am a retired pilot in Amman Jordan interested in free energy, I am interested in the replication and manufacturing the yusmar and propagating it commercially , could you please direct me??? thanks respectfully Captain Husseini s safwanh nol.com.jo --part0_897495898_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 10:21:24 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA24012; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357EE94A.420C bellsouth.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:15:06 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OYqqJ2.0.-s5.LzhVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19664 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A William Beaty wrote: > Allova Sudden it hit me! Suck, not blow! EUREKA! Worked for Monica. > BERNIE VONNEGUT WAS RIGHT! TORNADOES ARE ELECTROSTATIC ENGINES! > > What if this is true? What if ten-meter air-threads extend invisibly for > miles out of certain thunderstorms, and a certain rare shape of e-field > causes them to transport air from the ground towards the sky? The e-field > of the thunderstorm would drive them, and so they would constitute a type > of invisible corona streamer which discharges the electrical energy in the > thunderstorm while also transporting ionized air. I've always wondered > what would happen if lightning had high resistance, so it could stay > "turned on" for many minutes as it wandered over the ground. Maybe the > answer is "phenomenon called tornado." On a recent TLC or Discovery Channel program about tornadoes it was mentioned that just prior to the formation of a funnel cloud there was a tremendous, almost continuous, bout of lightning. And, just after touchdown, the lightning all but stopped. This does support your theory. If we could measure the B field surrounding a thunderstorm before and after touchdown, we might could prove your theory. Interesting! Terry From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 12:21:37 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA27644; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:15:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:15:35 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980610141554.00c62fe4 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:15:54 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Fwd: replicating yusmar In-Reply-To: <2f479efd.357eb35b aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"U8uQC.0.pl6.MjjVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19665 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:24 6/10/98 EDT, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote: >From: Safwan Husseini >hello >I am a retired pilot in Amman Jordan interested in free energy, I am >interested in the replication and manufacturing the yusmar and propagating it >commercially , could you please direct me??? Frank, I suggest you direct him to flying school where he could actually make some money... Scott From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 12:34:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA30300; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:26:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:26:28 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:26:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <357E3431.821364BF gorge.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ZJc8W3.0.MP7.atjVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19666 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Tom Miller wrote: > In mild storms, the charge can be balanced by precipitation. > > In more severe storms, threads (stepped leaders?) can dissipate > charge via lightning. I am convinced that threads are not stepped leaders. In playing with VDG machines, I have seen the familiar single-strand sparks, and also "trees" of branching dendritic leaders. I have also seen discharges take the form of a sort of purple tube of fog. I suspect that threads are akin to the fog-tube. Or they may be a third type of discharge entirely, one composed of stablized ions (or something), with no free electrons and no light emission. > If lightning is space-time surounded by electrons, ball lightning > must be a broken of fragment of space time, probably swirling, like an > eddy, surrounded by electrons. The electrons make it visible by ionizing > some of the surrounding air. It has no weight, except that of the > electrons, and no bouyancy since it is not a gas. If threads are aether flows, there may be desktop experiments you can perform in order to show evidence of this. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 10 12:47:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA20577; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:41:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:41:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357ED323.393 earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:40:36 -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: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Little: Ohmori little lily theory 6.10.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YgDfw2.0.L15.H5kVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19668 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 10, 1998 Hello Vorts and Scott Little and wrathful Rothwell, We are discussing Ohmori's March, 1997 "Transmutation". I get all revved up, attaining a sense of completion about questions about these reports that have been bugging me quietly for two years. Yes, Ohmori in 1993 did assume that no recombination was occurring, and so Shkedi's analysis, published in 1995, does apply, namely, substantial recombination does account for the excess heats. You are right and I am wrong that the slopes in Figure 8 should be different. Thanks, Scott. Well, at least Ohmori should study the amount of leaching of impurities from the silica and the top silicone stopper, and the impurities from close to a liter of ultrapure added water. Exactly what is the configuration of the cell, all dimensions, components, materials? Little found with the CETI RIFEX cell that every component had to be actually measured, to find all impurity sources. What if the "Fe" is actually, say, 23 Na2? How many molecular interferences are available? How about a chemical test to prove the exact abundance of Fe in the whole cell? This should be child's play for professional electrochemists. Jed Rothwell's surmise that Ohmori does reuse his silica cells may be an important clue. Would repeated leaching of the silica roughen it on the microlevel, generating fractile surfaces that would exponentially increase the actual surface area exposed to the electrolyte, and likewise increasing the rate and amount of impurity release? How do these surfaces look under scanning electron microscopy? Let's see, 0.3 ppm Fe is one part in 3 million. But if the Fe is distribed as grains of , say, 1 micron size within the silica, then it's removal would roughen the outer layers. How much? Here's another chance for the qualified guys to calculate a few simple models. We really need to know all the major impurities in the silica, and their size distribution. I am pleased to receive Rothwell's vehement criticism of my little lily (LLT) theory. The problem with Au is that I know of no information that Au loads H. So the inevitable electrodeposition of Pt, and minor amounts of Pd, Os, and Ni onto local tiny rough spots solves that problem. In terms of vaporizing the Au and making an explosion, that is probably not necessary. It is only necessary to generate ehough heat at a 30 micron spot to soften the Au enough, for the heated H to expand and produce a metallic foam bubble, which could pop rather gently, leaving the wonderful, sublimely ugly ears. Now, of course H from a wider area of Pt could flow through the metal to feed a flame at the hot spot, if a little O2 bubble happens to be positively charged and stuck there. An area three times wider would supply ten times more H to the central 30 micron hot spot. Would some adept in calculation like to estimate for loadings H/Pt = .5, diameter 90 microns, thickness, oh, let's say 10 microns, how much heat might be generated how quickly from O2 bubbles in the range of 10 to 1000 microns? An experimental test would be to eliminate the Pt anode, perhaps by using a 100 meter long plastic tube to a distant anode of some very insoluable conductor-- then would there be no lilies. Note that once, formed, a lily would continue to attract electrodeposited impurities. Is there any evidence for this in the photos? This could be experimentally checked by deliberately adding tracer isotopes of Pt, Pd, Os, and Ni to the anode, using different tracers every few days. So it should be easy to decisively refute my little lily theory (LLT) by experiment. Well, Jed, really, isn't a strategy of portraying Murray as a witless incompetent counterproductive? As one, 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 Jun 10 13:08:28 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA05118; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:06:10 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:06:10 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:05:54 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"MRE7u2.0.uF1.nSkVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19669 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 9 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > Isn't there quite a bit of compelling circumstantial evidence that large > swirling cells of intense convection can pull air below it into a vortex > more or less like the drain in a bathtub? With such a satisfying > explanation on hand, why reach across all the conventional evidence for a > new electrostatic one which, one rather bizarre personal account aside, has > little if any evidence to support it? Not being an expert in this, I can't answer the question myself. Why did Vonnegut, a researcher of some stature, devote time to such a concept? He said that tornados are not understood. So, when tornados ARE finally understood, will the new information simply be extensions of the old, or will it be something fundamentally different (such as solid evidence that electrical processes are necessary before large dustdevils can become destructive tornados.) I intentionally choose to take the "electrostatic motor" idea seriously because it is part of my anit-herdfollowing philosophy. The people on sci.geo.meteorology act shocked and offended over the very idea that tornados could be electrical. This sets off my alarms. In my view, this is the voice of the "scientist herd-mind." It suggests that the majority is not looking into these ideas, and it implies that there is a possible blind spot in mainstream science. Blind spots are valuable finds. Amateurs, lacking the professionals' learned "taboos," can step in and illuminate such blind spots! Of course it might not be a blind spot, and Vonnegut might just have been displaying eccentricity. I guess it all comes down to this: A. Tornados are not understood, but only a very few researchers know this. The majority make unwarranted assumptions about the unknown sections, hotly defend their assumptions, and angrily refuse to accept that such large unknowns exist here. B. Tornados are understood, but a few crazies such as Vonnegut and fringe amateurs think that conventional science is wrong, that strange explanations should replace the simple, mundane explanations. I don't have enough evidence to judge which of the above two situations apply. Therefor I tune my perceptions so that, at least to me, the situation looks like "A" above, while keeping my eyes open for anything which shows that "B" is the true situation. Life has yet to convince me that "B" situations predominate. Science history shows that "A" situations aren't that rare. If we want to find untrodden ground in science, we have to search out spots where things like "A" have not yet become completely untenable. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 10 13:34:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA01775; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:31:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:31:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 13:24:08 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: Terry Blanton cc: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <357EE94A.420C bellsouth.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hbEJw1.0.eR.QqkVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19670 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Terry Blanton wrote: > On a recent TLC or Discovery Channel program about tornadoes it was > mentioned that just prior to the formation of a funnel cloud there was a > tremendous, almost continuous, bout of lightning. And, just after > touchdown, the lightning all but stopped. This does support your > theory. This sounded eerily familiar. I found why. This was on my "unusual phenomena reports" page: On 10 July 1972, at Gramsville, NY, I witnessed an intense thunderstorm with continuous lightning from about 9:30PM to 11PM. As the storm began to quiet down, a cone shape light extended a few degrees above the horizon for a few seconds a few miles away. The next day, the area was was found to have experienced a small tornado. What was seen the night before may have been electrical lines flashing in the vortex (funnel). Jan Curtis Fairbanks, AK USA - Tuesday, September 24, 1996 at 21:54:32 (PDT) Perhaps it was not lightning leaders, perhaps it was a cone of light, similar to the tiny glowing spot at the tip of any needle which emits an "air thread". BTW, the ESJ article on air threads is ELECTRIC SPACECRAFT JOURNAL, Issue #16, winter 1995, "Electrostatic Force Flow Visualization", pp7-19 Fascinating stuff. Yost examined the air-thread emission points under a microscope and photographed them. They look like "blue jets", the gigantic ionosphere displays which extend above thunderstorms. See: http://elf.gi.alaska.edu/sprites.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 Wed Jun 10 13:44:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA20208; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:39:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:39:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357ED289.2AC9 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:38:01 -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: [Fwd: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads] Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"sPciY1.0.Sx4.I3kVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19667 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Message-ID: <357ED245.7365 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:36:53 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Organization: NASA (Retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: commengr bellsouth.net Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <357EE94A.420C@bellsouth.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Terry Blanton wrote: > > On a recent TLC or Discovery Channel program about tornadoes it was > mentioned that just prior to the formation of a funnel cloud there was a > tremendous, almost continuous, bout of lightning. And, just after > touchdown, the lightning all but stopped. This does support your > theory. (i.e., Bill Beaty's and other's theory - fjs) > > If we could measure the B field surrounding a thunderstorm before and > after touchdown, we might could prove your theory. Interesting! > > Terry If I read Uman's book right, the normal cloud-to-ground lightning discharge lowers negative charge to ground. I would think that this also supports voltage gradients that would cause migration of + air ions from ground to cloud. Let's see, positive feedback mechanisms at work?: 1. Tornados are intense lows - low density air tends to rise. 2. Turbulance and fluid shear should tend to heat the incoming air - or, at least reduce the expansion cooling. This might help the upward flow. 3. The low pressure core of the tornado is easier to ionize than the surrounding air so it would be a good channel for ion transport. Hey, talk about free energy! - What we need is a "captive" tornado in a tall tubular structure - taking advantage of all the positive feedback effects we can think of. Pecos Bill was way ahead of his time! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 14:52:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16952; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:44:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:44:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <357EF065.5543 interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 16:45:25 -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: AIR THREADS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2-XOV.0.k84.UulVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19671 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chasing Bill B's air threads: OK, I cobbled together a + 13 kv power supply to play with air threads. I used an aluminum pie pan for a water pool but I have no dry ice. I sharpened a #12 solid copper wire to a sharp point using the flat side of my bench grinder (hey, this is copper wire - no damage to the wheel!) I touched the grinder wheel with the wire RADIAL to the wheel and at only a slight angle to the flat wheel surface. I rotated the wire with my fingers as I ground it. Finishing the point on the fine wheel, I wound up with a point sharper than a needle - too fragile to touch. I arched the #12 wire over the pie pan of water about 8" above the water surface. When I turned on the power supply, at first I didn't see anything - so I "led" a grounded wire from the water to near the wire point and then I saw some action. I was in a dimly lit room but I could see the reflection of a window on the water surface. This turned out to be a pretty good "poor man's: thread-tip detector. This is similar to Scott's first test and the window reflection thing is, I believe, a variation of one of Bill B's ideas. The point is, using a very sharp copper needle, a + potential on the needle, the water at ground, I could detect the END(s) of that I believe were threads. I'm sure that I had a good ion wind from the needle, but 8" away on the water surface you could see a "dent" less than 1 cm dia. scooting about. Remember, I'm looking at the water surface at an angle of about 30 degrees with the reflected window in the background. It would be neat to have a "slat-type" blind over the window to make parallel bars on the water surface as a reference grid. I haven't played with it enough to say much more, but, I think metal points may make threads too. I need to confirm that I'm really looking at a thread. Dents that small and 8" away make me think that I am. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Wed Jun 10 14:56:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA17200; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:45:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:45:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 14:30:07 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HV water dimples In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980609091620.00c5cf30 mail.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"dXakX.0.ZC4.evlVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19672 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A On Tue, 9 Jun 1998, Scott Little wrote: > I tried using my finger tips from a distance of 6-8" looking for evidence > of Bill's air threads and didn't see much of anything (I don't have dry ice > yet). I tried looking for dimples by removing the lens from a Radio SHack laser pointer, then reflecting the fan of point-source light at a low angle on the water, bouncing it to white paper. I found that I could make a detectable dimple on the surface by holding a single strand of steel fiber pulled from a batt of extra-fine steel wool. The dimple was a few mm across, and remained the same size until I lifted the fiber tip more than 15cm from the water surface, whereupon it vanished. Again, I don't know if the thread is extinguished as the voltage tradient at the emitter is reduced, or whether the thread simply has a particular length and so continues to exist even when lifted off of the water surface. The emitter tip had a tiny glowing purple dot, as expected. I could see no other dimples, so I suspect that this technique reveals only the very strongest air-threads. At the same time that the hair on my arm was showing many tiny corona dots, I could detect no dimples in the water. In the past, the dry-ice fog has shown scores of little holes under these conditions. I tried looking for thread-shadows in the spread laser light. Nothing. Pointsource emitters can project density variations in the air as shadows on a screen, but they are not nearly as sensitive as a proper Scheileren (sp?) system. Yost's system used an 18" astronomical mirror, video camera, razor blade, and an LED as the point source. I briefly tried making a mist-layer with an ultrasonic humidifer, but lost my use of the kitchen table before proceeding very far. (Maybe it's time to clear some of the equipment and supplies off the test benches in the garage?) The mist layer showed a 5cm turbulent hole when exposed to the same filament of steel wool which had made the ?5mm? dimple above. This gives a rough idea of the different sensitivities of the two techniques. Also, the humifier mist has a turbulent flow across the water, and does not invade the boundary layer by much. This is opposed to the dry-ice mist, which formed itself entirely inside the boundary layer and which behaved as if it was "glued" to the water surface. The humidifier mist might do better at showing the structure of the threads in the few cm above the surface. On tornadoes: In discussing the possibility of tornadoes with CHarles Yost this morning, he suggested that the earth/ionosphere capacitor be simulated, possibly with a horizontal b-field as well. A light bulb went on! Tornados would require that a tuft of plasma be on the ground, while the charged rain in the thunderstorm would behave as my metal cookie sheet. The suction end of an air-thread is at the sharp emitter point. This suggests that an artificial, electrostatically-driven tornado could be created by arranging two horizontal electrode plates a few inches apart, placing a tiny sharp emitter needle on the surface of the lower plate, and then connecting the plates to a few tens of KV. A layer of mist on the lower plate would make any "tornado" there become visible. Yost's microscope photos show that air-threads can be emitted by spots on a small-radius electrode. This could connect with the tornado mechanism: if a tuft of plasma should form on the ground, the ions exiting from its top would distort the e-fields and "attract" flow-lines of the sky current. Given two relatively flat electrodes, if a tiny corona should for some reason be triggered near the surface of one of them, that hotspot could launch an air-thread towards the other one and the direction of air travel would be established. In the real world, density differences from temperature inversions could aid the air flow. The "hose" would be established electrically, then the air flow would be driven both by electrostatics and by density currents. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 10 21:51:51 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA31035; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 21:47:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 21:47:56 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:47:35 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980611125055.0a2facca 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: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"PAH5p.0.ra7.y5sVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19673 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty posted the following (edited for brevity) at 13:05 1998.06.10 -0700: >On Tue, 9 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote: > >> Isn't there quite a bit of compelling circumstantial evidence that large >> swirling cells of intense convection can pull air below it into a vortex >> more or less like the drain in a bathtub? With such a satisfying >> explanation on hand, why reach across all the conventional evidence for a >> new electrostatic one which, one rather bizarre personal account aside, has >> little if any evidence to support it? > Yesterday's Singapore newspaper (Straits Times, 1998.06.10) had a nice photo of a waterspout taken June 9 out over the East Coast. This waterspout occurred some time before a time of heavy lightning which I witnessed while downtown shopping. The lightning activity occurred several hours after the waterspout, and in an area well away from the seaside (8 - 9 km from the waterspout) Evidence ? No, I witnessed the lighning. Someone else saw the waterspout. No measurements, no rigour. Pure subjective observation. Perhaps the two are related, perhaps not. The relationship may be such that vortices induce/relieve static buildup Perhaps the static buildup induces vortices. Perhaps they reinforce one another. Or not. It's all worthy of investigation. One thing I do know from casual observation: read on... >Not being an expert in this, I can't answer the question myself. Why did >Vonnegut, a researcher of some stature, devote time to such a concept? He >said that tornados are not understood. So, when tornados ARE finally >understood, will the new information simply be extensions of the old, or >will it be something fundamentally different (such as solid evidence that >electrical processes are necessary before large dustdevils can become >destructive tornados.) > (Central) Burma, the place I've spent my last four months in, is/has become a virtual prairie-cum-desert due to the devastating effects of ecological ignorance. While I was there, I encountered many 'dust-devils'. I managed to get myself inside of two of them to observe what I might about their internals. Note, I was unprepared for these, as I was performing work for someone unrelated to the 'study of dustddevils'. What I did notice, and correlates to what I saw in the western U.S. versions, is that a dustdevil is (as far as I've seen !...) a dry creature. It seems to occur only in the presence of stifling unrelenting heat. It almost seems to require an absolute stillness before erupting - there is never anything even remotely resembling a breeze. Inside these dustdevils (One was nearly 100m. in diameter) there seems to be only a rotating wind which is urgently (and abrasively) tending upwards. Everything lightweight gets levitated. Its not a powerful lift, but it is relentless. There was no indication of static electricity being generated or discharged during the event. I had no meter to quantify this, so there may have been some small amount of static, but the gross effects such as glows, hairs standing up, particulates repelling each other - not seen. Needless to say, I was disappointed. If only I had had a Leyden jar... One thing I decided might account for them is a boundary layer near the ground, where air is being magnificently roasted by reflected sunlight as well as direct sunlight. On a still day, with no observable air movement, a pressurized air layer may build up just over the first meter or two over the ground which is held in place due to some (I'm not a meteorologist so I don't Know!) mechanism of the air layers above. Along comes a butterfly and voila! a wingtip vortex triggers the birth of a dustdevil. Maybe, maybe not. Just my observation. Couple that with the observation that tornadoes occur only when there is some type of humidity, and this leads me to believe that the strength of tornadoes would come from the water in the air. Consider the different masses of a dry vortex and a wet one. The difference between a 20m. diameter dustdevil and a 100m. diameter dustdevil is negligible. The turbulence is a bit stronger, It's higher in the sky, It shuffles more debris, but it's got no punch. A tornado 100m. wide is something I would try to avoid. Angular Momentum. Additionally, the mass of the water in the air would cause a vortex to generate a stronger 'vacuum', creating a larger pressure differential between the interior and exterior of a vortex. The interior of a dustdevil has no substantial pressure differential. As to the generation of a tornado - what I saw in an area near Wichita Falls a few years ago was that there were (very light !) breezes before the big one. The cloudy sky seemed to glow dimly, and the clouds were actually rolling (much as you would see when boiling muddy water) A butterfly wouldn't be enough to trigger what happened that day. But I would have to wonder if electricity wasn't part of it. Lightning is the immediate and utter discharge of potential between cloud and cloud or cloud and earth. What if that discharge is given as a flow of humid air/ ion mix slowly through a vortex extending from the earth up into the charged region? A charged rotating mass should be generating one heck of a mgnetic field, if that's how it's being done... Just a few thoughts from here... >I guess it all comes down to this: > > A. Tornados are not understood, but only a very few researchers know > this. The majority make unwarranted assumptions about the > unknown sections, hotly defend their assumptions, and angrily > refuse to accept that such large unknowns exist here. > > B. Tornados are understood, but a few crazies such as Vonnegut and > fringe amateurs think that conventional science is wrong, that > strange explanations should replace the simple, mundane explanations. > >I don't have enough evidence to judge which of the above two situations >apply. Therefor I tune my perceptions so that, at least to me, the >situation looks like "A" above, while keeping my eyes open for anything >which shows that "B" is the true situation. > >Life has yet to convince me that "B" situations predominate. Science >history shows that "A" situations aren't that rare. If we want to find >untrodden ground in science, we have to search out spots where things like >"A" have not yet become completely untenable. > Amen to that... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 02:58:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA16236; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 02:57:17 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 02:57:17 -0700 Message-ID: <009a01bd951e$fea18e40$f2b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Cappuccino Motor Fuel Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 03:52:55 -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: <"w-hFe.0.Wz3.ydwVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19674 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Seems that a water mix of any finely divided biomass or other organic materials,ranging from grass clippings to milk cartons run through a coil of 1/4 stainless steel tubing in the exhaust of ANY Internal Combustion Engine (Including Gas Turbines)and heated from 550-705 F (1000-3200 PSI) will form combustible gases(H2, CH4, C2H4, CO,etc.)along with combustible liquids and particles that can be burned in these engines. A tank of strong Cappuccino (or cow manure) fed into the exhaust heat exchanger with a metering pump,then injected into the engine using electronic fuel injection makes a neat way to harvest the "Infinite Energy" of the Sun. (at the end of the food chain so to speak) :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 03:19:12 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA24317; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 03:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 03:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:09:51 -0400 From: Soo Subject: Cappuccino Motor Fuel Sender: Soo To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" Message-ID: <199806110610_MC2-3FE1-22EA 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 DAA24226 Resent-Message-ID: <"BXGny3.0.lx5.JxwVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19675 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Freddo, With or without chocolate sprinkles? It could make a *big* difference y'know. - Soo From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 03:17:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA17295; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 03:16:35 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 03:16:35 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:16:21 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980611181948.23170a18 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 From: Mpowers Consultants Subject: Gravitational Polarization of Light Resent-Message-ID: <"RXFbd2.0.9E4.3wwVr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19676 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O 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: Which component of light is blocked by polarizing lens, the e-field or the h-field anyone hear of that ? just curious... From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 04:19:54 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA02572; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 04:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 04:18:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <00de01bd952a$15e16520$f2b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Cappuccino Motor Fuel Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 05:13:46 -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: <"CrEsH3.0.4e.HqxVr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19677 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Soo To: INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 4:16 AM Subject: Cappuccino Motor Fuel Soo wrote: >Freddo, > > > >With or without chocolate sprinkles? Without,sprinkles gives you tinkles. :-) > >It could make a *big* difference y'know. Yep. Turnips is the answer I started out with 25 years ago. And Broccoli, they both give you "gas" and kids hate'em. Mr McGruder might come after you and Peter Rabbit if he catches you in his turnip patch though. :-) Regards, Frederick > >- Soo > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 06:55:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA06319; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:49:45 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:49:45 -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: <357FE05E.80FDC739 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:49:18 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YB7VK2.0.aY1.v1-Vr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19678 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A 03:51 PM ET 06/10/98 Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than its surface. Full Story: John E. Steck --------------------------------o]{: Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 08:31:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA20964; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:20:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:20:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <000801bd954c$226290e0$255b2bcf ar91037.argis.com> From: "Craig Haynie" To: Subject: Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:17:57 -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: <"xorbP3.0.R75._M_Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19679 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have >solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a >century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than >its surface. > >Full Story: > > >John E. Steck Hmm...Doesn't quite bode well for Randell Mills' who seems certain it's caused by hydrino formation. Craig Haynie (Houston) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 08:49:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA26513; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:44:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:44:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <011901bd954f$4173b920$f2b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 09:40:20 -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: <"IAvH01.0.AU6.rj_Vr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19680 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: -----Original Message----- From: Craig Haynie To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 9:27 AM Subject: Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery Craig Haynie wrote: > > >Hmm...Doesn't quite bode well for Randell Mills' who seems certain it's >caused by hydrino formation. Mills' Theory is just aiming too high. :-) You still get 7 Kilowatts/cm^2 off that Cold 6,000 K surface. Which is it, 6 microwatts/cm^3 in the "Nuclear Reaction Zone", or much more in a Hydrino, Quasi-Neutron, Quasi-DiNeutron "outer Shell"? Regards, Frederick > >Craig Haynie (Houston) > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 11:23:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA19978; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:15:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:15:24 -0700 Message-Id: <199806111814.OAA10063 mail.enter.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Robert G. Flower" Organization: Applied Science Associates To: vortex-l eskimo.com Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:35:55 -0500 Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Reply-to: chronos enter.net Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52) Resent-Message-ID: <"86OiQ3.0.4u4.xw1Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19681 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 8 Jun 98 at 9:50, vortex-l eskimo.com wrote: > From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) > Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads > > "A wild-eyed hypothesis: the "rays" are actually molecular threads of > water. (Uh oh! Polywater again?!) Fear not -- "Polywater" is alive and well -- under a new politically-correct name, of course. Water cluster research is a cottage industry within physical chemistry. A short blurb I wrote for a science-news column is copied below. Liquid water forms moderately stable (energetically-favored) clusters of 6 to 8 molecules. In the vicinity of a long-chain polymer (eg, DNA) or a solid surface with long-range order, the pattern of clusters becomes more complex. So the suggestion by Francis J. Stenger: > Maybe the threads are a chain of molecular (or just small) entities > electrically polarized like so: > > +O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+O-+ organized like an elephant chain seems entirely possible. --------------------------- Virtual Bathing: Water Cluster Chemistry http://www.psc.edu/MetaCenter/MetaScience/Articles/Jordan/Jordan.html At the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center, chemist Ken Jordan is giving DNA and other macromolecules a virtual bath in a Cray supercomputer. Using a simulation model that considers the collective behavior of clusters of water molecules (not just two-body interactions), he finds that the structure of water near these bioproteins is very different from that in bulk water. His calculations are among the first to account for quantum effects in the hydrogen-bonding electrons, and predict that clusters of six or eight water molecules in various geometric arrangements will be the most stable ones. The importance of quantum effects and cooperative behaviors in water has been long suspected in fields ranging from surface chemistry to homeopathic medicine. Says Jordan, "We have shown that a water cluster containing as few as eight molecules undergoes a phase transition... A single cluster in the transition region switches back and forth between solid-like and liquid-like structures." --------------------------- Bob Flower From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 11:57:21 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA26795; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:53:20 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:53:20 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980611134023.00c64248 mail.eden.com> X-Sender: little mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:40:23 -0500 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Murray: Au transmutation critique In-Reply-To: <199806101022_MC2-3FC9-B088 compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"quVGK2.0.UY6.VU2Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19682 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:20 6/10/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: >...I say the [Rick Murray's] claims are damn >nonsense. I can only evaluate his statements relating to calorimetry and basic >chemistry and physics. People who understand spectroscopy better than I do say >that his claims about these subjects are also nonsense. I understand spectroscopy pretty well (20+ years experience in x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy) and I am certain that Rich has uncovered some genuine problems with the spectroscopic results of both the Cincinatti Group and Miley. Don't flip out, Jed...I'm not saying that all their results are bogus...nor that everything Rich says is golden...I just want you to know that at least some of Rich's claims are NOT nonsense. 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 Jun 11 12:03:25 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA27752; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:57:23 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:57:23 -0700 Message-Id: <3580264B.AE604A1 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:47:39 +0300 From: Hamdi Ucar Organization: Orchestra X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex Subject: [Fwd: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------9ECD99C606F7B610D891A5CA" Resent-Message-ID: <"qgHsr2.0.Xn6.IY2Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19683 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. --------------9ECD99C606F7B610D891A5CA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------9ECD99C606F7B610D891A5CA Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-ID: <357FF5C9.B6383858 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:20:41 +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: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery References: <357FE05E.80FDC739 css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Steck wrote: > > 03:51 PM ET 06/10/98 > Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery > > LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have > solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a > century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than > its surface. I recall it was already solved long time ago (?) (and discussed on vortex too). Nothing new on this discovery, Probably this news comes from archive. Regards, hamdix --------------9ECD99C606F7B610D891A5CA-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 12:24:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA07888; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:09:38 -0400 From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> Subject: Murray: Little: Ohmori little lily theor Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com> To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Message-ID: <199806111512_MC2-3FEC-C49 compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Resent-Message-ID: <"-zVk21.0.7x1.dp2Wr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19684 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Rich Murray writes: Yes, Ohmori in 1993 did assume that no recombination was occurring, and so Shkedi's analysis, published in 1995, does apply, namely, substantial recombination does account for the excess heats. Ohmori did not assume that. He measured it. The consumption of make-up water proves there is no significant recombination. The excess heat exceeds the limits of recombination anyway, so this is not an issue. Well, at least Ohmori should study the amount of leaching of impurities from the silica and the top silicone stopper . . . Ohmori and thousands of others have studied this, especially the people who develop and sell lab supplies. How would significant contamination leach in from the stopper? It isn't stopped, by the way; this is an open cell. The exiting gas purges contamination. . . . and the impurities from close to a liter of ultrapure added water. It is not "close to a liter." It would be 724 ml in the worst case, at 3 amps for one month. Most experiments were at lower power for a shorter duration, so in most cases ~200 ml were added. More to the point, you could not extract that much iron contamination from 100 or 1000 liters of ultra-purified water. I doubt you could extract that much iron from a ton of tap water. As I pointed out yesterday, lab purifiers measure the impedance of the water. They would sense these levels of contamination and shut down. Little found with the CETI RIFEX cell that every component had to be actually measured, to find all impurity sources. A CETI RIFEX is *far* more complex than a isoperibolic quartz glass cell. It has many more components exposed to electrolyte, and many more nooks and crannies in which contamination can hide. Despite these problems with contamination, if a RIFEX produced the large isotopic shifts the Ohmori et al. found, that would be proof of a nuclear reaction. What if the "Fe" is actually, say, 23 Na2? And what if the moon is actually green cheese? Four leading industrial research labs, which are world-class experts in analyzing materials, confirmed that it is iron. Two of these companies actually manufacture the spectroscopy equipment. They took the standard precautions to eliminate interference from other elements. In blind testing, they saw *no* isotope shifts in the control experiments and unused samples, and massive changes in the active experiments. It is absurd to suggest that that these experts cannot distinguish between elements. Jed Rothwell's surmise that Ohmori does reuse his silica cells may be an important clue. Would repeated leaching of the silica roughen it on the microlevel, generating fractile surfaces that would exponentially increase the actual surface area exposed to the electrolyte, and likewise increasing the rate and amount of impurity release? No, it wouldn't. For the last 150 years, chemists and electrochemist have used washing and electrochemistry to *reduce* contamination. Ohomori spends weeks cleaning, testing and preparing his cells before running the main test. It is only necessary to generate enough heat at a 30 micron spot to soften the Au enough, for the heated H to expand and produce a metallic foam bubble, which could pop rather gently, leaving the wonderful, sublimely ugly ears. Right. The fact that this is physically and energetically impossible is not an issue. We just wave our hands and conjure up reactions. How jolly and simple!. . . The gold was vaporized. No "rather gentle" chemical process driven by a fraction of a watt input could do this. Now, of course H from a wider area of Pt could flow through the metal to feed a flame at the hot spot, if a little O2 bubble happens to be positively charged and stuck there. Why has this phenomenon never been observed in ordinary electrochemistry? Why is it linked to excess heat and transmutation? This is a physically impossible, ad hoc, handwaving "explanation" for one small piece of the puzzle, ignoring the other pieces. Well, Jed, really, isn't a strategy of portraying Murray as a witless incompetent counterproductive? Murray's own comments make that case. I merely point out a few of his mistakes. - Jed From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 13:11:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA18641; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:06:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:06:44 -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: <35803829.C931FFA7 css.mot.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:03:53 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: [Fwd: Edupage, 11 June 1998] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"3Lowb2.0.5Z4.GZ3Wr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19685 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > > VANDALS HIT THE STANFORD LINEAR ACCELERATOR CENTER > > Computer vandals who monitored Internet traffic in order to "sniff" > > (intercept) a password to the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center were able > > to gain access to more than 30 of the federal research center's most > > important Unix servers. No permanent damage was done to programs or data, > > but the facility was closed down for a week, as a precaution meant to > > protect the lab's computing infrastructure. A spokesperson for the center > > said: "We now have to assess the tradeoffs of an open community vs. a more > > Internet-secure community. It's a debate that's taking place heatedly among > > different scientists." (San Jose Mercury News 10 Jun 98) John E. Steck --------------------------------o]{: Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 13:46:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13092; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:42:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 13:42:05 -0700 Message-ID: <3580330B.A77FEFAE gorge.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:42:03 -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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <199806102008.NAA05687 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Q3mFA2.0.SC3.S44Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19686 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A BillB wrote: > I am convinced that threads are not stepped leaders. In playing with VDG > machines, I have seen the familiar single-strand sparks, and also "trees" > of branching dendritic leaders. I have also seen discharges take the form > of a sort of purple tube of fog. I suspect that threads are akin to the > fog-tube. Or they may be a third type of discharge entirely, one composed > of stablized ions (or something), with no free electrons and no light > emission. I think you are probably right about air threads and stepped leaders not being one and the same. They certainly don't "look" the same. They "look" like they are following, or making, successive, more or less random paths. more or les, because the trend is always in the direction of charge imbalance. Sprites, (above clouds) DO look a lot like air threads (and fog tubes.) In searching the net for lightning info, present theory has tops of Tstorm clouds a Positive charge, bottoms as negative. This negative charge is said to "induce" a positive charge in the ground. The stepped leader apparently ionizes forked paths downward through the air until ~100m above ground, when a positive leader flows up from the ground to meet the stepped leader. Some electron flowgoes to ground, but the major portion of the lightning stroke is a flow of positive charge, UPWARD from ground to cloud. (There are oppositely charged strikes, more rare, and more damaging.) See this official site: http://www.nwstc.kc.noaa.gov/d.HMD/Lightning/Ltng_home.htm A most interesting aspect of lightning is the idea that a positive charge is induced in the ground, etc, BY the negaative charge in the bottom of the cloud. Now, I can understand indicing a negative charge, by attracting free electrons. But, indicing a positive charge must necessarily mean pushing away free electrons. I can see this happening in a conductor, which would leave behind positive ions. Is it reasonable that the ground, trees, houses, people, all contain massive amounts of positive ions underneath a thunderstorm? Wouldn't this have serious chemical repercussions? More to the point, the mass of current flow in a lightning stroke is said to be POSITIVE current UP to the cloud. I can comprehend a mass flow of electrons, doen, but what does the positive upward stroke consist of. Positive Ions? Maybe it is obvious to everyone else. At the very least, I hope this discussion will stimulate us to look at the concept of "charge" in a different light(ning). Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 14:21:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA01224; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:12:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35804677.2F0D interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:04:55 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <199806102008.NAA05687 mx1.eskimo.com> <3580330B.A77FEFAE@gorge.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"pYwb43.0.-I.QW4Wr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19687 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tom Miller wrote: > (snip) > More to the point, the mass of current flow in a lightning stroke is > said to be POSITIVE current UP to the cloud. I can comprehend a mass > flow of electrons, doen, but what does the positive upward stroke > consist of. Positive Ions? Tom, I think a mass flow of electrons down is equivalent to a flow of positive charge upward - just like in a semiconductor, a flow of electrons to the right can be thought of as a flow of + "holes" to the left. I would think that there is some movement of positive ions in an atmospheric pressure plasma but I think the major current flow is always with the electrons due to their higher mobility. Any words of wisdom from an "authority in the field"?. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 14:35:07 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA04452; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:26:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:26:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Chuck Davis To: Tom Miller Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:19:06 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3580330B.A77FEFAE gorge.net> X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck Organization: ROSHI Corporation Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"PAABC3.0.P51.Sk4Wr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19688 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 11-Jun-98, Tom Miller wrote: [...] >More to the point, the mass of current flow in a lightning stroke is >said to be POSITIVE current UP to the cloud. I can comprehend a mass >flow of electrons, doen, but what does the positive upward stroke >consist of. Positive Ions? >Maybe it is obvious to everyone else. At the very least, I hope this >discussion will stimulate us to look at the concept of "charge" in >a different light(ning). >Tom Miller BTW, has there been a discussion on the "sprite" phenomena that appear at the tops of the bursts of lightening, as seen by shuttle missions? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 14:42:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23416; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:36:24 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:36:24 -0700 Message-ID: <35803BE6.1EED earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:19:50 -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: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Murray: Third Ohmori critique May, 1998 6.11.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"q-uoD2.0.Uj5.Nt4Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19689 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 11, 1998 Hello all, It's taken me two days to realize that Ohmori, Mizuno, and Enyo in May, 1998 Fusion Technology have quietly deemphasized excess energy claims in their 15-page report. Their only comments: "Excess energy measurement was carried out simultaneously only in the case of the electrolysis conducted at a current of 1 A. In this case, cell voltage and increments of the electrolyte soloution temperature were monitored by a recorder." "The excess energy was measured with 10s [?] electrodes in sodium sulfate and sodium carbonate solutions." "The amounts of excess energy evolved on 10s electrodes in electrolysis at current densities of 100 to 200 mA/cm2 were in the range of 0.5 to 1 W. These values coincide with those obtained in previous work. 3 [1997] However, under electrolysis at >200 mA/cm2 , where a considerable amount of precipitates was produced, any liner relationships between the excess energy and the amount of produced iron, which were observed in electrolysis at 100 to 200 MA/cm2 [a spurious claim in their 1997 report] were not observed. This result may be acceptable in view of the production of considerable amounts of mercury, nickel, and krypton and small amounts of other various heavy metal elements in the present electrolysis." That's it, folks! In the theory section, they talk about a number of wonderful Au + proton reactions that release many electrons, but energy is not specified, except for rather general comments like: "Such a phenomenon would result in the compensation of the positive and negative heats caused by several exothermic and endothermic transmutation reactions. The possibility of this type of compensation effect was offered by Miley and Patterson 8 and Miley et al. 9" They are obviously riding a balky hobby horse in presenting vivid pictures of "some microexplosions probably caused by some nuclear transmutation reactions" with "intense heat evolved locally as a result of the microexplosions." They present no estimates as to the total energy needed to create the myriad craters, whose number or collective volume are not estimated. Was this discussed at ICCF-7 in April, or at the ANS Meeting in Nashville yesterday, or in Infinite Energy? It appears that the 1995 papers on recombination artifacts by Jones and by Shkedi may have finally started to take root in the stubborn soil of the minds of cold fusion researchers. Their table III lists SIMS isotopic measurements on the surface of the Au electrodes in five runs for nine elements. I am very grateful to have a table of numbers to deal with, rather than a cramped and puzzling graph, as is so often the case in CF reports. However, I still had to double via zerox Fig. 2 to estimate the SIMS counts for Run #4, probably typical of the data for the other four runs: The counts for the nine elements range from a low of 200 for 11B to 200,000 for 24Mg. Runs 1 and 3 have identical conditions, but Run 1 has five fairly normal isotopic ratios, whereas Run 3 has only one fairly normal, and the ratios for its 39K and 41K are by far the least normal: 83.1% and 16.9% vs standard values 93.1% and 6.9%. Run 2 is just like the previous two, but with twice the current density, so we might expect increased isotopic changes, but only in the case of Mg is Run 2 different from both Run 1 and Run 2: the ratios for 24, 25, and 26 are 75.1%, 12.1%, and 12.9%, versus normal 78.6%, 10.1%, and 11.2%. Runs 4 and 5 yet again double the current density, and use a different electrolyte, but in no case do their isotopic ratios differ meaningfully from the fairly varied results of Runs 1, 2, or 3. The second least normal isotopic ratios are for Ti: mass numbers 47 48 49, 50 9.7% 69.5% 6.3% 6.5% versus normal 7.5% 74.0% 5.5% 5.3%. "Lead, silver, and elements lighter than iron present on or in the electrode showed the isotopic compositions close to their natural isotopic abundance. The isotopic composition of these elements are listed in Table III together with their natural values. This shows that these elements are mostly impurities." This admirable and sensible conclusion, however, leads to unforseen difficulties. We have the SIMS counts for Run #4 from Fig. 2. They are only 200 for 10B and 800 for 11B, and just 1,000 for 206Pb, 1,000 for 207Pb, and 4,000 for 208Pb. Yet, on page 368, where known impurities are listed, there is no B and no Pb to <1ppm in the Au cathode, and <1 ppm B and no Pb to <1 in the Pt anode [mass never given in any report], and 10exp-9 concentration of Pb and Ti,and no B, in the Na2CO3 electrolyte, by ICP/MS. Yet, these minute impurities, on the verge of detectability, show up on the Au SIMS data with counts of 100s and 1000s in the 30 day, 500 mA/cm2 Run #4. In fact, 48Ti has a count about 60,000. So, it is reasonable to conjecture that all unexpected elements, when correctly measured, will likewise derive from concentration from trace impurity sources. The "major product elements" are Hg, Ni, Fe, Kr, with possibly Pb and Ti. For each element, the major isotope SIMS count for Run #4 is: Hg 1,000 Ni 10,000 Fe 100,000 Kr 5,000 Pb 5,000 Ti 60,000. Clearly, Hg, Ni, Kr, Pb, and Ti are at the boundary at which undetected impuries, just a shade more rare than B and Pb, are electrolytically concentrated onto tiny active spots, to be detected by SIMS. Hg and Ni are present at 10exp-8 in the Na2CO3 electrolyte. Complex and subtle estimation of the amount of "major product elements" is likely to lead to errors in the fervently desired direction. Apparent isotopic anomalies are most reasonably to be accounted for as any of a myriad of available interferences. Fe and Ti are conspicuously open to numerous molecular interferences: 28Si2, 55MnH, 40CaO for 56Fe, and 24Mg2, O3, 40CaN, 32SO for 48Ti. We can sympathize with this almost wistful comment: "In fact, for titanium present on or in the electrode after the electrolysis, a slight nonnegligible isotopic deviation from the natural value is visible in Table III..." There are many hints of the transfer of impurities from the Pt anode: The Run #4 SIMS data gives: Pt ~200 counts 103Rh (18 ppm) 800 counts three isotopes Pd (2 ppm) 3,000 counts each 52Cr (2 ppm) 20,000 28Si (2 ppm) 60,000 counts 10B,11B (<1 ppm) 200, 800 counts 63Cu, 65Cu (<1 ppm) 20,000, 10,000 counts 40Ca (<1 ppm) 200,000 counts Hg (not detected) 1,000 counts Os (not detected) 100-500 counts each for five isotopes. Of course, many of these also come from the cathode, electrolyte, and silica cell. 58Ni 10,000 counts (10exp-8 in electrolyte) Why are the Platinum isotopes only about 200 counts each? AES also finds Pt and Hg on the Au cathode, and the EPMA images show Pt, Hg, and Os. Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti all absorb H, and the first four catalyze the fiercely exothermic reaction 2H + O -> H2O, which is the basis for my little lily theory (LLT). Si and Mg were also found in the precipitates, also with shifted isotopic ratios, leading to perhaps precipitous prognostications. The SIMS on the Au cathode for Run #4 with Na2CO3 electrolyte found 24Mg 100,000 counts-- was some of it C2? Commendably, Ohmori did owe up to many problems with interferences: "FeO" "TiO" "signals of O2+ and S+ may overlap" "for the spectrum of numbers from 63 through 66, two or three kinds among TiO+, S2+, Cu+, and Zn+ signals are considered to be overlapping, so the quantification of sulfur, copper, and zinc could not be achieved by SIMS measurement..." "To check the possibily of overlap of 56FeH+ in the 57Fe signals,..." "Neon and argon were not identified because of the overlap with Ca2+ and Ca+ signals, respectively." "The precision of the measurement of the isotopic composition was checked with a sample consisting of various kinds of oxides with a natural isotopic components and proved to be within +-0.5% for 208Pb, 107Ag, 39K, 24Mg, 7Li, and +-1% for 56Fe and 28Si." Were the same totals of SIMS counts used as with the far more complex actual samples? "It is surprising that the atomic concentration of krypton reaches approximately ten times that of gold." Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 14:50:44 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA24512; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:43:32 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:43:32 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:43:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199806112143.OAA02990 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: [Fwd: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery] Resent-Message-ID: <"E8yXD3.0.w-5.3-4Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19690 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >> Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery >> >> LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have >> solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a >> century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than >> its surface. BS: All they did was to shift the blame from why is the corona so hot, to, why are there all of these intense magnetic fields at the surface of the sun blasting the ions out there. The issue absolutely is not solved. It is simply shifted. And SOHO is making it very much worse (I just bought a $300.00 book on the first results from SOHO) Anyway, we observe a lot of things that just cannot be, according to our present theories. Like, globally symmetric, temporally symmetric, coronal mass ejections. These just cannot be unless aether is blasting out of the interior of the sun. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 15:09:46 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA30104; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:04:04 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:04:04 -0700 Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0970 xch-cpc-02> From: "Scudder, Henry J" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:20:21 -0700 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Resent-Message-ID: <"k-eX_1.0.HM7.JH5Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19691 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At atmospheric pressure, I believe there are very few free electrons in the air. They latch onto a neutral atom, making negative ions very quickly. The mean free path is quite short. After that all conduction is via ion mobility. Hank > ---------- > From: Francis J. Stenger[SMTP:fstenger interlaced.net] > Reply To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 1998 2:04 PM > To: vortex-l eskimo.com > Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads > > Tom Miller wrote: > > > (snip) > > > More to the point, the mass of current flow in a lightning stroke is > > said to be POSITIVE current UP to the cloud. I can comprehend a mass > > flow of electrons, doen, but what does the positive upward stroke > > consist of. Positive Ions? > > Tom, I think a mass flow of electrons down is equivalent to a flow of > positive charge upward - just like in a semiconductor, a flow of > electrons to the right can be thought of as a flow of + "holes" to the > left. > I would think that there is some movement of positive ions in an > atmospheric pressure plasma but I think the major current flow is > always > with the electrons due to their higher mobility. Any words of wisdom > from an "authority in the field"?. > > Frank Stenger > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 15:15:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA31558; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:07:43 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:07:43 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:16:55 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com Subject: Re: Murray: Little: Ohmori little lily theor In-Reply-To: <199806111512_MC2-3FEC-C49 compuserve.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Uw2kt.0.xi7.kK5Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19692 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I love lily tornados ....but what ARE they :) :) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 15:37:15 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18923; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980611222822.00693898 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, 11 Jun 1998 18:28:22 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Fleischmann & Pons in Science! Resent-Message-ID: <"AOPT41.0.Zd4.ff5Wr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19693 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sir Arthur Clarke has a two page article in Science (Vol 280, 5 June 1998, p.1532) in which he mentions among other subjests, that his confidence level in the "new energy" has reached 99%. He also predicts that "Pons and Fleischmann will be the only scientists ever to win both the Nobel and the Ig Nobel Prizes." Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 16:29:23 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA06356; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:25:58 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:25:58 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:12:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: Discussion Group - Vortex Subject: Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery In-Reply-To: <357FE05E.80FDC739 css.mot.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"V7-lG2.0.3Z1.5U6Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19694 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, John Steck wrote: > LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have > solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a > century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than > its surface. This has always fascinated me because it is a fairly blatent unknown. I always look for it in popular accounts of solar dynamics; its presence indicates the authors' competence (what is NOT known is often more important than what IS known, and those who know this, I want to know.) The findings matched one model that showed the heat was uniformly released, probably by a clash of magnetic field lines causing dozens of explosions that release energy along the loop. Priest said the explosions occur in tiny regions of intense electric current that heat the atmosphere in the same way as an electric current in a light bulb or electric fire. This doesn't sound like anything familiar. Probably a bad translation of physics-speak. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 11 18:23:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA24150; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:13:00 -0700 Message-Id: <199806120113.SAA00082 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: BS Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery Resent-Message-ID: <"tbdJq2.0.Av5.D98Wr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19695 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, John Steck wrote: > >> LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have >> solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a >> century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than >> its surface. > >This has always fascinated me because it is a fairly blatent unknown. I >always look for it in popular accounts of solar dynamics; its presence >indicates the authors' competence (what is NOT known is often more >important than what IS known, and those who know this, I want to know.) Well, it gets worse than just that. Did you know that the solar wind continues to accelerate as it heads out of our solar system? It does, out to beyond about Jupiter where we have data from Voyager / Pioneer. They say that the mystery is solved but as I said, all that has happened is that they are seeing the localized origins of the heating near the surface. And they are noting the topology of the magnetic field lines in the heating regions. However, they are not in the least explaining the phenomena. They have simply shifted the mystery from hot atmosphere, to, "magnetic carpet". Now they have to explain how and why there is a dancing magic carpet of magnetic fields. The problem is this. There is no reason for there to be a hot corona. In fact, there is not really any reason we should be able to see the sun in the first place. Our entire solar system ought to be a huge gas ball getting cooler and cooler as the gas gains in gravitational PE. But instead, as those solar wind gases gain in PE, they also gain in KE, and just accelerate right on out of the solar system. So what is continuing to heat the solar wind? Further, SOHO has for the first time demonstrated that in fact, there are global solar coronal mass ejections. And, it is well known that if one region of the sun breaks into a flaring condition, it is far more likely that other regions of the sun will also break into flaring activity at about the same time. The implication is simple. You have point symmetry, and so the origin of the surface phenomena has remained coherent from the core of the sun. The problem with that is, it takes about 170,000 years for thermal energy to be communicated from the core to the surface (I should look that number up, but it is a huge time scale). The point being, you don't have something happen in the core that long ago, and remain coherent despite all of the global oscillations and convection, such that with minutes, the entire surface of the sun blasts a huge shock wave out into space to 20 or 30 times the diamter of the sun in a matter of an hour or so. No magnetic fields can produce a spherically symmetrical shock front like that due to currents because you are constrained to work with cylindrical symmetries, and cannot create spherical symmetries. The solutions is simple. The property of the universe that corresponds to "mass" in particles, is really the amount of aether associated with their solitonic resonances. And so fusion, is in reality an emission of aether, the medium of what we call empty space. But since you have a spherically symmetrical ball that is causing the fusion reactions, that aether emitted must flow outward and exit through the surface. Now what happens when a fluid exits a region that resists it's flow? Answer, the pressure drops and the fluid accelerates. And what happens to things that are in that fluid if they transition those regions? Answer, they are accelerated too. The coronal heating and that magnetic carpet are due to aether boiling up and out of the sun, a fluidized bed of aether vortices. And the coronal mass ejections are due to large excess reactivity in the core, and the ensuing flow of aether that heads on out through the volume of the sun, blasting out all over the sun at once. That is what is really going on. And the bulk flow of aether leads to a plethora of other phenomena as I have said before including T-tauri jets, and planetary nebulae. it also can be seen to lead to mysterious phenomena regarding black holes, which are actually aether sinks. And you thus expect that what flows in, must flow out. And we observe both jets, and our big bang, not to mention many other observations by Arp and others. Check out the Venusian atmospheric circulation, and the solar acoustic oscillation graphs. Check out the earths incessant 5 minute free oscillations and the solar acoustic oscillations graphs which show that the maximum oscillation power is at a period of 5 minutes. Coincidence? Hardly. It is only our inability to think of something equally as silly as saying the earth is not flat once would have sounded. But here goes. Empty space is not empty, it is an ocean out there. And our matter does not consist of particles, it consists of localized vortices, or solitons, in that ocean and made of the medium of that ocean. When you get that, it is easy to understand that mass, is a measure of how much aether is associated with a given solitonic geometry. And thus, that aether must be flowing out of stars, and out of our sun. From there it is easy to see that if that flow rate changes, so too will surface activity. Have fun, Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 18:26:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA22796; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:19:56 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:19:56 -0700 Message-ID: <35808238.7DF2 interlaced.net> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:19:52 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F0970 xch-cpc-02> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JsFv1.0.2a5.x88Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19696 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scudder, Henry J wrote: > > At atmospheric pressure, I believe there are very few free electrons in > the air. They latch onto a neutral atom, making negative ions very > quickly. The mean free path is quite short. After that all conduction is > via ion mobility. > For a "cool" batch of ionized air you're probably right Hank. I guess I was thinking of the hot plasma as in a return stroke - but that isn't really the condition of the pre-stroke effects. Plasma physics - another area I spout off about without knowing what I'm talking about! Hmmmm, is that No. 437 or 438? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 19:04:09 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA27413; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:59:54 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:59:54 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:59:46 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <3580330B.A77FEFAE gorge.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"VJ9gA.0.Fi6.Qk8Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19697 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, Tom Miller wrote: > A most interesting aspect of lightning is the idea that a positive > charge is induced in the ground, etc, BY the negaative charge in the > bottom of the cloud. Now, I can understand indicing a negative charge, > by attracting free electrons. Oops, this is part of a widespread misconception, "electric current is electrons". In fact, free electrons exist in metals and plasmas, but otherwise are rare. In the environment, mobile charges take the form of + and - ions in electrolytes. > But, indicing a positive charge must > necessarily mean pushing away free electrons. I can see this happening > in a conductor, which would leave behind positive ions. Is it reasonable > that the ground, trees, houses, people, all contain massive amounts of > positive ions underneath a thunderstorm? Wouldn't this have serious > chemical repercussions? Maybe, but these objects are already full of positive ions. A huge e-field only makes a tiny fraction of the ions in a conductive object migrate to the surface. > More to the point, the mass of current flow in a lightning stroke is > said to be POSITIVE current UP to the cloud. I've seen this said before too. It is wrong. The leading edge of the wave of current does go upwards, but the actual electrons in the plasma go downwards. It's like breaking the end off of a long trough of water: the water flows towards the break and outwards, but the "wave of shallowness" flys from the break and off down the trough. When the stepped leader of lightning makes contact with the short leaders from the ground, electrons suddenly have a path available, and the ones and the earth end of the leader start flowing downwards first, then their higher neighbors, etc. THe bright wave of light would race upwards, even though the moving carriers would flow downwards. (All this ignores the positive air ions in the lightning, which do act as part of the current) ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 11 21:32:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA14253; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:30:28 -0700 Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:30:28 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <88cb3efb.3580aeb0 aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 00:29:35 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: <"LPZgv2.0.YU3.ZxAWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19698 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, The fifteen dollar multimeters have arrived. Not bad for the price. They are ~2 megohm input impedence. I think they will serve well. They do not have an auto-off feature which is goodness. I constructed a resistor to fit inside the reactor tube out of .040 ss wire and added some wiring, a switch and binding posts to the power supply so to be able to power the resistor with the variac. The resistor will be powered by AC directly from the variac. I don't think power factor will be a problem with this simple setup. I will plot a series of points of watts vs temperature to see what wattage is required to heat the tube to the temperatures I observed when running the glow discharge. The tube will be filled with H2 at the same pressure used while running the glow discharge. Preliminary testing without temperature measurements, (just to check the resistor and my wiring) brought the tube to red heat with an input of 90 watts. This is entirely subjective. NOT science. I will run careful tests with the thermocouple to see exactly what wattage is needed to hold the tube temperature at 600 degrees C, which is what I observed running the glow discharge in H2 with K at about 50 watts input. After I establish the wattage vs temperature with the joule heater I will instrument the glow tube with the digital meters and conduct runs with the glow discharge in H2 with K. I still need to construct the voltage dividers for the meters. This is going slow folks due to my being very busy at the day job so please have patience. (87.5 hours work hours last week) Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Thu Jun 11 23:14:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA23547; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:09:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199806120609.XAA23519 mx2.eskimo.com> X-Sender: stephens pop.enteract.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-L eskimo.com From: Scott Stephens Subject: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers Resent-Message-ID: <"K7p5G2.0.rl5.UOCWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19699 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I believe this must have been tried before, or is impossible. since most everything concievable has. This concept for an engine occured to me after conteplating such things as magneticaly crushed cans and coins, and explosively powered, Tera-watt generating E-bomb weapons. The engine I'm proposing is similar to the internal combustion engine, in that it burns fuel and air, but MHD - style by: * Blowing a fuel-air mix into a ball or donut-shaped plasma vortex (plasmoid). * Imploding the plasmoid bubble current-loop with a pulsed magnetic field * Harness energy as the fuel-air detonation increases the area of the plasmoid current-loop. A Tesla Coil comes to mind, because this basicaly is a plasma-ball in a Tesla Coil. This system will generate larger current pulses at resonance, than are applied. This may not be very effiecent, but for some applications, such as high power Tesla Coils, lasers, jet propulsion, and nuclear applications, it may not matter much :-) So how do you blow a plasma bubble? Microwave excitation: Perhaps you've put burning charcoal, toast, toothpick, et. in a microwave oven and watched the pretty orange plasmoids go buzzing off. If you have, you know it can take some effort to get the plasma started. Once a current path is initiated, the power keeps it lit (ionized). You can trap the lit plasmoid in an inverted glass (cup), but it will quickly melt through, and cause the glass to melt and become conductive too :-) The objective with an engine is to produce a viscous plasma bubble or other geometry that will implode, compressing fuel-air in a magnetic bottle field. Similar to a Diesel engine. And will expand like a rubber balloon when its contents are detonated by the implosion. This type of plasmoid may be created by quadrature 'extraordinary wave' magneto-sonic resonant excitation. A cylindrical microwave resonant cavity (Cavity) has ports seperated by 90 degrees. Microwave oven magnetrons, mode - locked 90 degrees from each other, excite the plasmoid through these ports. Take a glass of water, and move the glass forward - backwards, and right - left. If the two orthogonal motions are phased 90 degrees, so the motion of the glass traces a circle, the water will begin swirling and storing energy, just like a magneto - sonic plasma at its resonant frequency. The magnetic field diverts current into a circular or elliptical orbit. The magnetic field acts like a dielectric across the radius. I've read of effective E values up to 10,000! Fuel and air are blown into the cool center of this plasma. The excited current and ambient magnetic field must be strong enough to create a viscous plasma, that will contain a fuel-air detonation burp or blast. The gas doesn't have time to completely burn, because it is pulsed 100's to 10,000's times per second, by micro-second range pulses, which detonate fresh gas as it moves into the plasmoid's center. The microwave Cavity is in a Tesla Coil like inductor. It could be a gap in a ferrous torroid, and biased by permanent magnets. Or maybe without permanent magnets, if I can figure out how to consistantly light a plasmoid with pulsed magnetron microwaves. The windings are wound more dense at the top and bottom, so as to create the famous Magnetic Bottle. When the Tesla windings are pulsed, such as from the typical Tesla spark gap & pulse capacitor, the plasma implodes. Magnetic bottles leak at the top & bottom. So a high - order plas-modes may be usefull, such as a figure-8 shaped one, with a top and bottom current loop. The top and bottom plasma torrus's implode, creating a shock which compresses and detonates fuel in-between. When the plasma bubble explodes, the current-loop expands with it, inducing current in the Tesla Coil. So you get more voltage across the Tesla Coil than you put on it - no free lunch, because the fuel in the plasma blast did the work. This system would be tuned to electronic resonance for the Tesla Coil, and the (super)sonic resonance of the plasma bubble implosion-detonation oscillation. A spark gap, diode, or other switch could switch current into a storage device, until the next cycle. The Q of the inductor/Tesla Coil would be too low to store any energy, superconductor notwithstanding. These devices could be staged, with progressivley larger plasmoid and fuel volumes. I think the limiting factor would be the magnetic core saturation field values and Tesla Coil ohmic loss. The good news is that like a Tesla Coil, kilo-amp and kilo-gauss magnitudes are possible, but at a lower duty - cycle, or firing rate. The bad news is that unless I find a way to consistantly and repetitivly spawn or blow a magneto-plasma bubble, I'm stuck keeping the magnetrons going CW with at static, permanent B-field. Perhaps the energy could be store in a liquid metal MHD flywheel. Magnetic pulses are directly coupled to an induction motor flywheel rotor, or liquid NaK homopolar generator, for kilo-joule impulse power storage between pulses. Most nuclear power would probably show up as radiation, for thermal recovery. Magnetic design: * A plain solenoidal Tesla Coil would not couple very well into the plasmoid. A ferrite torroid would much better. * The gap in this torroid is a magnetic bottle, as the flux is dense at the poles. The Tesla Coil may be wound on the torroid, or around the cavity in the gap. * It should supply a significant steady magnetic field for a magneto-plasma and magneto-sonic mode tuning in the magnetron oscillator's range. * It must not suffer from eddy-current losses from Tesla Coil pulses. It should be torroidal for maximum magnetic coupling to the plasma bubble. I'm afraid to ask what 10 lb's of metglass will cost :-( Maybe coils wrapped around ferrite, at Cavity top and bottom, could be connected in a flux-cancelling mode. Of coarse this would reduce the inductance of the Tesla Coil, and probably destroy the .9 M. * It must not eat the microwave Cavity excitation, and affect its tuning. * The ohmic losses of the Tesla Coil must not be excessive. Microwave Cavity Design: * It should take energy from two magnetrons, launch it into the plasmoid at the appropriate angle and phase. * Broadband enough to accomodate the changing plasmoid magnetic field during implosion and explosion. * It should not eat the Tesla Coil flux or current. * It should not heat the Tesla Coil, or torroid * It should not be affected by, or must adapt to, the ferrite in the torroidal pole pieces. * It should not melt or explode. * Sometype of patch resonator or array of ceramic flux pins. Propelant Design: * Determine what pressure-volume change rates will DETONATE common fuels? What books have these curves? Will this only work with hydrogen and pure oxygen with luck? * What will be the detonation velocity at various pressure-volumes? * The best performance would be had by not significantly shrinking the plasmoid volume, which would result in significant electronic tuning and magnetic coupling problems; but by inducing a small, mm-range change in volume of the range of .5 - 10 microseconds. Roughly an implosion shock velocity of 100 - 10,000 meters/second. Applications: * If possible, it would make one hell of a Tesla Coil. Giant sparks, from a little propane torch. * RF power for exciting lasers and plasma cutters. The plasma ball could also be a laser cavity? * Set up an asymetric detonation, such that momentum is leaked out for jet propulsion. Detonation waves allow > mach 2 jet velocity. Phase - shifted oscillating plasmoids could provide MHD catapillar-style propulsion. * Plasma fission/fusion cycle It occured to me that if a few of these were staged, eventualy nuclear density and power levels would be reached. A nuclear engine as a device that will focus or lever managable energies into previously un-managably small volumes. Use a non-thermal neutron, high energy fissionable isotope as a primer to get a fusion pop. U-238, Th-232, et. A plasma gun fires Deuterium-Tritium puff into a Lithium, Thorium or Uranium plasma ball. (Lithium breeds Tritium, Deuterium-Tritium burns well). Appropriate EM-trapping fields keep the D-T plasma bubble in a heavy ion plasma. As in sono-luminescence, the bubble is magneticaly imploded, focusing the energy many orders of magnitude. I've read that the sono-luminescent effect is a result of viscosity, I'm proposing an analagous situation with plasma bubble viscosities. * Temporal Staged Implosion A magnetic impulse creates the first implosion shock in the microsecond time scale, then a nanosecond magnetron chirp compresses further, finaly a concentric holographic laser flash causes the outer blanket plasma to lase and radialy compresses the tiny, hot plasmoid. As the size of the plasmoid shrinks, magnetic coupling decreases, and high-order radio-frequency modes accellerate the implosion shock. The final laser discharge in the excited heavy-ion bubble-blanket is the final shove. Burst my plasma bubble, or build a nuclear rocket engine! Why won't it work? From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 02:56:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA24301; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 02:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 02:53:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199806120609.XAA23519 mx2.eskimo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 23:40:32 -1000 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Rick Monteverde Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers Resent-Message-ID: <"9yH16.0.dx5.ZgFWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19700 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott - > Burst my plasma bubble, or build a nuclear > rocket engine! Why won't it work? Don't know, sorry. But any message with... * "donut-shaped plasma vortex" * "plasmoid bubble" * "magneto-sonic resonant excitation" * "liquid metal MHD flywheel" * "melt or explode" * "Giant sparks" * "concentric holographic laser" ...mentioned in it makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over. Thanks! :) - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 03:11:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA04640; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:09:25 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:09:25 -0700 Message-Id: <3580FC2F.F4184C0A verisoft.com.tr> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:00:15 +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: Gravitational Polarization of Light References: <2.2.16.19980611181948.23170a18 po.pacific.net.sg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"nZ0ii3.0.Q81.KvFWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19701 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Mpowers Consultants wrote: > > Looking for, but not finding, any reports of any effects of gravity on > variously polarization angles of e-m stuff. > This today anounced paper may help: General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology, abstract gr-qc/9806054 From: MONTANARI fe.infn.it Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:23:40 GMT (16kb) On the propagation of electromagnetic radiation in the field of a plane gravitational wave Author: Enrico Montanari (University of Ferrara and INFN sezione di Ferrara, Italy) Comments: 13 pages; revtex; accepted for publication in Class. Quantum Grav The propagation of free electromagnetic radiation in the field of a plane gravitational wave is investigated. A solution is found one order of approximation beyond the limit of geometrical optics in both transverse--traceless (TT) gauge and Fermi Normal Coordinate (FNC) system. The results are applied to the study of polarization perturbations. Two experimental schemes are investigated in order to verify the possibility to observe these perturbations, but it is found that the effects are exceedingly small. Available from xxx.lanl.gov Regards, hamdi ucar From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 03:40:39 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA29616; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <357FF5C9.B6383858 verisoft.com.tr> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:20:41 +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: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery References: <357FE05E.80FDC739 css.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yrzrg1.0.fE7.uKGWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19702 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: John Steck wrote: > > 03:51 PM ET 06/10/98 > Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery > > LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have > solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a > century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than > its surface. I recall it was already solved long time ago (?) (and discussed on vortex too). Nothing new on this discovery, Probably this news comes from archive. Regards, hamdix From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 08:18:38 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA13872; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:10:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:10:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3581435A.6D7A interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 11:03:54 -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: <88cb3efb.3580aeb0 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kuW3V3.0.PO3.nJKWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19703 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: VCockeram aol.com wrote: > > All, > The fifteen dollar multimeters have arrived. Not bad for the price. > They are ~2 megohm input impedence. I think they will serve well. > They do not have an auto-off feature which is goodness. Great, Vince - 2 megs input will make the divider design very easy, I think! > > I constructed a resistor to fit inside the reactor tube out of .040 ss wire > and added some wiring, a switch and binding posts to the power > supply so to be able to power the resistor with the variac. > The resistor will be powered by AC directly from the variac. > I don't think power factor will be a problem with this simple setup. > > I will plot a series of points of watts vs temperature to see what > wattage is required to heat the tube to the temperatures I observed > when running the glow discharge. > The tube will be filled with H2 at the same pressure used while > running the glow discharge. > > Preliminary testing without temperature measurements, > (just to check the resistor and my wiring) brought the tube to > red heat with an input of 90 watts. > This is entirely subjective. NOT science. OK, but remember, this is just "one small step for man" but it's a good place to start. Your radiation and detailed convection inside the tube may be very different from the wire to the plasma - but, I would think the external heat transfer may be pretty close. The infrared heat from the wire may be contained in the tube better than the blues and violets from the plasma. This might tend to give a false "negative"? Anyone? > I will run careful tests with the thermocouple to see exactly what > wattage is needed to hold the tube temperature at 600 degrees C, > which is what I observed running the glow discharge in H2 with K > at about 50 watts input. > > After I establish the wattage vs temperature with the joule heater I will > instrument the glow tube with the digital meters and conduct runs with > the glow discharge in H2 with K. > I still need to construct the voltage dividers for the meters. > > This is going slow folks due to my being very busy at the day job so > please have patience. (87.5 hours work hours last week) Keep up the interesting work, Vince! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 08:30:29 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17219; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:27:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:24:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199806121524.KAA26180 dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com> From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) Subject: A question to R. Murray To: rmforall earthlink.net To: vortex-l eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"PGt-e.0.sC4.jZKWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19704 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 12, 1998 Rich, I have seen (not read all) your extended comments, critiques, suggestions not only on vortex but to the extensive list of addressees that prefaced your output. Question: Do you expect, plan, or seek to do any actual experiments in the laboratory yourself in line with your verbal involvement in the cold fusion scene? -ak- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 09:02:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23760; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:00:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:00:33 -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: <35814FF7.16EBF7A5 css.mot.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:57:43 -0500 From: John Steck Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: BS Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery References: <199806120113.SAA00082 Au.oro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JTtZ6.0.2p5.S2LWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19705 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ross Tessien wrote: > They say that the mystery is solved but as I said, all that has happened is > that they are seeing the localized origins of the heating near the surface. hee hee hee, I knew this topic would get your attention! BTW, how is the book coming along? John E. Steck --------------------------------o]{: Senior Mechanical Engineer Rapid Tooling Applications Motorola CSS, Libertyville From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 09:50:00 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02958; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:44:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199806121644.JAA00319 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: BS Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery Resent-Message-ID: <"DOcOo.0._j.cjLWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19706 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Ross Tessien wrote: >> They say that the mystery is solved but as I said, all that has happened is >> that they are seeing the localized origins of the heating near the surface. > >hee hee hee, I knew this topic would get your attention! Yeah. They notice one more detail and claim they solved the problem. All they did was sweep it under the carpet, and shift the blame. The problem is, no ideas they have even come remotely close to being able to explain coronal mass ejections let alone that they can be global in extent. We now know that the regions of magnetic fields under the surface are very flat, like pancakes. So there is no communication from the convection under one patch of sun to the other side of the sun that could cause things to happen all around the sun at once. It is so blatently obvious that the symmetry of the events is point symmetry. ie, spherical events have a point of origin, not a spherical shell of origin. The core of the sun is what drives coronal mass ejections, not the surface magnetic fields. And the aether emissions from the core of the sun are what drive the "Blinkers" that result where their magnetic carpet is dancing. What is really happening, is that the aether must "percolate" up through the spacetime acoustic standing wave topology. And so to do that, it is making a sort of barber pole helical motion, a bit like a leaf falling to the ground, as it moves through the spacetime quadrature nodal structure. That in turn is, what a magnetic field is. a localized rotation of the pressure condition of the spacetime nodes. Newly born white dwarf stars display this the best I know. They have tremendous surface magnetic fields because they just ignited their fusion of helium and a spewing aether like crazy. That is why they blow out their huge planetary nebulae, and blast out the FLIERs along their axis' of rotation. But what really baffles me is that even here on vortex, I read Hamdi and others saying that this problem has been solved long ago, and was even discussed on vortex. They forget that when I mentioned this a few months back, I pointed out then that the problem did not go away, it was just swept under a different rock. But no one seems to understand the idea that you can work with the universe as an ocean, and matter as waveforms. I guess explaining the above is about as clear as explaining to a meideval person that the earth is not flat. > >BTW, how is the book coming along? Great. I am nearing completion of the illustrations. Once finished, then I will do the real nitty gritty of writing it. I am giving a speaking presentation of the ideas and the illustrations tonight locally. This will be a fist test of how well the illustrations help to explain the concepts. But these people are not physicists, though they belong to a group of very intelligent people. So it will be interesting to see how much they grasp. Later, Ross Tessien From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 10:47:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA23546; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:39:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:39:49 -0700 From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: <613e16af.35816741 aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:37:04 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: My Newman's motor is on the web... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 116 Resent-Message-ID: <"vXsCW2.0.ql5.aVMWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19707 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, I have build successfully the Newman's Magnetic motor, so I have updated my web site with all pictures, diagrams and scope pictures about my V1.0 You will find all these informations at : http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jlnaudin/html/qmmv11.htm The tests phase will begin next week...more to come soon.. Sincerely, Jean-Louis Naudin (France) Email : JNaudin509 aol.com my Overunity WEB Server : http://members.aol.com/JNaudin509/ From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 13:10:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA14579; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:02:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <358188E0.71D09E5D gorge.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:00:32 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <199806120614.XAA25354 mx2.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"72AKu1.0.eZ3.IbOWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19708 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > > A most interesting aspect of lightning is the idea that a positive > > charge is induced in the ground, etc, BY the negaative charge in the > > bottom of the cloud. Now, I can understand indicing a negative charge, > > by attracting free electrons. > > Oops, this is part of a widespread misconception, "electric current is > electrons". In fact, free electrons exist in metals and plasmas, but > otherwise are rare. In the environment, mobile charges take the form of + > and - ions in electrolytes. > > > But, indicing a positive charge must > > necessarily mean pushing away free electrons. I can see this happening > > in a conductor, which would leave behind positive ions. Is it reasonable > > that the ground, trees, houses, people, all contain massive amounts of > > positive ions underneath a thunderstorm? Wouldn't this have serious > > chemical repercussions? > > Maybe, but these objects are already full of positive ions. A huge > e-field only makes a tiny fraction of the ions in a conductive object > migrate to the surface. > > > More to the point, the mass of current flow in a lightning stroke is > > said to be POSITIVE current UP to the cloud. > > I've seen this said before too. It is wrong. The leading edge of the > wave of current does go upwards, but the actual electrons in the plasma go > downwards. I think you are probably correct, in that I cannot imagine the huge amount of positive ions required able to move at the requisite speed. That leaves the problem (to me) of largely non conductive items on the ground, including humans, gradually having neutral ions changed into positive ions, and then changed back, after the storm (or lightning strike). Most biochemical systems require that the reactants have an appropriate charge. If masses of these reactants ionized and deionized by a thunderstorm, there should be sever disruptions to the biosystem. Since there is apparently no serious disruption, it has been assumed that ionization and deionization can take place without any problem. What if, on the other hand, the idea of ionization/deionzation is incorrect, and that another mechanism is responsible for "charge." After all, a similar function must happen, when making sparks from one's body, (van de graaf generator, shuffling feet on carpet, etc.) or in the subject air-threads experiments. Related idea: We all "know" that charge stored in a capacitor is due to electrons moved from one plate to the other plate. But the amount of charge which can be placed on a cap is related to the characteristics and thickness of the dielectric, rather than the mass of the plates. This all works together. If we assume certain things are true, because that's what we were taught, no progress, or better understanding can be made. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 13:56:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA24210; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35819361.57D89B43 darknet.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:45:21 -0400 From: Steve Organization: DarkNet Online/Digital Fusion X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Br4OL1.0.Aw5.kKPWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19710 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > You do not need to go to anywhere near this much trouble. Read > up on MHD.... you can build a test set up with a propane torch and > permanent magnets.... and some wire screen. Hi John, most of the stuff I've read about MHDs involves very large setups, which is why I never really considered building one.. if a simple one can be built with a propane torch, magnets and a wire screen, then I might try to build one! can you tell me where this info is? Also.. it'd work with hydrogen instead of propane, right? I'm working on a hydrogen generator too.. it'd be nice to find a use for it! thanks!! -Steve -- darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616 DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 14:20:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA29463; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:17:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:17:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35819A31.7BFB interlaced.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:14:25 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <199806120614.XAA25354 mx2.eskimo.com> <358188E0.71D09E5D@gorge.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"JwbXO1.0.8C7.6hPWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19711 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tom Miller wrote: > > This all works together. If we assume certain things are true, because > that's what we were taught, no progress, or better understanding can be > made. Well, Tom, let's look at some numbers to clear up the confusion: 1. Let's assume that a human has a capacitance similar to a sphere one meter in diameter. C_h = 4*pi*e_0*r = 4*pi*(8.85 x 10^-12)*(0.5) = 5.56 x 10^-11 farads. 2. To raise this capacitance to 100,000 volts requires Q = C*V = (5.56 x 10^-11)*(10^5) = 5.56 x 10^-6 coulombs of charge. 3. This much charge is carried by (5.56 x 10^-6)/(1.6 x 10^-19) = 3.475 x 10^13 electrons. 4. If we took one electron from each water molecule, we would need (3.475 x 10^13)/(6.02 x 10^23) = 5.77 x 10^-11 g-moles of water to rob. 5. This is 18 x 5.77 x 10^-11 = 1.04 x 10^-9 grams of water. I think you could find that much water in a very thin layer of sweat on the hairs of your body! I think that's the point, Tom - charge at high voltage is restricted pretty much to the outer fringes of your body and it doesn't take many singly-ionized molecules (or just electrons) to provide for a very high voltage. Can someone check me on this - now that I'm over 60, numbers are not my friends! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 14:38:33 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15213; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:32:55 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 13:32:55 -0700 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:26:07 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com cc: vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers In-Reply-To: <199806120609.XAA23519 mx2.eskimo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-ilCe3.0.dj3.s1PWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19709 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Scott, You do not need to go to anywhere near this much trouble. Read up on MHD.... you can build a test set up with a propane torch and permanent magnets.... and some wire screen. J From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 15:04:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA09703; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:55:09 +1000 X-Sender: mindtech mailhost.nor.com.au (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: mindtech nor.com.au (Peter Nielsen) Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"RSWdo1.0.TN2.nLQWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19712 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >BTW, has there been a discussion on the "sprite" phenomena that appear >at the tops of the bursts of lightening, as seen by shuttle missions? > >Chuck Davis > There was an article in New Scientist maybe a year ago. FTL wavefronts were claimed. Peter Nielsen From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 15:16:19 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA11881; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:13:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:13:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:59:02 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers In-Reply-To: <35819361.57D89B43 darknet.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Iso6L3.0.Wv2.kVQWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19713 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Dear Steve, Just think about it..... There are BIG generators for power grid suppies, locally it is DP and L ... Dayton Power and Light .... but there are also little ones that go on your bicycle ... for the front head lamp. GO .... to the library! Are you near a college library? If so you are set... or any large library. You want to try to find texts that discuss many different types of genration, this will give you a broader outlook. J On Fri, 12 Jun 1998, Steve wrote: > > You do not need to go to anywhere near this much trouble. Read > > up on MHD.... you can build a test set up with a propane torch and > > permanent magnets.... and some wire screen. > > Hi John, > > most of the stuff I've read about MHDs involves very large setups, which is > why > I never really considered building one.. if a simple one can be built with a > propane torch, magnets and a wire screen, then I might try to build one! > > can you tell me where this info is? Also.. it'd work with hydrogen instead > of propane, > right? I'm working on a hydrogen generator too.. it'd be nice to find a use > for it! > > thanks!! > -Steve > -- > darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616 > DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net > Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 15:29:48 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA00173; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:25:40 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:25:40 -0700 Message-ID: <3581AAC9.F854814B darknet.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:25:13 -0400 From: Steve Organization: DarkNet Online/Digital Fusion X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"w-sJA3.0.X2.ZhQWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19714 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > Are you near a college library? If so you are set... or any large library. Hi John, nope.. no college library, or even a big library.. I live in a fairly small town.. and it's getting even smaller due to the nuclear station shutting down.. half the town worked there.. :( Anyway, I've been looking for some MHD info on the net, but haven't been able to find anything that explains clearly how to build one.. any suggestions? I found one on KeelyNet I believe, that's somewhere in my bookmarks.. I'll dig that up and read thru it again. Anyone know of any other places where I could find construction details about MHD generators? I'll try to get to a city sometime soon and look them up at a library there. ;) ttyl -Steve -- darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616 DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 15:32:20 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA00398; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:27:49 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:27:49 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 15:27:41 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads In-Reply-To: <358188E0.71D09E5D gorge.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"LZ6JX1.0.86.bjQWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19715 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 12 Jun 1998, Tom Miller wrote: > > That leaves the problem (to me) of largely non conductive items on the > ground, including humans, The earth is conductive, otherwise "ground wires" wouldnt work. Humans are very conductive, they are salt water, if they weren't, then electrocution would be impossible. Skin is somewhat insulating, so ohmmeters indicate large resistance, so you must stick your DVM probes deep into a large wound... don't though! > gradually having neutral ions changed into > positive ions, and then changed back, after the storm (or lightning But there are no neutral ions, ions are always charged. Humans are full of charge, it's just that it comes in equal numbers of + and - atoms. When a human is in an intense e-field, only a tiny percent of ions migrates to the surface. REALLY tiny percent, less than PPM. In theory, if the e-field was strong enough, it would affect chemistry. But I think this requires gigavolts per millimeter, enough to shatter the bonds which make matter be solid. > strike). Most biochemical systems require that the reactants have an > appropriate charge. If masses of these reactants ionized and deionized > by a thunderstorm, there should be sever disruptions to the biosystem. There are much larger upheavals when you touch a battery to your tongue. The electric current in your tongue is made of ions, and a fair amount is metal ions from the battery terminals. The battery drives metal ions into your tissue as the terminals corrode. If you kept a battery on your tongue for long enough, the tissue would change color (blue for copper, etc.) > After all, a similar function must happen, when making sparks from one's > body, (van de graaf generator, shuffling feet on carpet, etc.) > or in the subject air-threads experiments. Sounds like a physics problem. How many ions are normally in the top micron of skin? What percentage of excess ions would be required to charge the body to 100KV? Bet it's .00001% excess ions. Or less. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 12 18:16:36 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17767; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:11:05 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:11:05 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:58:28 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: HV water dimples In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9Dezf1.0.QL4.e6TWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19716 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, William Beaty wrote: > On Tue, 9 Jun 1998, Scott Little wrote: > > > I tried using my finger tips from a distance of 6-8" looking for evidence > > of Bill's air threads and didn't see much of anything (I don't have dry ice > > yet). > > I found that I could make a detectable dimple on the surface by holding a > single > strand of steel fiber pulled from a batt of extra-fine steel wool. Carbon fibers from my old Radio Shack record cleaner brush work even better. They are so thin that they are almost invisible. By holding a single 1cm carbon fiber between fingers, I made an obvious surface dimple from 15cm away (charged water, me grounded.) I also stuck the fiber in the water and it remained upright because of e-fields, and when I held my hand above it, I could feel an ice-cold spot where the air-stream was disrupting my boundary-layer. All I need now is some swastika-shaped vanes and some more dry ice, and I'll have a tornado. Those "waterspout" tornadoes might employ a common phenomenon: when an HV electrode is held above water, a spitting cusp-shaped bump will form. If the e-fields were really large, a whole "air-thread tornado" might still form, but it would use charged water spray rather than ionized air. Being heavy, the water would make the tornado weaker in comparison to the low-mass ionized air of a land-based tornado. And since a "needle-point emitter" automatically forms on the water surface, then "waterspout" tornadoes might appear long before the sky-voltage grew to really large values, and so "waterspouts" would be more common and more feeble than land-based tornados. Also, if a "waterspout" came ashore, it would die VERY quickly, since its "spitting cusp" would no longer be there to provide charged water spray. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (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 Jun 12 18:32:13 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA20513; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:28:47 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <8fd955cb.3581d1f0 aol.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 21:12:15 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: <"IJG-G1.0.Q05.CNTWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19717 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In a message dated 98-06-12 11:10:22 EDT, you write: > From: fstenger interlaced.net (Francis J. Stenger) > Great, Vince - 2 megs input will make the divider design very easy, I > think! Correcting a mistake. Using a calibrated Fluke ohmeter the input impedence is actually 1.1 megohms. I ordered today from Surplus Sales of Nebraska (402-346-4750) a bunch of resistors for the voltage dividers. For measuring tube voltage the divider will be; Ra=10 meg, Rb=100 ohms. Rb will be shunted by a 1 kohm trimpot for calibration. Tube current will be sensed across a 10 ohm resistor in series with the power supply voltage. Frank, what do you think of these values? (10 meg & 100 ohms for the divider) >> I constructed a resistor to fit inside the reactor tube out of .040 ss >> wire..... > > The infrared heat from the wire may be contained in the tube better than >the blues and violets from the plasma. This might tend to give a false "negative"? Anyone? Oops...I hadn't thought about that. I would think the IR would transfer better through the tube wall. > Keep up the interesting work, Vince! > Frank Stenger Thanks Frank, I'm on vacation all next week and I ordered the resistors sent UPS Red so I shoul have them on tuesday and should be ready to start the glow discharge work. I will work on the joule heater calibration until then. To all: Surplus Sales of Nebraska sent me unasked a snazzy 400 page catalog. I must be on some list somewhere. I am glad they did. The catalog is especially interesting to amature radio people. Loads of neat stuff. Lots of Los Alamos Lab surplus ex: 60 kV supply, and lots of components new (vacuum tubes) and used (pulsed microwave) stuff. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 20:44:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA04471; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:35:57 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:35:57 -0700 Message-ID: <01BD9652.1D516480 pm3-149.gpt.infi.net> From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" Subject: RE: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:33:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD9652.1D5A8C40" Resent-Message-ID: <"zvfO83.0.e51.SEVWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19718 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD9652.1D5A8C40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- From: Peter Nielsen[SMTP:mindtech nor.com.au] Sent: Friday, June 12, 1998 4:55 PM To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: Re: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads >There was an article in New Scientist maybe a year ago. FTL wavefronts were >claimed. FTL, eh? Can you post some more info, such as the conclusions they made? Kyle R. Mcallister ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD9652.1D5A8C40 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhoDAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAHZvcnRleC1sQGVza2lt by5jb20AU01UUAB2b3J0ZXgtbEBlc2tpbW8uY29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAdm9ydGV4LWxAZXNraW1vLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J3ZvcnRleC1sQGVza2ltby5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpWT1JURVgtTEBFU0tJTU8u Q09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACMDMBBIABADIAAABSRTogUmU6 IEZVTjogaGlnaC1zcGVlZCBlbGVjdHJvc3RhdGljIGFpci10aHJlYWRzAC0RAQWAAwAOAAAAzgcG AAwAFgAhABgABQA7AQEggAMADgAAAM4HBgAMABYAIAAkAAUARgEBCYABACEAAABCNjFGNTZGQzQ0 MDJEMjExQTc1RUU4RTAwQUMxMDAwMAAOBwEDkAYA3AMAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwAp AAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAAQAA5ACBlHAV8lr0BHgBwAAEAAAAyAAAAUkU6IFJlOiBGVU46 IGhpZ2gtc3BlZWQgZWxlY3Ryb3N0YXRpYyBhaXItdGhyZWFkcwAAAAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG9lnwF Ey4BRcICRRHSp17o4ArBAAAAAB4AHgwBAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAfDAEAAAAXAAAAc3RrQHN1 bmhlcmFsZC5pbmZpLm5ldAAAAwAGEKvMr6wDAAcQJQEAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAC0tLS0tLS0tLS1G Uk9NOlBFVEVSTklFTFNFTlNNVFA6TUlORFRFQ0hATk9SQ09NQVVTRU5UOkZSSURBWSxKVU5FMTIs MTk5ODQ6NTVQTVRPOlZPUlRFWC1MQEVTS0lNT0NPTVMAAAAAAgEJEAEAAAA0AgAAMAIAAFQEAABM WkZ1QLfZPP8ACgEPAhUCpAPkBesCgwBQEwNUAgBjaArAc2V07jIGAAbDAoMyA8YHEwKDujMTDX0K gAjPCdk7Ff94MjU1AoAKgQ2xC2Bu8GcxMDMUIAsKFCIMARpjAEAgCoUKi2xpMQQ4MALRaS0xNDTP DfAM0BzDC1kxNgqgA2D2dAWQBUAtHucKhx2bDDB1HmZGA2E6H+4eZgyCIF5QEgAEkAewCJBsEfBu gFtTTVRQOm0LgKJkHpFoQG4FsC4FoOBtLmF1XR+PIJ0GYA8CMCHPItshgGlkYXkALCBKdW5lIDEC MiqQMTk5OCA0NjoYQCOQTSYfIJ1UbwsoXyLbdhWhZXgtbOpAB5BrB3BvJZIsDycuOHViah6hLi8i 21JlIzOgNYJGVU4zoGhpIGdoLXNwCeBkIBckIB6hA2BzAZB0aWNCIAtwci10aBYAYcxkcxrvG/Mz Nh1nGjk2PjotLYdoBJAq4Hdh3wQgA5EKwDehNxAgC4AHs3xTYwiQAjAEAAVAAMB5YmIq4GEgeThQ BcBhpmcw4CFwVEw9IXYNwPcDYAIwBCB3PPExPTqvO7/OID3gC3AHgGQuQY8L4g8bTEIPQEIqkGVo PyBKQwOReQhgIHA3YSD+cwNwKuAEYD0BC4ACECqQ/HN1EbA30AQgOCAq4AWgum494HUAkAIgSzN5 PyGlDbA/OJxLeT3xUkAw/E1jB0AcIDdwBJA5Dx1nLxLyPClGhRUhAFIwAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAA AEAABzCgutvoe5a9AUAACDCgutvoe5a9AR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAAwANNP03AACSBQ== ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD9652.1D5A8C40-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 22:08:57 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA12666; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:01:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:01:18 -0700 Message-ID: <358207B2.5637 interlaced.net> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:01:38 -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: <8fd955cb.3581d1f0 aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DnJ4Y.0.p53.TUWWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19719 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 98-06-12 11:10:22 EDT, you write: > > From: fstenger interlaced.net (Francis J. Stenger) > > > Great, Vince - 2 megs input will make the divider design very easy, I > > think! > > Correcting a mistake. Using a calibrated Fluke ohmeter the input > impedence is actually 1.1 megohms. > > I ordered today from Surplus Sales of Nebraska (402-346-4750) > a bunch of resistors for the voltage dividers. For measuring tube > voltage the divider will be; Ra=10 meg, Rb=100 ohms. Rb will be > shunted by a 1 kohm trimpot for calibration. > Tube current will be sensed across a 10 ohm resistor in series with > the power supply voltage. > Frank, what do you think of these values? (10 meg & 100 ohms for the divider) Gee, Vince, that would be about a 100,000:1 ratio, right? So, for 3000 volts in you would get 0.030 volts out to the meter. Is a full scale signal of 30 mv going to let you use the max accuracy of your meters? For example, with my little Micronta DMM my lowest DC scale reads 300.0 mv full scale. So, using my meter, I would want Rb = 1000 ohms if Ra = 10 meg. This would give me a divider ratio of 10,000,000/1000 = 10,000. So, 3000 volts in would give me about 300 mv out of Rb to the meter which I could read as 299.9 mv. So, I would use Ra = 10 meg, Rb = 1000 ohms. The true ratio would be 10,001,000 total ohms / 1000 tapped ohms for a ratio = 10,001:1 so just use 10,000:1. So, bottom line, figure what full scale reading your meters can read at their full accuracy, and then pick the divider ratio as we did above. Note that the 1.1 meg input meter resistance shunted across the 1000 ohm Rb changes it to 999.1 ohms - which you can forget about. But remember to calibrate your final divider with a known voltage and your best voltmeter. Anyone else see a flaw in our results here? > > >> I constructed a resistor to fit inside the reactor tube out of .040 ss > >> wire..... > > > > > The infrared heat from the wire may be contained in the tube better than > >the blues and violets from the plasma. This might tend to give a false > "negative"? Anyone? > > Oops...I hadn't thought about that. I would think the IR would transfer > better through the tube wall. I was just thinking about the "greenhouse effect", Vince, maybe some transmission experts out there could comment on this? (Sunlight goes thru window glass better than IR from the plants gets out.) I'm sure it depends on the exact material of your tube wall. > > To all: Surplus Sales of Nebraska sent me unasked a snazzy 400 page > catalog. I must be on some list somewhere. I am glad they did. The > catalog is especially interesting to amature radio people. Loads of > neat stuff. Lots of Los Alamos Lab surplus ex: 60 kV supply, and lots > of components new (vacuum tubes) and used (pulsed microwave) stuff. Thanks for the tip, Vince! I'll check them out. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 22:58:49 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA12623; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:55:45 -0700 (PDT) From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <754418d5.35821396 aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:52:21 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: <"uvAD23.0.953.VHXWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19720 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: All, First test with joule heater in the quartz tube in H2 atmosphere at a fill pressure of 6.0 in Hg. Results measured on two digital meters with 0.1% accuracy, one meter recording voltage and the other amperage drawn by the tube heater. Readings were multiplied to get wattage: Watts Degrees C +/- 0.1 C 24.0 277.0 33.95 328.0 44.8 371.5 56.25 405.0 75.0 472.5 89.1 502.0 107.4 542.5 123.5 585.0 149.8 627.4 The joule heater was constructed from .020 ss wire coiled by wrapping around a 1/8 diameter rod. The rod was removed and .060 ss wire leads were attached to the coil ends. The resistor coil was 2 inches in length to correspond to the glow discharge electrode spacing. Alternating current was supplied to the resistor from the power supply variac. Two digital meters were used, one to monitor voltage supplied to the resistor and the other in series with the resistor. Readings were taken at 1/2 ampere steps starting at 3.0 amps up to 7.0 amps. At each step the tube temperature was allowed to stabilize for 10 minutes. Voltage and temperature was noted and the current was then increased by .5 ampere (500 mA) and another 10 minute period and so on. At the last step (7.0 amps, 21.4 volts, 149.8 watts) I ran the series in reverse, stepping down in .5 ampere increments and noting wattage and temperature for each step. The temperatures agreed to within 0.5 degrees C. The garage is a little drafty which may explain this as the tube was not shielded from stray air currents. As soon as the supplies of the electronics for the voltage dividers arrive next tuesday we shall see what kind of power is going to the tube during the glow discharge. Crude input measurements back on May 14th were about 60 watts input which resulted in a temperature of 598.9 C. Something strange may be going on here if those crude input numbers are anywhere close to the actual input. I was careful to construct the joule heater to heat an equal length of the tube seen glowing at bright red heat with the glow discharge. BTW, I have a nice photo of that at 598.9 C with the glow running. If anyone wants a copy I will upload to you. If Mr Beatty mails me a go ahead I will post the .tif image to the group. It's a 512K Tif image. I think thats a little bit large for the vortex server to swallow. I will try to convert it to .jpg format which should shrink it a bit. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Fri Jun 12 23:23:08 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA15819; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 23:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 23:18:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3582198E.F45733D0 gorge.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 23:17:50 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads References: <199806130344.UAA05901 mx1.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"o0SAX3.0.5t3.HdXWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19721 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank and Bill: Thanks a lot. What spoilsports, ruining a perfectly good argument with objective reality. ;-) Maybe looking at this site: http://www.novacap.com/broch006.htm about dipoles in dielectrics, will better explain what I am trying to get across. It's interesting, anyway. Tom Miller From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 04:47:41 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA32734; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:45:30 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:45:30 -0700 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 03:46:10 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"NIBZ03.0.J_7.QPcWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19722 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:12 PM 6/12/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: [snip] > Correcting a mistake. Using a calibrated Fluke ohmeter the input >impedence is actually 1.1 megohms. > > I ordered today from Surplus Sales of Nebraska (402-346-4750) >a bunch of resistors for the voltage dividers. For measuring tube >voltage the divider will be; Ra=10 meg, Rb=100 ohms. Rb will be >shunted by a 1 kohm trimpot for calibration. [snip] You posted that your meter was 3.5 digits with 200 mV full scale, selectable decimal place. I take it the meter can be set to read 2000 or 200.0 or 20.00 or 2.000 when supplied with 200 mV. If so, then setting it to read 20.00 when 200 mV is supplied would make the meter read directly in kV units. This would sacrifice some accuracy, but would be easy to read, and would make the max voltage for the meter 20 kV. So when Vtot = 3000 V, you want to supply Vmeter = 30 mV to the meter. Knowing Rmeter = 1.1 Mohm, we know Imeter = 2.7272x10^-8 A = 0.02727 microamps. Setting (Ra+Rb)/Rb = (3000 V)/(0.03 V) = 1x10^5, so your ratio of (10 Mohm)/(100 ohm) = 1x10^5 looks just right. However, 10 Mohm is a low resistance for a 3 KV meter, because Itot = Vtot/Rtot = (3000 V)/10 Mohm = 0.3 mA, and Ptot = Itot^2 * Rtot = (0.3 mA)^2 * 1x10^7 ohms = 0.9 W, but it should work if you watch your resistor wattages. It is noteworthy that the voltage and current is so low that the transient voltage protection S1 needs to be shunted in at a higher place in the resistance ladder, between R2 and R4 in the diagram below: 1 uA ----S1------G | 250k 250k | 5k 100 o---Rn-- ... --R4--o-R2--o-R1--R3--G | | 1 k o-P1--G | | | M1 (1.1 M, 200 mV max) | -----G Ri - resistors P1 - potentiometer (variable resistor for calibration) R3 - fixed resistor to augment P1 if necessary S1 - Transient voltage suppressor G - ground Again, I would urge you to use a *bidirectional* transient voltage suppressor to ground, not just a single zenier. You never know what polarity of static charge you might carry to the device. 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) The leakage current is only about 1 uA if I recall, so shunting it at a 10 V point on the resistance ladder carrying 0.3 mA would be a nominal drain. For safety, you want to have at least 3000/500 = 6 resistors in the ladder. If you want to design so the ladder can safely handle 20 kV though, you should have at least 20000/500 = 40 resistors for R4-Rn. If you want Ra to be 10 Mohm, then R4 through Rn should be 250K, and each carries a max of 500 V, giving a max current of 2 mA, and power dissipation of 1 watt, making each resistor R3 - Rn rated 2 watts minimum. Another option might be to use ten 1 meg resisitors for R4-Rn. This would give a max voltage for the meter of 5 kV, and current of 0.5 mA at the 5 Kv, a power dissipation of 0.25 W, and gives a required rating of 0.5 W for the resistors. Asssuming R1 is 100 ohms, and R4-Rn totals 10 Mohm, and we want a max of 10 V across S1, Rs1 = Vs1/Is1 = (10 V)/(2 mA) = 5 k ohm. Rs1 = R1 + R2, so R2 = 5000 ohm - 100 ohm = 4900 ohm. Actually a 5 k resistor would work since the protection breakdown voltage is above 11 V. R2 could be as low as 1/8 watt, as it carries only a max of 0.02 watt. A small resistance R3, a few ohms, probably will be needed to permit calibration. Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 05:10:30 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA21745; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 05:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 05:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:02:58 -0800 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Resent-Message-ID: <"3LS2K2.0.hJ5.blcWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19723 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 9:12 PM 6/12/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote: [snip] > Correcting a mistake. Using a calibrated Fluke ohmeter the input >impedence is actually 1.1 megohms. > > I ordered today from Surplus Sales of Nebraska (402-346-4750) >a bunch of resistors for the voltage dividers. For measuring tube >voltage the divider will be; Ra=10 meg, Rb=100 ohms. Rb will be >shunted by a 1 kohm trimpot for calibration. [snip] You posted that your meter was 3.5 digits with 200 mV full scale, selectable decimal place. Here is a nominal picture: 1 ohm ------R1-------- 30 mA | | ---M1------ 1.1 M 30 mV I take it the meter can be set to read 2000 or 200.0 or 20.00 or 2.000 when supplied with 200 mV. If so, then setting it to read 200.0 when 200 mV is supplied would make the meter read directly in mA units. This would give V = I*R = (0.03 A)*(1 ohm) = 0.03 V = 30 mV. You need a 1 ohm current sense resistor, not 10 ohm. Could use a 1.1 ohm up to about 1.5 ohm resistor R1 and a 1 M trim pot P1: 30 mV 1.1 ohm ------R1--------------- 30 mA | | ---M1------P1----- 1.1 M 1 M Regards, Horace Heffner From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 07:13:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA12205; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980613100513.007c8430 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:05:13 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Farnsworth Fusor Output Calcs In-Reply-To: References: <2.2.16.19980605232846.20f76d52 po.pacific.net.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"Tbyqw2.0.b-2.oYeWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19724 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 02:47 PM 6/5/98 -0800, Michael J. Schaffer wrote: >Mpowers Consultant posted: > >>I copied this from the Farnsworth Page: >> >[snip lower gain results] >> >> The Mark III Fusor produced startling >> high records in quick succession. >> By the start of 196.5 the team was routinely >> measuring 15.5 G-neutrons/sec. at 150 Kv and 70 mA.. > > >My analysis is: > >P_fusion = (15.5x10^9 n/s)(17.58x10^6 eV/n)(1.6x10^-19 j/eV) = 0.0436 W > >P_input = (150x10^3 V)(70x10^-3 A) = 10,500 W > >This is about a factor of 200000 short of energy breakeven. > Thanks, Mike. Given the less than 100% efficiency in the feedback loop, that probably rises to ca. ~ 10^6. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 07:14:58 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA12341; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980613100829.008905f0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:08:29 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com, rmforall@earthlink.net, aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki) From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: A question to R. Murray In-Reply-To: <199806121524.KAA26180 dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"JgJHb1.0.k03.fZeWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19725 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 10:24 AM 6/12/98 -0500, Akira Kawasaki wrote: >June 12, 1998 > >Rich, I have seen (not read all) your extended comments, critiques, >suggestions not only on vortex but to the extensive list of addressees >that prefaced your output. > >Question: >Do you expect, plan, or seek to do any actual experiments in the >laboratory yourself in line with your verbal involvement in the cold >fusion scene? > >-ak- > > Good question and good idea. BTW, thanks Akira. I have been away at the American Nuclear Society meeting which included almost two full days on cold fusion and LENR. Will review your materials for the next issue of the COLD FUSION TIMES which should be out in about a week or so. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 09:42:50 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA05562; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 09:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 09:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980613123413.0086d6a0 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:34:13 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Isotope cloud [cesium-137] detected over Europe Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"9vpWq3.0.jM1.XkgWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19726 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: from this morning's The Times (London) Mitchell Swartz June 13 1998 EUROPE Isotope cloud drifted over Europe BY BEN MACINTYRE AND NIGEL HAWKES INTERNATIONAL experts have launched an investigation to identify the source of a radioactive cloud detected over southern Europe. Between May 25 and June 2, the observatory of the French Institute for Nuclear Protection and Security at Toulon reported abnormal levels of airborne radioactivity, which at times were 1,000 times greater than normal. The Swiss Health Ministry also detected the cloud, at levels exceeding a hundred times normal. In both countries a single radioactive isotope, caesium-137, was responsible. The normal level is about 1.5 microbequerels per cubic metre of air. Between May 26 and June 8, Swiss measurements showed levels rising to 150 microbequerels, while in France they reached 2,000 microbequerels. While significant, these levels are considered to pose no health threat. Northern Italy, the Czech Republic, Greece and Bulgaria have also detected the cloud. The fact that only a single isotope has been detected rules out a nuclear power station accident, which would have released a mixture of isotopes. The Swiss monitoring teams have also ruled out last month's Indian and Pakistani bomb tests. The most likely source was the accidental incineration of a caesium source used for medical or industrial purposes. Such radiation sources are used for non-destructive testing and for medical radiology. Strict rules cover their use and disposal. From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 11:56:47 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA27714; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 11:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 11:54:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 11:54:15 -0700 From: Lynn Kurtz Subject: SMOT - Question for Greg X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Message-id: <199806131852.LAA27316 smtp1.asu.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Demo Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"gAYLW3.0.xm6.PhiWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19727 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Greg (or anyone else): Since situation with DMEC is apparently at an end, and since you now seem to be occasionally posting to this newsgroup, it seems appropriate for me to repeat a question I asked many months ago: Is there any version of any kind of SMOT, RMOG or whatever, that anyone has running (like the Energizer Bunny, going, going, going ... )? If not, what is the longest period of time any such device has run? How many seconds/minutes/hours/days? Greg? --Lynn From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 13:38:14 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA29360; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:33:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:33:11 -0700 From: VCockeram aol.com Message-ID: <150b12b2.3582e1c4 aol.com> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 16:32:03 EDT To: vortex-l eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part0_897769923_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62 Resent-Message-ID: <"6fcRU1.0.bA7.78kWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19728 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. --part0_897769923_boundary Content-ID: <0_897769923 inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII All, I was able to convert the tube image to jpg format which got it down to 28 kilobytes so I will post it. The reactor tube is seen in the center at a temperature of 598.9 C. The object wired to the tube is the carbon shoe with the K bead thermocouple imbedded in ceramic cement in a 1/8 hole bored into the shoe. The silver object to the right of the tube is part of the lower tube end support. The threaded standoffs at top I use for supporting various instrument wiring ect. At the upper end of the glow discharge the end tip of the stub W electrode can be seen, just poking below the blackining W on the tube wall. In this run the upper electrode is at a negative potential. The lower (positive) electrode was at 1.5 kV, and the tube current was 34 milliamps. The fill pressure was 6.0 in Hg of H2. Ambient air temperature is 21 C As can be seen there is no insulation shielding around the tube. I do wonder what the temperature would go to with insulation. Regards, Vince Cockeram Las Vegas Nevada --part0_897769923_boundary Content-ID: <0_897769923 inet_out.mail.aol.com.2> Content-type: image/jpeg; name="H2K51498.JPG" Content-transfer-encoding: base64 Content-disposition: inline /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQAAAQABAAD/2wBDAAgGBgcGBQgHBwcJCQgKDBQNDAsLDBkSEw8UHRof Hh0aHBwgJC4nICIsIxwcKDcpLDAxNDQ0Hyc5PTgyPC4zNDL/2wBDAQkJCQwLDBgNDRgyIRwh MjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjIyMjL/wAAR CAIAAwADASIAAhEBAxEB/8QAHAAAAQUBAQEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwECBAUGAAcI/8QAShAAAQMC BAMFBQYEBAMHAwUAAAECAwQRBRIhMQYiMhNBQlFhBxQjM3EVJDRSYnJDc4GxFiWCkTWhwURT Y4OSorImRVR0wtHh8P/EABoBAAMBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABAgMEBQb/xAAnEQEBAAICAgEF AAIDAQAAAAAAAQIRAyESMQQTIjJBURRCBTNhI//aAAwDAQACEQMRAD8A8pqoGw11TEzlayZz W/8AqGNzeFziRX/8Urv58n/yAtFO2vlR43zeGZxIbU1f/wCQ4ix7BTP6WH8OcmUW1HV1XfOp o4KieaLneZmgZmVppqaFciaHDy8eM/T0OHLyna2wVklZi9JSq/kkdY9fj4Xwzsmp2K3T9R5N wu2/FNB/MPdI+lDq+LjJg5/l5WXpTO4YoHNsiPT+pBl4Ni7NewqpGv7lVDVHG1wxvuOScmf9 eMLTY83G5cPWK+TXtPQsm4XizVRPM10sf/1HK9PyNLFGJI5qKhE+Jw/xf+Rm8/8AdMaatkhz WOauLZrOp1uejMp8iLdAKstIiohN+Hw/wf5OTzx02Js/7JJ/QqZ+M2Uk3Y1DVY/yU9gjVbpd qHjHtop4m4nSubGmZbbfQzy+Dxz0qfJv7h/+MqSRdHEj/FEK2s48qpo/vEDf1G3bTw9mzk7j i5fjeH7d3FZmv/8AE1PbVTkxymenUUPYRrplGpRUxh4X+tPpxdMqYpJOtodtXE1bIrShShi7 rne5t7nj0PCNF71Ese4k69rQLlUTgnBYMRxh7Km8scVlRFPUP8N4Rky+4x2/qdfD8Xyx3a5e XlmF8XieAR5aqS5oapcsN0TY9Ej4QwWJ+dlGjV/cpFxrhXDpsMlRjFjeiaOubX4e5qVn/ky/ p5jVVfZR9ruZmtq6SS65rKppl4UdWvWOSscllIU3s8pmarVqqfQvj+HZ7pX5E/jEzVUbulxW SyZj1Wm9nOESMvJO9f6kLGOBcIw+gkmR8iqmx1Y8WMntheTbysGWDoG9t+ktIsJpVhzKnMG4 JGbac0v3YZTt7hPcofyhuBRtGl8yhhzdJfUeB0E7OeFAuUns5jawbQh6FNw5hbWaQoUtZgtJ H0IopnKdxsZY4nvpGt6RI8OaviGmbvpCa45pafYyfmGfYz/zB5Yq8cv4hit3JX2PP4VF+y6l neG4OzKdpZwty5SLQ0cqLzIXbKBcm3MSb0DhuBixMUvqihiW1ip4aif7olm3Q1ixM7LmPLvt pldPFuK6JkFSqo3vMtI3KbfjSz6tOz6kUx8zfzHdw+mO1I7qOCeIadJBjmjmnNAzo2iZQ8fS dlJ0pFynBspw0BHBGnADYxwrdx5CzGm94Ojc6BTCM2PSOEG9nSIpyfL/AAdXxFz2KpISYWnZ rqSYm8p4ju2CtkQXJmj0CSRXCxQ6C0W0FWq1ACIqrqXToWZAbYWX2CUeUR6VvLqS02FSJAli dJ2E6K4NrdURQ7s1rWGsZrqUjYyZWtERNBUTzFsthjZi6Ickq5dQjW+YisAhY+SK6bkeSbUM iXhe1O4gLEqooaORKgrUXkLGJW9D+/YoYocqopMRyq3L39xUFkHqoXMeQ1f3E5r5XW7XUHPC jrrbUZI7EuSmNzWI8TVbvsPa53dsLVCa20SeorGOlUiNurkuSm1GVLIpUQMqJGy3eR3bAnTZ nC9oTsSURuvVsR6hEvoO7bU5dd1BUmg4G6BHgXSI1NBY3ZmiUTxhst26jU0HNmK0T53rf+I1 X893/wAgTQtX+Pqv/wBQ7/5DWn0+Lyit3DtGN2CR9Qg0uCwXRpq6eC6bGfwNl0SxtKaC8aHl c1u3o8N1DuFKVf8AFNOvcxyHsSbHnHC9Llx1r/JEPSE2O743/W5PlXeTjjjjocynyouMS3TX KhNjYiSCMYxatz7c1gypzDiduXYCjUJANdRjbmt0PGfbSv8AmFIz9Sf2PaWpoh4p7ZX/AOdU zPp/Ymm84omZsQp/qbVU0Qx+HMviMH1Ns7uPO+S9T4npHQehx1ji27HbDc41RqbjkS23s1S9 fVL+hP7nqKHmHsyZaqq1/Sn9z1BNj1vjzWDy/l/9hCFir+zwuod5NJpXY5/wioTzabuZ59T/ ABFc71I80Uiu10aGwuHI9/kSKpLr6Fa62DmsywplK/iJE/w7Mrl1yqWcXyLIVHEq/wCQzZn2 JJ4z/F/1Fyz5KFT/ABf9Rb/wmmVb49BDGjxhREibztNThqciWMxH1mqw1nKhlm14oPN0FFiH SaOZNChxFvIZca+X0ys3USqBmYjz9RIotjorDiT3aAGbktzLoBZDqZOkWJB9h7B6i2YECc+v SaVItf8AQhRUjL1DPqauJLvtbuK9Ysr701HD33ekTzUvXreFVXyKnD4FhiZZdC0/gqinn6+4 s6804nja6vS7CirYItG5DS8Q2WusUNT1Hbh1EYSVm3YfA53Sd9m035Se9m41hflW/hirfsyE E7C4/wAxcZOUjvYGOdL6eKt+zP8AxBPs535idlHNYV9Sp8FX9mO/MO+y1/MXLIR+QPOq+nFC 7Dng/cpi9yDeyD6lT9OKNtFM3wndhJ+UubCtYPzL6akSCTN8s9J4b+HhyZ9DLRss4t6fEvd4 7HJ8i+c06uCeM01rVRdSRE/Yy9NjsS7k+PGoVPJuFjo20LXpb1HtQpI8Xg/MGbjlOnjJ1S0u XN0GsZ5FczGYF8SBUxSHucCFk1g7s+8rW4jF+YMmJR+YaGk1GXFRtiH7/H5hGVbfMe4SQjQm X0BtrYsuqiJWxr3j1EnZRHN0GrVx96nMq4lFMYDW3jk127x6Uqu5oxHSsUbFJkddji8cYflS e7StdtYckVixbilO5tpo/wCorJqV7btchXhC8wLJkS6DOi6J3hnZO91gayQt0Rb+o/H/ANLa Gkb5Ha6IWEcCNiAo5L6D+2TYmQbpJLMbykZjL6hXroOi1TURouXUI2JU3Do1LjZHZdheJ7BV EaBdJfRAqoqoMp6fmupOlbC7HvUei5WaBpPQr3qqLaxWj2I6RRmdbC7xiNZZupUxRa8Jqvx1 S7/xXf8AyBNG9U0jv1Dmn0k6eYM3Ye3qGigGv4ZmRbNU3dPMmTQ8swWp7KpRHHodBLnYh5Xy OO7dvDemy4WXNiVzf9xg+Em3r3L5IhvO47fj/wDW5vkX7nHHHHQwRWfPcHX0IsC3mfclDToq eomQUVogS1jw/wBsTr8QQt9G/wBj3I8K9rzkXiaNPJjf7AbDYW2+KwfU2bjJ4On+Zwmqd1Hm /K7er8b0Q446xyadYT0DwU2Ya2O62Q0OG0GZENMJtlllI0Ps/pewWd1je9xn+GqZKeJyp3l+ erxzWOnlcuXlltxWY+uXBqhfJpaFbjbO0wqZnmhpGTEUFuzzHVWqEqlpkjbYj1TZFXbQ00nY cOjSh4yppFwpXtk0NTA1FZa1ik40+Hw9Jp3KRrobeMx/MLVPllXB8wtL8hjk3xCEyOUbcmU2 XvLk2kKFju1aarDk5SkZbtELukXlMuaadHBdpk3cUeIpylvNJ3FPWrdhz8dacs6ZednMSqSH QRzOYnQNyob2seGbGZ8odla0axdghi6SIc4T9pw+wk4Yy9Yz6mxw6nR87TJ4Wn3tpscLb94j T1K/0Y321bGpCxubRA0itWnVW6jnwpJGjb9wCf4VOrUOOe0ZMDi1pMQXUoKhPiPcaPEEvWKp np33znX+k8atdHmbmAJsTdyK9CZdOqQqdJzojoSSiBs9Ifu49I+YkjR7Gg8gN4YC/qJIJEOc GY0Y8eJ6AHtQc1g5iFFCoDeGBCnYA7PmDMYDtzBoxeMPdh+R2XqI7mu/MS/AR3i8IPKmNV/5 h7ZZvziNaODwxPypnvdQ3pePTEKtPGMG5RfSxHlR0xWr8wrcZqvMh+Ec1CfoYfweeSczGapO 9R7MfqG95ByArB/jcY+pVl/iGo71J2G4xVV1bFSx3WSRbIULWmo9ndKj+LoVVL5LKOfF49j6 t09Ow7g1/YNdVVTlVU6UQl/4Pi7p3f7GoTYU65wccmvFw3nz37ZR/BzFTlqP+RT1/CtfSszw L2qIehnCvx+K+8ROfOft41FVVUsywpEuZNCzbQVnZXymwp6GBcSlf2aFgtOzyF/gcSv8rL+P PWQVaLbKFSGdPCbhaOP8g1lGxV1aL/A4h/l5fxhnPljTnZoAbi8Ma6uN3Phkbm2seaceYcmH 9k6FcrnOMs/+Nx1vGtMPlS2SxeQ1Cyx50vqCe6W/SprOGcKibgcHasuqpcuEw+nVb9mhGP8A x+H7p35Ml6jzOTE46debcYuOw/nKD2lSrDxQkUHI1GIY51TL+Yx5PhXG6la4csym3qH2vDbc r6jFo1XqPP0rZvM73yVe8j/Ev9afUxb+LGI7WRRzsZZb1MBFM/8AMPWaUJ8az9lbGR8Tv3Dm jf4sn7h57TzxW7D2jG7DgJJplyvabjCazLCiGCi3NFhc9kacnNjLXRw3XT2DgWftcQlT9KHo vceSezqrjZjEkci2c9ERh623Y14fwZ/I/JxxxxswRaZLPcSiNT6vcqKSQI1UGpoo7U5NgI48 D9qi5uLf/Lae+IeCe1Bc3F66/wANojZTCP8Aikf0NasZlMM0xKNxqO1OHnx729P4+WoTJY76 jVkEzIcXi65ltMpY+82mE4PU1ECPhnRP6GbwqjSZvZr3l5E+q4Zj7a6vh8jt+LMNfc4/k539 NZg1NX0LnR1SI5i7KheGOw32j4BVpkmqkhlTwvQuU4mwZ0edK6JW/U7fKfp51/8AVyZPjHiS hwijayaVEe/SyEHEONuH0V0a1yf0UxmKYlw7V3VZ0e71uOWf1O15BxPhkzERsyXJH2pSO/jJ Y8rq/cM7uxlK/wClQ4flTkezsxOiT+KhnOPOIMPfgvukUzVevkY6hwT7Qi/Hq36lvR+zJay3 31i/UcmV/cFkYGDqJ2c9Mp/YqqNzfabf/QUWOezyrwZL9q2RPQLx/wDsXM5GLzHMc4krhr0f YgvidE4nRpML3dq3mNPh/SZih5nGvw+LlQ5+a7dPx4fNoVlZ0lvOmpW1bPhnPg25Z0zrusmR dJGd1kyD5Z0Vz8IkfUFGMaG8Bk6Axe469lOvctKwwZPvDdLmywv8TH3amRwNfvBssFYx1Wjn LbULPtZW9tFBn7dXuXSx1bl93UI3K5Vy7DKtie7HLjO02sLX/OeZaZed5qK5PvMhl5EzVLjq o4w2DXsCM6wmTMQ6tILWhkFWMYnKI9H94goxVGRj1GIlzg0LOYJTkOtZNCMpNemhDtzhsjUQ IjeUe1o9A2AkQCqElxHUQCag+MWwVg9l7Ny8oN2xJy8pGXceJOQQIgigeghB44ZBD2DbDmAD +4CF7gdgKlZsbj2Ww5+IZHr4WoYdqeRvvZOy+LVDv0J/c0ntOXUr2k4446HC4444Ar6aO8z3 EpWjadLIv1ClbSYjNBuVAw2wbIxWnnPtKYiy0TfN/wD0PSbHnXHqJJjWGR3/AIu39AVj+Ubz CWdnhlOn6EJqgKRuWjhT9KBkQk6+fuPnrNxfIrlzZWoZd7TQ8XO7XiupXfQo1Mcr3p1cU6RD u4NkEymW22jYgvcPYwfk0I2qdsc750n7nHNOX5038xxzTucA0e44SPpCACRk6mls4rh8LibN zR43V23GF1Oqefmej4DxJiETGsfL27E/MeLUdZlNpg2L2VDk143p0XKZTt66nEzsutLr+4p8 Z4srkopPdImQut1u1KSKuRW3uQq+ftqaRL9wXkyROPFrOHqLHKXBXVb8Q96nW7kiVia/1Kxv tUZTYh7jXYbKydVtyrcv+F8VdU8Ndp2C5o7plvuea19VUP4kZWOw97mRy7HbPuc96unrNbj8 WH4V9o1ET2wol1KCH2o4BPGr4nvcieikHibjagdwnJErHMlkZl7NyHn+BQq6gV+TqVXE5b/R 4YzJv632rwRp9zw6WZfVbHmmM1dZj2LPxGqajFXlRpcupe/Yhuo9CNX9tMcIqqWlbDLnXqJv bAZIFYpCkzIZZdt8ek9agkU0md6NKFJHZi8wdqySoY/TbY5tUyaWhpo1iZdykuSmx3FaTs2R oqKWeFUSTRsul7Gpga6FqZE2Orh4cNbycnLyXbx2q9mWPz8y0bX/ANUCYX7LcVZN99gSKBN7 OPaGYnkkRkyW9Q3v8cmkXMbax/jGZ2PDOKeBKDC4kliXMp57V0C0vNl5T6W4hpI6hjs7ERbH i/FWGz0VO5ys+Gq6E3HV3PS5Zkw53aSE6gijmXK7qNPhnD09VIiRUyyl4zbPTHRtqe7tCwpG cQ/9lkqf6HqjKdcDpo5KrCG2+pZ0vtHwmhj1okZ9Cspxz37LdeaQTe0Smi5ZanL/AC0K+sxL iyRfv0syp+09hd7YMJyctO9XGRxn2gNxZVYlI1rFMpeL+DVeet+1X+F4HNL2mWU1P27IjLRx FJNL2j3OXqK+39DE6gb8ZDZ4emxj8P8AncpsqDZpyczu4B5k12KyqZeNxZzquYgzs0MMGuc6 Zd6c5OgZyAZE5yTTm9rm4ej0TUJkECeEh06Q3sBsJUwDxDxJbcPvTt/obbA2I5VVDz3h3SeZ FPQcIc2OPc0y6wc99tC1+SP0Kx9ar4XL62DuqY8ipfUpXPVsVnLZLqtzjxvabFHXTr20hnov iVLy2xKdHzPyP0KjDeeaTzOm3pfDDnJZxIiYNlZZR8Ghjt16JJFoQnR2LOwN8Y4SqyuOyuJ/ YDGw82pW4YMcIbJYOyMY8ktI8gBjR7xUSyFxJEHW8xyJoLYDCdlykdU0JLwLhEDsGhBKFhAC vXlIncSX9JHbsVEwqbCBG+gxQUacccNJDkEHp0i0DgQV/SCaMFboejeyhPvlQuS/KnN/U85a eteyaJPs6aW3Uv8A1NMGeV+2vSzjjjocTjjhHdIAONB2USLRoQEm2OsOOAaNsea8R/e+O6CH ycn9j0tTy9z1rfaPH+iwfpWHt6dElomJ5IdK7JE5b2sdZezREAVq5aGVV7miD50xiTtsdq3X v8Rf7kK1w9RriVUv/jL/AHEa05cq7+OaxBynZQ9h2QjbQKNnN5hsg6NgRGaGZyPPl/ETfzHH NOf86b+Y4fHsek84WM4a0cCDBGjRAWPHIW2GVjo5kKMlUfWTcZROnotLiN4ySlSrotFM5Q5s lidHJ2cTzm8duiV6jwZkTBp1jX3dVTx6i4dBTsqnzfaDUdfyA8CPmfw/PIjElTWyP0Tcl4fJ iGZ3+WUtrr/EOxx8jH+0+nokjhk7XtJl2VE9CLw6zNhbPi50+hK9qc70igjkhigW+7Vv3EXA Lx4Wy8iS/QR8SwfCRHUyEztk7zks4zt20l0qZKXTYq6mivsapYUcQZ6W5k2xu2RdSa9JocBp rPTQCtNz7Ghwamyqi2Ia76a/Coka1C7R2VCsom5WoTJH2abTqObLtDxGRFZpuefV3FOJYJiL ViYj23NdiNR4W7qZ2bBaepkbJXT9mxFuqmH1dZ/+NMOPc23tBOuMYcyWeOzlQwPH+CPia3NI qxu2PQcHq8ISmZDS1DXI1DKe0OqpqmOCNkl1R3d9DvueN9OXvGvC6umlw6ounKaThviPHYpc 9FZyJ3WJeIUcWIUWXl7VDO4FjUvDmIPTs8zXaKTNT2020+K8bY3ia9hUsa1EK90XbQ3e4BJP 79IszU3JaaQmPLdL4sd/pX9k2MdDTZxXavLegpc7TOXra7FUtGQZqc160alRiFL2bdi5ntnp UYf842dAzkQx+G/iTb4el2GPLXTxT7XSJzakeRuhLenxNgTmaGErXL0zdUyzwlKPrU5jqVDp /Tk4vy0ejArRth7NiHWjzsyKRFbqTZ0dfnIUnQ4qIq24aYkr5EUvqrEI6L4aLYzPCss6Vdt8 2hP4rY+mcy7NzouO8dVy5XV6JVcQ5XZ2yX9AX226als663MtLU/pLWhvNExDHHgxhWqOsqJ/ e+rxF1w490qSOUpq5mSp/UW/C6fCe5R54yRrw+11LGA8ZOe26ER7DmdkFZ0nWGR6Bu65JB2E sEEEZlreEhzdxLevIRXZsxUKA2H2CsZyg1L2WioIo9uwPL+kWyCkBB3gyi0CrOYJGwR3/uCR pygejJSOgaXYGwCE7gRIAfUAYcccUkMM0GPRLjOOfsCCqNbsE6Jx7L7K4snDua273f3PG3fL Pc/ZxF2XC8SW3cppx3d2z5PwbE4446HE4a/oUcNf0gHN2HCJscBOHINFAOPLazEqXBuOveah bRqicx6j3HiHGD+2xiVfQnK6xXxzdeg1HtI4ehjzJVZ18kapj8d9p1TiNLLS4dQuYx+nbOUx TI4vIfY5fqZ/11T4+KKjea66qvMPYEt/uLYz26JNBWHD8g9glacxg549NAS+ZKXnj/xE38xx 0Zy/Om/mOOaem89IacdGc4EAiHDGgo7vLHDmXlK5pd4NFeRAvQxjSUkdmtOqn9jC9xNpY9NC Fi/NF5HNPbXT1Pg6kp/8FPkc507Vvo3SwfDqXDnMd2bKhy/kS5E4VxFkHBKs1hVEWyxNuCw/ H5UkyrO7Iq7pHqdW+3PnGU9pcbFradkdI6JLppI/0B4Y7s6BiKxI/oM9oeI09biMUMaSzWRL q8DS2jp2N1Qm0+Gbif2uoVk5V9qc2bUw238V6ypEfOilR2+g18/dcz2uYrBqIsnmaHCorWMz QOvJY12HN5dRYqvS+g6UGVM2VBGOswra6os1S8stRjJtT4jW9m/tE7iBHidFXqlNVKqNuO7N a+e2ti9oeGYks5U1Obj4cs7t1TOYTVSsPwnBIIe2hndfyRDz/i6qz1do0WNibHqaUrIYMqIi HnHFVNnmWx6Mx1NOHLLyvbGwzOZK1cxFx2gWONKruUtYqFc5NrqNs2Fub5BI110z3DkyO+E8 uJ18jJ0S+616fuNPI+7EU5+Rth/UdF+KaDC2cpn49XmnwvpTQjYTlYljPYz0mnd0roZnGNic azsUGHfPU3FAto0MVhrfvJt6NPhD5K24fRy6roCXXcKo1V0MWqjr9wNOT65hAh6jok6cc6y0 l2FYnIP3YczYl1Ik6epXyrlheWc6XYVdUv3SUrFNG4YqGMxCJVWyXLTiCqSapavaXYV3BlH7 1i8LM3eaLijDUjdldb+h13HWLkt7YirexX/D6C7pKNvYsfcge48uhYPjVkGj+4zxnei2zmKc kxb8ONa2hVTOVzviuNTgKWwtvqpHJNR0cC7jXkAzCxirq05HShXs5CQkqKRpmWAxrd+XYRrL tEGPUhue6N9hiSuVRlpIvc5GHRs1JLWD2AkZZOkHbULKCQQLog3cccjANHsKkSEmw3lylCRD kjscxNAjzmpoOXYsiPJ0gWMDyIDYOdo0RBgdUyAgnQ0ZYbYNlEsVsaDyahGNzHNHtFsQPKMT qDDcoY0g3NdkPYfZ7xNhr8GionTMinb4VPJGjHRtUuXXpOWMyx1X081yOS6LdBx84UeP45hy WpcRexnkqZiwh454nYuZa3N/pQr63/jm/wAevfiNUVUUGVHutc8hwPi7iDF8cpaOasRsb3WX K09LxzDo6jCHrtIxt0d6m+GXkyzwuHtcNlY9OVyDjyPhuvxh+OJR+8I+PNY9GxmWWhwaSoiX njbf6lTtnpcHXMBwzxbiWM0VVMtHbsU/N6lDhXHOMYzxA+g7Hs2I617gNPVqieOKFznOREQ8 KxyZJ6+dyPvzKWvG9ZiEciQLVKxHboimSb02MOTPrTo4MLbs9mwo1NghyvQk0GieI4JlE/1E gjR51tju4lJwMd4dQa9IYh56vzpv5jhzdy5h4brJ1fK2NbZnD/8ADNd/3anr+NeZ5RUtGu6S 5/w9XJ1RKR5cHrGfwlDxSqDspNdh1QnVE4H7nO3+GLVNHaabAYbq0oo6aT8prsApXo1uhOXT TBoqaJLFdizM8OXuNBTU8jtEItdhE8zdjk7211FVg3GWM4Tg78Lp0Zl1s6wtNxHxSjfh1Eaa 36ECU3Dc2fUuafh17bXOnHDc3WVkZyekr8XrPecUluqdyE1dERiJohqmYI3KiKFjwWPyHrrR 46x9MV2ar4Tvd5V8BvG4RHe6sQI3DIm9xHhF+bz9KKp7mEiPCalypobxKOBrtReyg8xfTipm zdDhjolRVTU0tImVqBGRxDsovGIuVqRm0Ik8aPGSy5CDNiqR7k24wpKn0FIjZNjTwojWIYml x9izIiKamlq2yxotzbizx10nkmSRU9Bhschjz3U2NRUNRu5guJKyyiyzRjFGro+0sEZInaMY q6LoUKVCrUEmaTkKxvTdmcZg7DE3K0tKZ3a0jQGK0+aPtvEEwO80KxflMcv6vD+JEDFuanDI +VLoV1LQqaOgo8qbHPa0K9Ph6GSxhNFNwsCq0ocVw5XM2FjUMjhbF7U21Inwihw/DlY7Y0MD crCs7tph1AlRAdwioDVSFq+sTQgRaPLKo2Kvxm+PccmXWawTpFZ0gol+GEYpDplAm6SorPwj 7FtUFNXr90eVhEZXoXhqtmo8RbkbqExXiKrqpXtmQrcDqctaxU5VI1fL97eubMd1wlx24PKp cWK8uV7SW6svsZpruYtGPshGGOj3VdVOzSuNrhjEbhbDBzO5jd4Z/wAMYY8/8dfxu4mNULuR WLkDMU5HUSRtyKsViXc7L5gaB2Cho6UlNRAiMAbNjj0FX0FBvURAuGtQe3ce0ewGqeQ9G6ne IdGgHC5AL08iaxtxj4w9tNK/IcqWQk9mCkbyhsrEJfqMYK8cxC2TpNQOUO4EB6MsdYcL/YY0 awIg1Av1EJAHbDAr26Ahk444649lo0ezcYKwWyWeBzLS45STovS49mxyofUYBeN+VVbqeK4U mfEIfqe1YgscWAxJkvdv/Q6+BxfJrD8MU1TBjHbt1spoeM8dlbhLqdGZM6WVSywdI2oipBqU PHMqviRtrIadMMb5VX8JP7HhPEPg5rtdqjrd5neCIkfxHO/sc2u1/Uj0/ENFh+DT0L6aRZX3 5kUZwpjeH4ZUyyVNK+R3dqZ3OaX43afxnNnxRsfZoy3rcomqGxOrixLEXTQxZG/UjXOXkrt4 JqdjtCICjsHTuMHQ5GHBETU6wtgLKJYNkGBsjLAnB3IhGeGKW+4ZSjXBY81r5lLlIKFdrHhV JxZU0idlfRrnFlFxrUNbuer515ni9k+z6JfIY7B6N3cw8sj47mQP/jx35g8yehO4coVXpQCv ClEv8NDDs49T8xKi4/aviH9QSbad/CFG3VImjYsHjp9kK2m4vZUbPLWDEM+u5HnKqSrCCmiY 0Nkh7yqkrWtaU1ZjiQ7KZ/Ui/Gta33ZnkKtXBGedLxM9e8X7blVu45naPFvlxOJFIzsWYmxg /tGWRd1GrUzL4yfKqmGm1fjjE2UhzcRJ+cyKvf3uIj3fqJ3V44RqZeJrd4tJjyzLYx5eYRTW cmhnq/1cxjcUNSrrFpfkKzDY0SNNCbK/IwvbJVYjNkYpi8QrVRdy/wAYqbIph6yS7zmtdHFC sq5GSZ0eaKi4rkp4sqmUjzOJ0cDepSpNfi2uMrTpxRJNpqRa961LcxUQZc7S+WO9LoXxxhyT HH0zMLPvNibUR2jI8f40mVq/BOzH8WAfucc+ArIi/ES5X8KpatkiCOe5KV7UGcKRuZjPN3mG XcaY9Vv6Sk1LynpspHpWllC3Q5lWk92SxX1dJeMue4iz6oIozbKPKuw17LJoXDkQranQNtIr lTUCqElQT9iopCn6SnXR5czdJTS9Ztg5OT3tIhcEuRoNgyqDfG7CnUqMQ5qcs5VKmvX4SBhO 9p5PSFhDPiyuc62VCuldmkcXuAx5mVq2u1kZRz/Ncd1cTo/mNLHvKqn+Y0tXN+ELEKibmcei YczLhkR56/qPR6FMlHC39Jzc97dvx50C+6CxqPlS24CJTldKRf8ASEaoNBUFoQVB1+UYhyAC pqtvMZMnZvyb/QVdgLAB7E1CZLsOjYK9bIBh2DRICTcPBGI5EmPcRWhoksNdvqPG6aaRHNIs pPX1Ic6WQn9nfSrXrFaL3jy2IQ0I4DcsOTMdqcOAFQd4RqHdwAxdgWwVdhrPUEk8Q0KoJQBn ccg1DkESfhT7YnT6aXPYMWlibhVPzqmm39DyHBG58ZpmfqPYMfTJh9K3l2/6Hbw+nn/JvZcN qUaxvNoZXi/EI3vs26mloWp2PcYjihyrOvoFusWfDN1mHeoLKzuaEGHE9PTk6RFHIdoSqdCR khtyPH+4O30M1Sis3Dp0kdiBUENuBBFBKBGO10I79iS/YiydI4TAu+dJ+5wRoF3zpv3OHNPV eakNcNGtOaCSjhrRGgpc4U12c9Gwu/Yoee4Q34iHo+G6U6GOa8RaqS0ZjMVm1NZiTvh+pgsT m5zPGbV5aCZLZxKjm/UVHaB4ZeY30mZbXMcgdj7oVkakuN6GbSXaQ9bEJ70CyPt3kB8uupKk qmTM82GCQ6oZDDUzvN5hDEJkFrQ03K1CLWzWYobOjYymxKe7Nycqzxm2dxWozqpnVZmcWlcp XGeMdWM0WPkC9q1CNcFzK7Ua52ktmdnSxo6eRVpDLx9ZqaKLNSF8bPlnSnRLVQSt+WSGQZKj UHiDEY3Q69dOZWu+Q4sMNkhR8S/xEUhOZ9zc4h0dY1Z4/wA1zD9aax6lRz/DTUtYZtCho2L2 EalhHexyhZ9vvqRJajTUYq6aEOXYk5BFnuRJlvuol1aDc5e8cjSI7uoG/VAi9QK5cCLIU8zO cuna7FPU9ZthXNzBQbB3AYOVwd+gVpx3pFkKfEOXIWzynxXNdhfEOT0Lgc/YYfXu82FHLLmX MXmEQtXAauVe9pm3dR1WuTSTTOb2zSyle3sSopvmNJr/AJQpdDSEnzGno9Mz4Ef7TzeDmqY/ 3HpUHymfQ5ud28HUOlZyEJW28RadxAlZqczeFj1HomgCPqJACQqCpqc1RFUQdIthkYLcmQR9 4Kh7EszYDJ9SQ8huXUCczpJVMRL8uxJhUS4sGL3jFW+o2N2gilRZv9CJPsSnLoQateUzvsZe kHS/qKgNFuPNGRHczQIV6jAxIjBwxDgB6DraDWDywiuFYPXYG3cEiAHjxO4AGIg5Dg0S54Yj zYtDy5tT0/F+qmasN9u/0PHaaplo50mgWzkJlRxNjlXIx76hEsb48njNOPm47l6evsaxKfSM 844jcnvTu4qE4px7btksRPeJ51zzPzvFc9zSeLiyl3XCDeo4wdx6KcijGj02IMWIOgBnSHYt iSFQKgJvmERVuSbsgKxKsdk5RybG0RWEZ+xYvj0IMzFK9E86f86b+Y445/4ib+Y45p6bzzmj hzRoE4JH1EcJG4A02D8rmm7pJkbEiXPNKCoyKaWnxZGxGOUpyrvE6lFZuYfEHc5OrcSzeIoZ 6q4YSk7MPiflIXaD2yGuhOlsybL4iSyp0KFswTtxeKplpaPqSL2/MQ3TgsxPgfm0dBV2ehr8 MxC+x53R5nONbhkjKdl37kZTRztsm1CrHzKU+KVrGN6itq8dbGzRxkq7GZJ32RTOTa8eljU1 t3ET3vNylM6fMObKXOIfVXTXjs5TNnCNnJ+kuculwx/Ma/Clz0v0PO21BtOHqjPBYeOGizz3 EtzdVUra9dtS0nXnshVVx0fpnDdsOcpm6bWvY1v5jQK//LymwlvaY7Ts83mFjTGPY6GntQxf QlxRpYJA1G08SbaIEbymNg2jOZpsQnxalo5PMAu63I0JVRKhFVCfUJYgP6RaazsFb5tAbkCe EYuwSqRpCmqevctnryqVNSuptg5uaBxdQSRQcG4sha+L0A9fIp8T62Fuq3KysZmePj6yPLG3 qLGjoli4FmqfPOhlaaklrX2jbdx6hgbqePgZ9JOxOdFLPgLBsDYkq1CJd22Y6L3+KceH3cvT ylmC1cLsz2dIOqhcyDMfQ+OYRgTcNl7FrO0tpqeP8RRM925EtYjvfZ+GGU3jtjaBmfEoG+p6 PHoiJ6GDwqK+K0/L3m6vY5+S7acWOolMsBlj/wBh0ShNLGTVWPRyCMmJMkfkQ1jdcJ2YnbaH Nkc7YF2YaBmmwjkSYmXJjbI0HClhz1EQUriEqh37EXpFRCoHjXTQj+IJH6grHpNikCIqESNQ 1y8cdr2crivq1JSqQ5lJs7K1GYEGoK/0GiGfUYO+p26lkUYPQapAPQcNYOUABsNQVwjCyd4g fiCucBUROEGtcO2AOEuOGbAQjVHZgKHAUEHN6gSD2uACNdzD2fUE0JHsQodm4SPrEZsorOoS kpNXBWA4yRFqpKRGMH2Hx6psPQuIQ3oQJ9dyxlUrpFFTeaP/ABE38xxzTpvnzfzHDWnpuBIa NObuNcBGnNcMOAx45spKjqyvacBJklTcjZgZwToFzHNcN8A6NrndLR6M7MOa4tcO4dqa1buQ 2GH8GU8KXmTM41x4bZuo8mAigkk8JNioMvUb2qw2mgj0ahma2VkXiJznieN2iNa2IbJiSsb1 FbPV36SE52Yx8Wky0mS1bn+IiZhhxU1E3s45rhgo9EJ2g5sgE4QSWycxq+Ham7bGNYaDAX5J AEbpOZLqpUV/WT7/AAksVcyqr9RfrTWAzLkoyBgCZ+IKT+YSqnSkH8GQdrxAxfyqYtcfT1+K TkanoHR+gFG7D0QzZGvsqkd1yTYZl8yfE5VbU7alTK7nLStt5lDJJzmdb4djKoJX6A73BKol kepUVZZv2K2pNuNz8yPG8V6g4xX8o6fD6MaL2efOoNNi2w+jWdlkJ27ODGZXdX9BgKPwh1Y5 yIxiXsBwt6drbwXPSKXD8Pp8GZHKiZpW2MBV4LLS1cjmoqNv3HZhl4XY48pnbPQ9bU3fyLfQ z/ELJH0SdsllNHheEumWTtUslt1IvE2GujoWKi9pH5k8vJ5fpUwm9PPMNg/zGP6mncV1DBlq kLVWanHbs+XDwNYvLqSGakX0DxkshMoPsbkhrdB6NAIPuwWNpKyA9g0ZNk9RiqI9bAb3ECP2 I70JeXlB5L9wyR0QcxnciB8iDUQk5SN/sPuKyMbYudHs1SJJqS1QiP6iYNkbzCDo9xXbAQHe Kh3iOGDsgzvHjO8DPZ3Cv2HRHP3AkZdhgRUGWKQZcGKIBk8PKKiCoPa0AUEugYEuoJCEvYeN KSRgRBrByEKlEYGTYEGZsSoVuxJjIrSRHsJSVESI10IsZJiZdxCUmFMwdWcuwamp9tNSX2Fk NccajagmRWFXKaWrpuQop47KFhy7eYv/ABE38xw1o5/4qb+Y4a09FwCA3BG7g3ADRDhWxucA Nyih46WQlR0X5gCtyho6dzizZSNDta1gHpEgw1FLegoomrq0i+8NZ4gLsTRuwS6S3dDNFC1C VUY7TRR8zjzSTGJ/CpBfUyS9Tjac3XpGmtxbiZHtyRmSlqXSuzOI5xnctnOjhrRTiVlOaN8A 4Ab4B3hEFaAcccOAGtLzCFtIUbS2wrrAnodM3NToVVYlpi8w+NPc0VSmr/n6BlNLxqtxN2Sk RPzEvgJP81e/LsQsY5GMYXXBcXZxvm73HLbrtv8Ap6JHKHR5UQzdxISc5/qJ8Vgj/IaslkIX aconaf7h5iYo9c4oZPmFrVPvoVTtVFvbfCaDboMykjKNVNCloyoVtSzuuW2XMVtUmppxxzc1 QW9QsmXKcg2YvQ4fQBqMD+E5L7LuZhTUUTLtiRe8xzy1enp/Fx29OkxajpqSKN2l00sBjyzM 07yjVkcvYsNHhlCieJbHfw/f3XPnxzj7VVZenie9N7GfxqZXUKIrrmvxSisxUR25i8ZpuzTR TH5M8fTX4+sr2zNMz7wWTmkeGPI+5NtdupxYdtflTtBcLGtwj2DGMKcqXCobL5ESPlcS0VAi Q15ALgssiIpFVb/QZmLqo+JuZ9jm2DUvzNAnZ7SfdbR6FfI3K/yL3+EU1R1m2UjLG7RkW5w9 BrvpqYNSMkCJqAREJcTLMKk2SO9dCG8mT+RDEWyM3HZhWsGOEo05NREFTcDcm4ibj2jU3ACs QYvKPZsMeNICjVHqgxSiA8Q0LlGWAEQezc47vAOcMH2GAWigw4L6ARg5BRU21A4ezcK0AFQg 0huweP0IrV5kJMRMUks6tCTT9ZFjJES82pOyaKm6UJbukraWfYmOlRDpwyjCwybWIzVZ81S8 qahMhQTLd6qhGdlVhHlsv4mb+Y4a0IsbnVk2X/vHFlR4Wrl5j0ZLXCr2xud0k2DC5ZO40NLh kUbdWlixkcZpMIhnYcBRNw32ZHF4S1krYoymq8WRekeWj2G9jWEZ0rWkOWvVxFdI5xjqr2mv rADqlxFEFqA/tHDcwhww4RopwBwjRRGgCnHHAHHHHADWjxjTvACDzmiiNAHtLLDutpWtJ9D8 1oKehUtQvuaFaru1qkaS6Nt6K5GhY91cxI9X3CtMIq8bzMmyr+U0fDbMtE0z+LNkkrvj9Zp8 GS0CIcPL6dOHpeMVSQ1FI0X1JDTiij1cMzaitU4JaNIk9yB4yfNoQFXm9TfBRdkBOCgXl+jI mqFdW7FgV1Zua4OTmqGgKQcnUDkX1KquH0EvNY22Hx6waGJbuhvsMb8pfJEOTlvcj1vi9Ro4 m87DTYa1UYZqj5p0NZQNtGel8b8XH8rJBxFt/qYrHkdfXY3Fal3mNx7qUx+bdYr+Je2ZyBIl FkSzUBxaHFxXpt8j8nK1RliUupH2U105pTE0HXVBMyNTUgS4tTMXqCQtpmuYWOMr48VhUIzG aceh5xNVNA9El5Niv9+jk1RxY4Y+KR2jx4TReS1l5YCkl6y5q1+HYpX9RpyIwM+oBQj+oGYN iRdRN2aRWauJK2yFYotQZdwbNRZes5ggfYjvJZGfsC4EOTZRqbnCB36hqHHM7gAoNQrdgLg9 kGIPRRv9C50RlgYQGMEOQVu5zeYAQ5BXbiIAd4QYUHbUSXIPyjQglGj2MOQM1CQVNCQwCnoG jQShW6BEXUag5nmSE+mk1JSzkSHUKrNB4oCkkVSFITFQjytsFpMVT07e0ld/4jiyjVkZSure ydK3N43ESXEHKerK89pJcTYxvUU9VjD16SodI5wMPKloZ9XI/qI5xwjccccBuOaIcAccKIAc cccAKcIcWTjhRANwp3hEIBTuk45oA0ccc3rBB7SbQ/NaQmkuk62gp6LQ/gDsBa+TGle3ePUB h0n3MteFm3qa2X8rP+pVXj1NsviDpJ8Vkkk3vlNFha2iQzs73PrJv3qaDDF5EPP5fToxvS8b YI1fIGzb0CocSz/CIhxybAe0ecrFXnLOYrF69DbFUPQG9vKEBPU0M1CtrNHFgV9bsa8bk+Qr gT11HL1A3lHxehINaiP6noFCmV3+hDz+kS9bB9T0Okvmt+lDlz/OPW+N+FaLC255dU2Q1lL0 GYwtLXVfI09J8s9Ph/FwfKQa1LyJbe5jcfZ2cuVTa1GtTH9TJ8XW99b9Dm+dPsX8S/fIzdTH ZjCHtuWNctkjQq3LY5OD8W3Pd5JCL3A5ATJdTqp/wzfGbunNeoiVFFU1bbQxqpQV2CVFLzSt VPqe98FU8aYSyTJzL3kziLA6LFKByTxIqpsqHo444Y/bp5+WeW3zG3tWO5QUnanpNXwvTUtT ZF0KquwJiqjY+8m4SFOSsW2aVI8rQ0FbWUz7xqb/AAb2ZzYgiOdLYt6v2XfZ9J2jZkfYn6ca 48n9ZXCeInVbeyn3LP1M5V0zKKry5bKaCFfuzFOTPG4uzDKUNUQGoVXg3rZDJrssS6h5F5CN B1ahJegudM0JdXaj4wfeHYQcNuAk3CPI718wk2slxyKCCbNHoS7IOYMHtDxAmYE8cu4wULZq CCoOKLaOIPchwK0Y0cIKgFo04Ud4uoCCEQf4hogcK3cQczYYPYwMwZGEZ/zJUNGwkMYDiQkI 0kjLCxbj8g9EsotEkRBlW4CPRoqOyaAlygXjnO9Qe+m4w8qn/FzfzHA2jp/xkv8AMcNaem88 8YPGAZogpwBx3Sc04AaOc3KNOBBxxxzS1GjB5xCXNHHNOBRBTvCcWDWjjjgNx3hOacAc045o pCD2kim+YR2kqm6gU1+HL8E03C+dtDiUqJfk/wCpl8OT4Jf8N1UkHvMCR5mvTUK0xnTOv+a/ 96miwvuIOPUHucrHM2cSsJ2RDiyu42xyjRR6poP2QSPRqDrnFVxyiXGX5hP7iMKcrHbk+deQ rXKuWym+C4Iig5PU5vqI80NxWVi6k66NaVlY+5pxuP5FV+bUTuBX5hUe0vSuKpeH82I031N9 RO+K79qGBwyVn2nA31NzRPVM6p3pY5M5fN6/xu+NrcLsr9b7Gop9IjJYMt7rbWxrKf5B6nD+ Dz/kojvxkf1MfxW6+Ioa1VviESepjuJHI/F0scvzr9i/iz/6RTYstp409EK+TX0JWLrfEG/s Qi7oc3D+K+X8kZugVPi2RQat5hufJURodPDN5sOT09l4TZkwWMscUW1G4icNNy4NEPxt9qWx 2/7PNy9PNsTW85TTKvvMbS0r1+8FXqtdEgsu6ePT0rhe6RtLPH5VZh77L3EHh1uWJugvE8lq B6X7itIrxHFH9pia38y1/gIU9ZldiP8AUu2J8FDm+Q7/AI16ABr6B8pHtz7HJHSNEdPtqOjA z7lzpIDNw6dIGMKwhcMfsQnkyRSPYUGg2IE8IiCoPZGoEYMCsEooEK8EvUESRNBTjigZqduO OsQA0QUeiaHLsNQOU7KP1yiB5IDOGnDNw9ogrRgeMmRsIsCcxa00ZEmxabHGtg7UCpGgvY+R fijYSIEjaKyL0JTYlJ8aNoqssR1UsXx6ECRlu4VlEuwr+oke+gxw9hC3lk/4yo/mOGtCS/jK j+Y4a09V5xwMd4RoA0444A444cANOaOacAIc0U4pmacc05pJuOHDS1FOO8JzRIccKcANaccc 0kzhWiDyiI0nU3M9uYgtJlJ1tJW2FEtqYveF5HNSpttbUoKNn3Y0HCipmqo/NorGuKPj83bR Jqi2UTC36IVFYmSpfZ3jUssK31OP9NMZpp2r8NDriR/LEsci4S51+UWwndsTFI8y/DKp/UWU +xWqa4tMT2qQcXnfBR8i2epNj21K3HET3Zn7jo4cZctVly3WO2Ymp8WTrdK5riJ8dvU6Q1Ed dVSOjRJNEIla+b3jnPR+jjJuR5/1KpGZvFmCN/a4sWvyRczub9o2OsfDysy836SNK8g6N/ut WyoyXyG3wXHqJz+dy/QxvbPczlcGw3M+vZn6jHk4pfud/wAT5N6w09mwapSdt2bKa2DSnMPw 1rAw3DOWnQ24Z9qvldVWsffE0MZi7s+M39TYQ/8AE3r5GIrpL4yqW/iHF8/02+JPuVOJPvX/ ANEBoMrZL16+Qka6mPH1C5PYmXQhvberiT1LBm5HbHfFIU31Or435Obkuo9twWPs8Khb6Ffx G+0Ni3oEy0UKfoQz/FD+VUv3HXO8nnZPPKt+aqIUTe0xOMO7WqWwtFFfE2iVHpuBN+ClvIi8 YyJFhL3d9ixwRuWBLlBx7JbDXNNP2z28eV/aV39TQeBEM1S89eaG/Khxc9709H481HSdFgSI EcpyXsc07dB7NspEnJCaEWQpmRgbTIDj6h7ukhpAn67AlHXG3AiCf1F7hzfhuR9tgxMJA8Yk snvNRn7NItLWQezQBsx4DxBnqDAF8I0cJYoGpo4J3DBtyVHibHXzjQST9ogonhDEgxpyiIMz 2bj2DB6bqMJVO3Ut6fQqqdC3i1RB40skqNB+Ua0cr7IWzEYhJjTQgxSXeTY1ug4l0jUsVtVH yFk7pK6rcGULGqpVS4WJLqMf1Boug5m+3ls/42f+Y4G0dJ+NqP5jhD03nuEyuHsbmLrDcP7V AE7Ujadx3YuPQqbhtHR9IT/Cv6SfIeDzrsnflG9m49A/wv5IDfws9O4ryLwYDKdlN2vDD7bE deGF8hbg8WPG5TVu4bf5AXcOy/kK8oXizIuXlL9cBkTwOBfYs3kG4WlIK0tXYS9vc4B9mvb4 Q2SAcTPc5PyjfdJBhFOJPuzjuxcARh4Ts/0HdmADHDsp2UAY0mUnW0jKSKPckYtpRfhfQt+G J0ixCfS+hS0ifdybhK9nikXqora3wivr83vsi/rUn4buQcYRYK9zF6dyVhi6J5nK2/TVQax6 BUQj0rtCWi+m5x2KgNjlSwZekHJaxM6Ur51T1K93UTp1IPiNsWkIgDEIO2gRqrr3B49ypxXF lpKlsPYucieI34Pz2x5vxPpGIxem1iBiCvWYnxTpU6s7wWIwNa9jMp7F9PK32q2Q5nZlHrA3 KSGWYNWymXSkBGZCxwn8VzEZycxIw75+5hn6dXxb/wDSPV+G7djHY2+X7rsYPhpVRsebY3T5 0ZSXVybG2M1jHV8i7yVtP+LlXyQ8+qZM2Or/ADDQVXEjMPmmvHmzJbRTGpXM9/Wodo29zz/n d6dvw8LOwKlb1rjo+oA6TtZHPQIimWLHP2mxag6NufH4Geo6FR+AtWfimnbumY6fjSeTl5b0 9xpUtSxJ+hDGcWVXxMptoktC1PQwnEsSMkcu504e3n5MXHrPqTsNivWopGi+aWWEszVN7BFP Q8IZanQyPtDfakU2mHJanQ8+9pEl4UQue0PMsO/GF9co8Kb8cuZNEODn7r0uD0bu4JzAY8oT Yx06Hf0Iz9VD/wBAK9Q0aPhQV50fSI8ja0ZUG7DxANyHHDQB7B2w1BzrICAlGoOX6iFGU4Yc SC7jUHHAoqeo04eCQ8o1WhRgYkEdlCHFGYPYMCIASqYtIV0KmLQlxyCnRVask5AUkoBJBivK 2Wh45CzgelkuUcC3UsYlXKLHKxNiXLJ3IpWSya2DyP8AUhShcqMYEvUSoMtiB4iVEpnip5ZL +LqP5zjhJfxk385wp6bzz4PmHoPDVM16M0PPqf5h6TwsmVrCM7pfHOm/oqCPsk0JP2c3yHUP QhNRFMfJpYr/ALOTyEXDGqWaC7jidqj7LQZ9kM8i8TQdlHC2zn2NH5A1wRv5DTI1F7juzQC2 yi4G1ydANeHo/wApsOzRe47sW2HKNsQvDbL2sAdwxH/3Zv8AsGrqM92YBPPX8Kxr3AF4Si/K ek+5t7kE9yRe4N0nl7+D2/lAP4OTuQ9W9xQT7OTyHujp5J/gx2qohHXhB3kewfZqeQn2Y3yH 5U9PGX8JSJ3EdeFJvI9oXC0VenQauEM8g8qWniv+GJE8Aak4clSTY9g+xY++PQNJDBBROhbS Nv8AnUcypajzFKXsIFbbYi062qo19TQ4nDkvYz0LPviBnWmHtDxKTtasnYXsVVV+OUtcLR2Z LnO6b6aOFOVCVHewegps0aX1JnuNznywtRtWjZNi0907iPUU+VCPCqmSlm+pCtuTp9CIrdS4 0Rqp81PRPmgZnenhKKklxLFopJnRN+H4TSxrqZ6oqJ0xhjMOpnxz38Heb8eNt1EZ9e1LXRVe Gyds5Fgf5DUxmaoy9sty8xanas/3iaT3rLqlQhX1EDaBeajZUZm+F53zDPGarz8rhbtHZiEW b4jJFQ736nzfhXZf1PGvlhczTCnM/wDNAsc3q9yzf6jPVCSldE3/ALHm/wBZa0GIpULaLDYY l88xRe8I3/7ez/1B6Rj6h6WywhY24fb0jBeF6jEHI6fEXQtX8iG3ZwlFSUtkrZHrbxtMBwxh WINVFbiLZP3tNZV0OJxU6q7FmW8jXHyk9OjOXftWYnSVMbHolnRN3tEZV9qh/wB5m5E8ksXk WNS0faxPp6iqzaKscpQ4jzNfI3DVpm7/ABH3OL5N8nf8bUmqDCiM+X0hSPRyNfT6KH1MZ0wz /JJhkJ3B7c/FUP7isTouXvAVP2vEDHL3Lc6/i/1y872VOg8+4nX4y6noK6MPNuJqi87kQ6MP 24Mvagp403LXA0RZingb2ib6l7gNPZ6L3k4hv6HSnPMfaVLZbIp6dS393PJPaLKvvG5pPZMj hHzCxctyuwjRyqWCpd5wcnt6fH6LGgi6D0ByKZNSpqCcET0BjLEZmwNR7OkC9TNoYLsNORQL ZUGnIoiAYiCKchyiBoweNuWgh1jhADjkOF0INxyDhU9Rg3wg3BhqhLoANHNHDSgVo4ag9BbB 7AiKCHNUYSkkswRHgMwjNyCWEGi6E1j/ADKyJSY2TQcIdX3QhyLZQkkhHcotjGGX1DsXT0I6 dRIjuIPMJPxNR/McIK/mnm/mOGtPTcCVR9nn53Ho/CqcrfI82p/mHpfCvShlyVpxenotH8tC YhDpL9khMMVU9BU3ETYc0cScif7it0OankOQZOa1NxyJpqcg9BxJmWyaDkQd3aiogwTKciD7 aHW7hkYjRUbYciHWDZFFQ76DtBkb3HWHW9Dk3GCCZUFHADUYhGrGJ2WxLI1YvwgDBYpCiyqZ FrLVq+Zuq+PqUw9rYkK1pxqOT8YX2D/OaUNUmSuS5eYKv3lpk6b6elYVB8JCw93I+D6wIW/e VpjldK9Kb0INXDyl6VmIdOpOWMKVi61Ocr3aE+v1lK990jW2pjI6saGi5FupnMTwuR1R77SV dpPD6Glw6HAMRmbJiGMrSrGvxKfs1XOhGxiLAXTxx4RgtU5qO1estrm3HNXr2y5MlI2vhxyS ODEamTtk0vJqAxGgkw2e1KrZUc3cjYnDLJXc9L7ry/LJtDBPIjI0S712TMd8z61lHBcbLuK1 tRK3rg/9wL3qL/upG/6jVrwrjM2jaJNe7OgKr4SxSFqNkoEb/VDK+E/Zy2s62ro8vyJc31LL C2x1lQkNPSPRy/rEXAqvNmWlWxKwCF1Bi7HTMVjEJtmm3BJcmwwzh2vdaNJW09/1XL9eF3Qw 55q7tZP2lRS4vA2ff/kWNRj0PZ9Zthnh49unV2BPitVQUT4Zu2suiSRojUQyrHQyOllncsmn 8RTWpXz1/D7oaeK91W6uVEQwtVRSNbIxkjHSeUepwfIu8tx3cFwk1Tm/ts0MigY86Ro2R13B GEsKLplNb7Oos2JOdbpMmuXs9TZ+zRipUzL/AP7c6fjdy1yfIemTaRqeZ8QSfFdp3npNW/s6 V7vJDyjGq5k1Q5pvh6cN/JAgXdTTYGl0RbmZgT4expsD7gx9m28a2pf6HjHH0l65T1+apZFR 6r3HifGM/b4g5TSQlVhWjScmqkHDtIyc1Dzc/b1MJqCd2pGevOFerrEa/OQpJTbQF3j0byAm 9QXtWPQoFyhMwDvJWcIIcNJDkETqOQnQE3GOHoIoAM444oiC+Aag5EAERoRvUIiDkIM5un0O HIneOFsB9wwN1A1GAhAoMsnIEjBoHjQmGbYRE1DNaPZGUQGVwuUlI0TsReI2Gz/3BmPOSMam 2gJ25VUarztVBeIhexEJMfSRGOJF+TQeLOvNn/Pm/mOGCv8AxEv8xxzdz0nCNTdR6bwt8th5 pRN+K09O4abyNMuX234/T0Ck+QhLaRKWzYkJTfM5zoqdw5qg2tQK30KQeObqM8gibbFQnJ9A iINaouid+o0n951tRGqOTcZFQVEE7xUGTk8hde45FFvoBFEOQ4NmVFOEQ64wVDrCXOAaKhEr uglIupCrl03GWmeq23Vxga34eI/1PRJ0+G488xZlqvUVaYqXGGZKjN5tJuCLzoAxtPlu7rC4 K7nQynVdX6etYMvwWl5fQz2Bu+EhfIuhW3PmXvKnEHaFouhSYi7cm0RlK35qkRQ9Sq9puR19 DCOoB9lXZL+dh6Xz6LoDcpcUOBVlbDE+HaZ2X6HZ8Sfftjz94aRZaanqpERW3S26mInwuD3h 9m5ebwnoU16Ws7Ds7K3QNW8FxtibO6uaiv1y9melyXp5kxeXvwrJze9TJ/5jiE+knzfjah3/ AJjj0ar4ClljfLBVte9E0jMasK0Uz4ZY+dDmkxrSWxWRUs+b58n/AKi84bpo58SWOpc9yN/U RYW/FzKS+H/+KOd4TLlxmM6dXxvuvbXMwvCu15Y5Ed59oESgw5H/ACVX6yKBv8dLCJN8TUw8 v07pjGkraWjg4NVWU7EXXUxOHr91l8jZY1JbhNqeqmJw78HJ6i5l8F1jSCpuIKmxmzOcvwz0 T2aR3ppZFTX/APs86f8AKPUPZxEjMKVbanX8eaxrj5619f8Ag5PoeT4rQs94dIuiqepYq/JQ u1seV41NeRdTXH8XH/sfS0KPitmNRg9Blc263MVTr8NEbc2+Ao6zcyqPGfsbXGI4Zno1VHdx 4ZxSlsQcmbY97xNysw5/NbQ+e+IH58Tk1vqVL0Mfy0WhT4RMYRaT5JIaedldvWwdIoCPVR0i iRdRECT4QHeHcmZoCw1QuwG/ME8QNVJNwn0EEQAciioIcgAQGKgxQIoqDB5BOFQZZybj2bFb MRo5jMwjAzNiNqkc1hzWWXpCDPEAKAXclxR9o9EI03UNIIqIPyHWHsBog+Mag5BGMxA8Ud1A Qk6nKnZURkNxexJTGjlYlvU20zQFb3AXpoTJG5EIa6k6NHAr6BtwCmStlj6iTflIsHWHlWyD xiMnm6fOm/mOHN3Gp86T9zgvZ8uY9BxJFB81p6pw0xOzYeW0HzWnpfD01kYZcnttxdxv6a+Q lNK+lkRYyYx3qYaVUliBWoAZYkNKiCog9GitHFSI2Y7lBIo+S6qRl5VAbSowqehEiuuyEtg4 TvpuORdDlG20GRbnZxneMuvcIDIo5HX0I6DkUAMcoO45FCA44HfUS4wKhX1+xNRdCuxBVzIM 1fL8lx55jKfeFPRpfw6nn+NpacX7VFPiutDGpEwdfjlhVJ2mD/Qq8JX7yhnPbqnp6xgar2TT RJsZbAl+G00zVu0pjkcuxSYi6zVLq+hQ4m7QjMsYys6/FAhZfmXBOQwjqCijWoqGwN3kWx6h TQpR0MVPHoiJe/qea4ddMZpbR5lR2x6eiokSZk1VD0fjTUcfyL+lQlFBDWe8zrnd3XH4nPT1 MHM62XYHiMnwsqpcyjoYoqjtLX9Ll51zYrunkVHJlMXxoqSYs2zLaJzGkhn1SyEDiGghmi+0 XIqqzfUjG6VcdsdDHy5hcDVGVSqu2Y0dDhtMmGTVzpdWJdIjHYbK735X+HOTy5Wt/jfblpsV qG50BRKssvIQ0k50cEpLyTnNJt6UrX8SqlPw7DFsq/8A8GLw75C+ZpeMKhPsynb6f9DK4U/l chryTvbDiupamqgxCQpHMTJL0Hr/AAJF2eBRrbe54+5b2Q9r4OblwGLQ7OH/AKnHz3tKx/8A AKeUYmxJJVPUeJX5KFDy6vd8XzNsfxcd9lpIuhDe4GzRpiqPmkjRTd4IlrCx/oS8eXJhT/of PmJr2mISfU974pkyYTJbyPAKlb17/qPesTwm802n+W0kJoDiTkQe/Rup5j1segn+oSJPQBcN B1D0aSqaAukIq6ARAMC7fUJcaIyCNO/cKMyoKgxByCB4FwQC7qAHIPsMY4eCXDxqCoSYjPIM zYCzcOwlZ4g45EAias2UE5Ao1dRSaSEiCjvDocACCZRWj0BbmJoSaddSOgaNdC5dIWEcg9JP QitctvQ5Xlyo0dNJoQFUNLJoQ1UraYRVAqcq2BkLGj6h8jtAUb9Bz3NyBIjL08+T50n7nBGj PHJ+5wp3uNMpHcxtMDq8qJcxMHUaXCXbGeUPC+L0akq/hoW1PU3QyFHKtkQuqeZbJcx0020c U3mTI3lJTyFlE7S9ytM/JZscER3+xDjk0JDHaXNJEbEVALo7hkVFFSyh4ls2NiJsgZiXUGnK Eaqdw9Hs+1xMpyPFv5hobDyICWMOgm4tCVHSKwqR/wCwY4WlbDy+o5EHNHaBobAyrucgbQ5G 2DQ2DZStrustrFZWtTP6jkG0Z6ZqZTA47HleeiKz7oYHiFtniOKKFM9BOnoUVEuSsT9xosMt 23YrtJoZ+dPdsT/Tczrrwu3qGBLyMNUxeRDH8Pu7SFhro2/DCM8iuXlM/ia8ql8++TbQzuJX v6E5UsIzrtXg1Dyb7jPCZOgmHuWHFKZyL4jbzYg27GK5Ecp58/lcipuTaav95mjkl+Y07eDL 9OXnx20FbVRq27l0Qy61klRItrowkz1V5OzS6lRVSSMk6ys6wxi2gnyqmpZsWKeklSf5djJx VFpNdid9stbE+CFPiKmhM6O9q2aoRkOIWVUYrLJy+pQUMS8tvzD+IccmxFGU8tKsL06nHU0t ouV2ZossttOCaTY35SXhkqtqPqUrpcviJmESfemOX8xjJp2W9NFxjVfAhS/d/wBCiwaTMjzu LKt0jmflsB4cdmY9xpl32y47Wij2BPQdGo+1zBshv0eh7lwslsDhPEJGXmYiHu2AMyYPAnod vHNcTh5faBxSv3ZDy+rVPeD0bi2TIxDzWo5qg0/TmntZ0K/Gab/B+lNDz7D0X3lp6Lgrfhoo YhXcaTdlhT1XyPCnc9Z/U9m9oMmTDVS54xT/AIkef47Xw/kt40sxLg5Fv6h16SI88x6cDULT 8u416or+RLIHgY0soKu3oACPBbEHDFOQRddjhKcMHHAA/EPZ+oZ4hzQMVQQ9BjgJyDhEHANF QI0GFQkFYGYDTKPJUMOVMgJFCoJJoKwRwwWIJaw23MP7hqDUcwe0RoVrCYZosYVjByNNWZt7 ICV4ZW2QiSBtJj5PJQSrcaqg9izOVQYmYYICNVoqryDWbCr0OLwnemWd6Yb+I79w4b/Ed+4c djjTKZposM2aZym2NNhXcTlVRqKLYuafu1Kij1LilQyUs4Etom5Pi0+pDpunUmQbFRkmRroS GEeMOz0LSNsMV2ovd6jFaBER6hGSLYFbUIiABmvFR9lBogqIB7P7QTMN/ucA2ejxc2oISwGN n1Fz/wCwDvEuBpKKLm1Id17jkcoBKuVFavOTs/8AuVlQt36i8TiRGv3XUxHEdu42aL93Mbj+ ykmzNM/s6iN/qQeIYOzqc/m0mImgTFofeMKbKm6EV18V7aPhCTtKKNTdwfLPL+BarRaVepup 6ZDImRAieTqiTdBmcTXc0MruW5msUfopHInBReIT6oN8QhhHUjTqAwvtKnGIYWJ1rYkzpyBe FK6LCuIO0qI0VrrZV8jo4bpllD6/DqnWaBF5VsZadZu2+Pe5vsYrkbmlpueFfCinmlfjLXvf pzZuk6c7txyVZsnRWa9w+gxGF1WztU0RSnwpZ6qo7RzcsSGhisxi2ahllyabzitnbK47VRVe LJ2KWQLDyQEKXmrn/uLKPKyn6cwW9aGGOkfwkrCpbVjPqQ83/pJOG/jIv3EaaSu4gn7WqRMx M4YZ9yVSqxi3vPKW/DfLhifUeX47Rx+9LxhJahEY+xIhk1MXSG1P8wgT1PeMNajaCFE/Ih4Z Ta4vTp6nu9HpSRftQ78f+uODk9stxdqm551p71Y3PFr17ZdTBKt6s1nrTlxXOHQr70h6Fg7b Rnn+EX7Y9Ewn5Ip6NjPaPLlpFRTyWh1qz0r2mSqjEQ83w75guT8Gnx52tn7EV62JL9iM8896 UCaTadOUitJkSaC2cI8D4Qr3AhbUYNcOBgZzdteoaPGACNHsGNCoIG94nT4R6gxYg5o64w5A 0kRmwRoJoVNhGePQY04gCoPZ6A0Hs6gBVUaKvUMAHneEbfQRBaUNEhJY3QHElyZHHdC4WzGt C5EtqGjacqGniz2iqzTQgTlk8rpyaFa8bdUCv6gPhGZhxw+JvMBlEX5Sj1AP+Wacc3kw5L0x f8R37hwNvU79wc63IlUvcaXDjOUho8M3Iq41FI4uqXYoqRdi7pdzM1vBr3k+HUr4F8ifFunm XGVS2adwZNQMaoSWrfu0CIPQVPUTML3FA6ydxyW8tREFQAUQ44Zu7hEFOEThO84TYA4aL/Q6 4A31Q4cJb1AG+HyKqoXnLVekrZm/EHFnJ8rQyeON0U1tvhmVxzpUiqZKxNw748ctE5Lq9NCF 3j4nPhnZKi6tJb4KqheuCcSRo/S79T16km7SBrk2VDzHiDDveoUrI9bbmi4Bxz3yldQzfNi3 IxXyTyx210z+S5ncQfdS/n2M5X7EciOJV953cd0iOMMXUE/UEyNq9wZdEBOk7CPtJtGIaY1N mwcTq1w6jzZtXJYw0ETqyqv5uJGJVkuJVto+nwtLmlpG09O3l51OiXU2w3JdC0zOwibEhMYv w1IqdQW/wXnP7b/plGx56537iXLyMyjsLpHS1UridVUuRjmnRGGtKPMTMP8AmI78oCSnyk7D 4fhXUBtV17885f8AD/8AwtPqZ/EW/eHGkwprm4ZGLL0OJOYTINyvQlQP78pi3qfhEfa49An6 j3eDSnj/AGoeIcJfF4kg0vzHuLdIk+h3/wCkjgz9vO+K5L1L0UwjF+83Q2nE7kWoeY2Fnx3m znxXuDOvIh6ZhmlOedYFHzep6NQMy0pM9G8r9pU/3hEMHh3zDWe0R+bEMpk6H8xHPdY6a/Gn e096gvCde6id55z0sTo9yZF0kVmxLjDag5AahXjNBbAPeNc0cuwgzIhyHDUJ8hoRgoNAogG4 QflG7BiRRoviHFpKg5NwTOoNqSorRzHDeUchAOYEQGgRBgiiIOUB3hIBVHxMUE0kxJdQCVCh OiaRYG2J8aF4wnDHbBVAP2LQBIVdQpPeV8m9zK04h+IQXxDV6SpdqgYWMY0KiDI2S1iOq/BW 4eboIjvkm3D+Tn5b0yDfF+4MBb4v3Bm9J0uZLptjRYfsZ+k3NHhyXIqo0NJuXNMu19ynpELm mb6GZrSFVLCJ2hXwk2FNBxmnMUO1bkVgdi6FpSMw5qg2oc0ZCoouYH6iouwwffU5qjFOuICK umol/wDYZc64A+52YZcYqhsxREXQGiohyKAF0Ev6gUXuFvoGzOVeUr5H3foTXO0Kp7/jWHBE 29ozL42nKppUXlM/i/SpmtjHdYz6BJPmAxNosqD5VlS8a7oVFdhlVhFc3E8LXNbVWlxhK2kN H9lx1MXaQLlf+Re8jTWZ6BwjiSnxiiS65Z00cxSNX9RVYhhdNFLepgWCT84Wndni0qUezzUz y7VjhPcD3U619gquo4I+0nq2NaUFZxVDDnSlRzvUmYNJbVpPVU2HRdtVap3IYnEMTqMbqezh a7s+5GkiLCMTxl/bVDlji81NDR4bTYbFlgbd351NNSe0Xv0rMLwn3CPtJfm+XkSn7kp6LuR3 lY5b9uLOayBZ1CvX4D/odY6VPusn7TJ249w/AKNvZSSXGV92T27lHYZ8Oie3zIlVmWRHZc6C 8v0rw7V8rufUkUb/AIRDe7nzNHROd2TjXbPxV1Y7nc41lCmWgYY+fxG3pGWooys7qFwzpzRy OyibCqZTLd00rS8CQZ8eif5Kezv0jX6HkPs6ivjGa3keuTrlgcvoehf087N5XxLJ8d9jOU/S pf8AES3mf9SmpOhTTJjGgwBNrnoEN20V/QxOBNSzbIbZ3JQL9BT0qvEOOpe0xNybmepOkt+M Jc+KvT1Kul+UZfIvTX4o6D+XKNao/wAjz3owrNyUzoIrCQ13L1C0oxVBXHvBrbIltxgghwiE G76iDhoA/JYVOkRmu48AG7YRo4a1eYZHCbKd3HM3ERECDE6hRKFb6jhpyZcoiEQewEOTTYYO GCXEGk9CVAQWv1JMb9QOLaJSW190KqOQO2UuVOkmSTyAPkQFJJqDuotnJoyWQgyKHkUjPJgg IxdkHDCtAgdmwBFsOjUZbNqF5SHI74RJnXwkSX5R0cf5ObkZePq/1EhpHj8X7iQ03YJtL1Gk w70M9RtNJQJsZqi9pC5p+4qqVNi2pt0ICzg2sTodrEGFOUnRdO44hLjsSG9JHi28w7SokVot tbjU3FQojhETy3OQ6wAgpyKcANsd3Drf7Df7Aon9zu+4veIoAlrbifTQU70JBE0O/qd3DRmV y2YVK6yFlMtmFX/GHBElF0Qp8W6C1KnEkuwzUyEifEBrsFqPnjNvUhtEvDes2NCvIY2h+Yau hXlHBklVMt2ZXJmb6mUxCioHO1p2/wBDS1WxnKzq9DLkq+JV/ZuH/wD4yL/UkRQU0Hy6djBG 6KFTyUy3XQSTm3AP2DqnkDUewiuQiqhMeRVLwrj54D6gqpbUbw5DxJctC4NdteLL7RsNqYlw 7bUizzt7tCBSSOSjsRJ6tzQ+ndt/qTSU+qzeEWKZqQfqKZ1TmOa/lN/psfqQWrlzqbyD8JD+ 086V2ZzWno0f4aH9qEcuOulcN3A3g16Qigl6DPCbXl09C9nMca1LnMTY9IrFy0j/AKGB9mjP hyL6G4xV+SgkX0PSvuPMzryrH3fFcVtGxVjJmMLeVQdOioxCsmePppMFZ0muqX5cOX6GZwZO kv8AFFy4W7XuHj6FeE8SSZsVf9SJDbKExlc+JSfUHF0mHyW/xoK3cfm8xGN1FQ4How5i6hc4 JgQBsx6jMwijUYLRylOuMUQnxMU5oxguYAM3YcMbsO7iQG4ag5wwoHjhrR7NhgiaD0HR5Re8 hRByCCgWnCid4qgRhyCDkGRFTUfGduEYGwLGtg6P0I6bD0QnatCJmGbj0S4iJroG06AVgB7S Zu3UFkHLsIFhliYqagnML2WkPKPiFtqOhaOXadATkWToJlQRKj5R08Ll5emXj6v9RKaR4f8A 9xKabsU+i2NLQ9xnKJuppqDVqGVVF3SXLmnKil7i2pttiSWMSbFhEiLbUg05OhGhJj3DtQDH qHTa5SS7DxjdNR5RGp6j91GHbLYW1HCoJuuooyJrucl+45BbAZipqcLqNUQN79Dh3SmogGb3 CDhgGZNfs1KzLeVCym0jK5q/EHBBkuVeJImQtbeRXV7eQhTGVXzVI/8AckVvziP3me2+CTQf NNfh+yGQo/mmrw7ZBwshawzdXuaKsM5VauMOSteECP6h09AcYVLGMbGr/wAwK+gdQViiRlIz 0JakWRDTjY8uO8UR5XYq77kpZv6inxv8Gbe3Nx5a6Qmfg2lbUOJMTmtpm5nEaXLm5TaY6aWo oRvSIP8AAWzdTNzVTG/qPSFZ2ccX0Q89w5M+L0kf5lPR61OzaxPRDn5u3Tw9IigFbyhgbzLh /Jtyenqvs3RPcnqanHHZcPcZ/wBnkeXCrlzxK7Lh6npX83l5+nlmK/PuNgXLbUHiPPOEhbq0 WVR+m0wRt3N8i5x+0eESfQqsCbZGkriyXJgsn0NMSvTwjElviDl9R8PQ0izrerVfUlR7dRzf Irs+LNjoKI1TlOF3HsCAmDvCBEsNHplGuIVIEmorWDhEQD0XIcEe+6ZclhqE7ORyIK7uHDCk mDRxxZETcegiDkQzORw9BGahGCUVDvocwdsToEG6WHdw1R4xJhyDbCjIRnUHbYioGYolRIZo ETqI7FFuJSUw7xA2L5jr6AjbgbhyKIBBqADvBFbCPlOQctswqbF4kjy9RCqflEqQgVbvhHVw uPmUUUTuz/1Boyeyny0TV/UQumQ3t2wnSfSbGkoOgzdJs00lB0oZ1cX1JqmxaU3rsVdJsWlP qhmhYQW07yxj9FIMO6E6LTuKidpkewZv0AR7BmroWk8cn+6DRE/5DBRx2g0RnNHIv+wzMKgA 62g05DgNw044Ab6jNx2wipdABEXQQ464jCqPklZD8zQsKro2IUXWOQ4kWsQcQ+UTbeZFrfkk qYev0m0Iv9CZiLech8xk2wSKXSVDU4cq2MnTdWhqsO2QIMhq1bpqZuoXmNDW9F7GcqfmmHJW vCaxSQmpEaupJYZxsXcG9B41dR7IFSJIwmAlZoEos3NK56FRjzslIwv5GGe4i/DM/cdPG87O XGq34Puzc3UQJMublFX5TSPmOzQnZw7wgmkkSknA2Z8cpE/WejVzNvoYHhpe14iok/Up6Fij 0Zoc3PXTxqjwjV6h8Z1udpnwd5NuT09j4DZkwZCXxS61GiDODI+zwZgHi13wkQ9L/d5Wbzeq W84Wm+c0jzKnbaEikW8yE0Nzgd86A+OH5MIcnoHwPRqFPx/U2w1WGuMZ5dPGt6hf3EyMhRaz FizoOP5N3dPQ+N+JzTh9tBqHI63IP7hDlAFYcvSNZoKQZvhFQ45EJU5BTvqcAPQYo/uGKEAf iOQ4e3YpLmbj27DP1DmiB/0aO/oMQI3clTmDvEcgeKJXjl2nYFhHfQt4qRP6nSUSNQrxqPKK Vo7wkiSmygLagqXZqBGNGWHoSs9u445pxJCM6TmXFRLHL6AkPxHIccUCLYjvUkqR3ajCKo+M 7IcicpWKUWRW3K2pcWMpV1J1cEcnL2mNd/lzSqd8wsYv+HtK7+IaME+iTU0tF0mfoW6mkomb EKXNKmxZ09r6FbSopbU+wkp8W5NiS2pEpyYzfUcSksuvcGYAbsHbtuUk45uhzTkDYdc5Ldwo 30GIXxC/QbsLugjcmwv1OTbURABb6DRdRl76gC/UanmIcKG4Tv2FVRPqMwKn5RDp9HEqpTTR SHBuGziX3kOsT4JKI9T8lSVMViaWcV6FrirOYqe4htgNT/MQ1OHatQy9OtpENNhy/DFDyEre gzcy85oa92m5m5etdDn5G3DHM30DJ53I7CQ3RDNtovMIq2Oucv1DYMXcTRRV6hothHlZZDL8 SdLGmsk2MtxAzNLG06OC/c5ObC72z8uXs2kYm1NHJF+0iZT0NuU0INaFE0WHDi5Mdgf5KbWW RZ5LqYzhtv8Ameb8psOXOcfPe3Zwzo5jRtvjoO+orUvUNsL48+8+X09t4VZlwWIquLX62Lrh tMuCwma4uf8AGcnoejPzeXmw+8xKo/nkFvzVJ2HfidRU9N1gjeUyvtHlyU6tRTXYPsYb2kyW 7zeMcvTzak5pCzbupXUXM4s27Hmc91k9X481iWwmUcg05tugVicgNyBGbCd4FoiC2HMORCVh ZDrBLHIIyHM9DrDm+gByIMVAgi9IY0kfKKKm4neXOknJ9BdzhzCQ5B4iIOQSit6i8w+kRUTM pUoxE1LSmnRLF4RjnWnp8JiyI5y6C1GDxrFmiFw+eOWJG31LCX4MKqrtLG+44raxFfCsbrKl im3flNBic3ardxnH9ZllNOrjtciDkOQVDN0HtFQRpzSQKwcNYO8IJDGoPOLBir5gHBl9Ae4B HF8A7KOt8MeNSrXtcVlWW0jCrrDr4q5OSHxM+5NIzGc5Y0/4BpGb1lsE+iYaCkTYoqN7ULim mQk9r2n13Qs4O5FKannTzLKCb/YSVzBZO4nMKynkJ0b/ACHEpjdgqdQBjwyP9RkcOS1xGuuL dO8ZOO7xMwvcBmpoInmLcVAMm44RBADtEQZ/QIo0AaIcdYIZBo+42/cI0Os5bAYbhavcFD5l fo4MCqPl6j7jZ+jYhTIYpuU3cX2KbKUneZVtxnw9aGiol+GZuPrNFQr8PQW1WFrl+GZ+TrL2 ud8IoHdZzZt+GFRArbggrfITU+52nkNQInmSDMoo8XwgAHR6GRxx3ZYnHfVpsfoYziBzW4om fpOj43thzekGeqavU0rXZXOLStWlejfdunKVB6Di2a3qHDY+okO6QJY8NfjXmn8RnuGmc8rv Q0Vjh5fb0OLuHMd0kijS9YxALE5SRhiZsSYnqV8Wfenm6j3XBW5cLh+hi+LV+9uNxhqZcOi+ h55xPMq1T1PQnuvMy/TLs6yZhSfeCK3a5ZYQ1M913EtucIb8E859o7/vFrnpmE6Ux5X7Q5Ud XaHRGF9shh3UWRX4dsTu48nm/J6/B+JzTt9zkFRrjmal8I1AluUbkK2DmBOzFYEaZKlByDLE 5E0AAe0VB6DgiWBRncMXQN4QKgkISwRrRrS0nIPawa3YWPQDkPbsFjGszD2ILatDZOQgvV7N lJn9gSx51DbHQ9NJJoqSKTvtWoSK0yq4qkY9jtBH539ahL2n6cEmq31C66IATUbkHpo4e144 6KOF8Q4hZhzRyC94wcwUWwoJN1QbsIvUNHsEUYPGoMGBF6BUTUe/RhQVsiFJWbF3KU9WdXHX Hyzd06KW1EQu1+IMbP8AAIWY0nbnW8VX+onU9fbxGba4M2UrR6a6DFETxFrTYtbxaGCZVZQz at2XqI0T0qnxr1LKHF/XU8thxFUJ0eLKneTotPUo8VJUeItPLo8aXzJMePW2UE6enNxBgT39 vmebxcQW8QaPH0tuobLT0hlY3zF96b5nnrMeRe8lRY4n5w2em7SoSxzZ0vuY1uON05x7ccai 7h5HpsEmF7RPMySYy3zCsxlvmPZ6antNTkfruZ5mLM8w7cUaGy0u0VBCqZiTbbhEr08w2NLC 41NyF77Go5KtPMNmSpvf0BQbDJp0Vx0T0ylfo4kJ/wAgUm3odnGq/kIUzeK6opR95f4lre5R WM624yRJrcvqL5ZQs3Lyk0jsTGjq5fh+hReMuKxeQpe858m3GKKig00HMI20HYE8JHRR19BA W/ccigLruKx4jSGbmK4ifL76sTcuRxsEXUzUmWoxLK/8x1/Dm8tOX5N6PwjgepxbC0qoaunb Ne3u7tFMtV0c9HWvpZku9D0bEcEpqXC433jc30XUyT0Y5znQuc1yfmPW8JPTzfO+TOtzDnSc pZ0ElPT1N62F0zPPMRa9YpZs1OmRn5THTZa8LfxfoaRDOcN8sUri9jkPP5Z27+KxJQl8Pt7X GY09SIi8hY8LNa7Govqa/D/JPyL09wgTJRM/aeY4+uaeX6npyrko/wDSeVY07NO9fU7sXm32 quztEWGDJqQf4exaYREmQid023oOWiueOccyZsTcezU6ZcOX6HhvGUmbF3/U6pemX+yDhzOU noy5Fw1nwtCwbsePy3t7HFNQHKORBxzdzFro9rOU7IPQchOxoGw9lxHCx7kmkIvJqAeHd0WA O3AsQ0HWGM6ghDQwFcK4GpZGIpw6xyFbIrQjG6nM0HJtsScOTQIzzBs3DIgtno7wHCHFJ04C EeD/AEhE6cIPQ5E1EZUFsLynC2Zg5Dk9QjRkaiDreY7U5UDZgq0ZYP4RhW0gtOFEu7MIz2oL P0iRnS9BSFfPsUdbsXU+xS1Z08f4uPP2/9k= --part0_897769923_boundary-- From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 16:03:43 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA09239; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 15:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 15:59:24 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l eskimo.com Subject: [TEST] (delete) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 22:57:05 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <35870399.2777850 mail-hub> 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: <"HXQ6J2.0.HG2.AHmWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19729 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: my bounce Regards, Robin van Spaandonk From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 17:05:32 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA21844; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <358303D4.728 earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:57:24 -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: Vortex-L eskimo.com Subject: Blue: three very cogent missives on CF research 6.12.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PHjnV1.0.CL5.bDnWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19730 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Subject: Re: Murray: Third Ohmori critique 6.11.98 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:17:09 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net > > That's it, folks! In the theory section, they talk about a number of > wonderful Au + proton reactions that release many electrons, but energy > is not specified, except for rather general comments like: > > "Such a phenomenon would result in the compensation of the positive and > negative heats caused by several exothermic and endothermic > transmutation reactions. The possibility of this type of compensation > effect was offered by Miley and Patterson 8 and Miley et al. 9" > > They are obviously riding a balky hobby horse in presenting vivid > pictures of "some microexplosions probably caused by some nuclear > transmutation reactions" with "intense heat evolved locally as a result > of the microexplosions." They present no estimates as to the total > energy needed to create the myriad craters, whose number or collective > volume are not estimated. > > Was this discussed at ICCF-7 in April, or at the ANS Meeting in > Nashville yesterday, or in Infinite Energy? > Rich, I don't think we can emphasize too much the fact that this "theory" is totally bogus -- utter nonsense. These people really ought to have their feet held to the fire until they acknowledge that the processes they suggest don't meet a simple, fundamental requirement for energy conservation. I would really like to hear what kind of energy compensation effect has been offered by Patterson and Miley. I challange them, and all their supporters to actually specify a reaction process that will "compensate" and still match the experimental claims. Let us not overlook the fact that the addition of a single nucleon to a stable nucleus in its ground state will, in general, not lead to the formation of another stable nucleus in its ground state. At the very least there is energy conservation to be considered. Now are we actually supposed to believe that each time one reaction occurs that is exoergic there is another reaction occurring half the universe away that is endoergic and exactly compensates? This becomes absurd when you put it in a context that actually would demand a wide variety of differing processes to get the claimed assortment of reaction products. Let's pick a specific claim, such as the conversion of gold into iron, and actually do the arithmetic to calculate the energy balance for that reaction. I dare you! Dick Blue Subject: Re: Murray: Miley SIMS data 4.8.98 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 11:35:54 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Rich, I certainly believe that your characterization of these results as data soup with lots of random scatter is the correct one. Moreover, I think you can learn something about how realistic it is to interpret these results as arising from some "massive nuclear transmutation process" by looking at these randomnesses. Here we have, it is claimed, an assortment of reaction products that can be identified as such because the isotopic abundances don't match well with handbook values. That is to say there is an assertion here that the reaction process "selects" certain isotopes as favored relative to the processes that form most of the stable nuclear matter we observe. Clearly the selectivity of the reaction process must extend to the atomic number as well as the mass number so the assortment of elements formed, as well as the isotopes for a given element, must be determined by the process. Do the data confirm this? If we compare various transmutation experiments what do we learn about the favored elements being formed by these processes? Does Miley, or anyone, present data showing some consistent pattern for the production of elements? While I have not examined all such data to find a pattern in the production of elements, my impression is that the outcome is pretty random in that regard as well. For example, in Miley's first presentation, chromium as overwhelmingly present as one of the major constituants of the reacted beads, but that does not seem to be the case in his second presentation. Where has all the chromium gone if it was, indeed, a reaction product as claimed? Isn't it now clear that chromium was actually an impurity, and that by "cleaning up" his experiment Miley significantly reduced the chromium available for deposit on the beads? Let me suggest that Miley has now proven me correct in my old assertion that his data is all consistant with contamination and not with any reasonable nuclear reaction hypothesis. Dick Blue Subject: Re: Murray: Ohmori: Au transmutation March, 1997 10.19.97 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 12:28:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "Richard A Blue" To: rmforall earthlink.net Rich, One of the essential features for "Cold Fusion" research is that you always look for a signal that would be present even if there were no nuclear reactions occuring. So, for example, heat has been frequently selected as the indicator of a reaction under circumstances where heat is generated by a known input. Now we have stable isotopes as the indicators selected for a reaction process, when we all know that stable isotopes make up most of the ordinary matter available as possible contaminants. I can't think of a more absurd way to attempt to detect a nuclear reaction process than by the detection of stable isotopes in their ground states! We can carry on for years debating the issues relating to the identification of isotopes and a determination of relative isotopic abundances. As you have noted we are faced with a data soup in which all sorts of random variations are available to be confused with real effects, if there are any. The way out of this is not to continue to extract information from poorly designed experiments. These people should be doing better experiments! So one obvious way to improve "nuclear transmutation" investigations is to seek signals that are truly unique to such processes. The analyses based on the same isotopes that occur in nature are just excercises in futility. Look for isotopes that don't occur in nature! Since we know contamination is going to occur at some level, design an experiment that will not be sensitive to trace levels of contamination. Isn't that the obvious thing to do? Now what isotopes should you look for if you don't want to have to deal with the interference of contamination? Again the answer is obvious. You seek to detect isotopes that simply do not exist in ordinary matter. Radioactivity, under these circumstances, is not something to be feared. It is not something to be shunned. It is the best hope for detecting a nuclear reaction process with great sensitivity and little interference from chance contamination. Prof. George Miley actually started out to do the right thing in this regard. In his initial experiments, he looked for signs of nuclear activity. Had he found activity, detected gamma rays, and identified characteristic gamma energies we would not now be having this discussion. Nuclear transmutations induced by electrolysis would be a proven thing! That is not, however, how things have turned out. After the definitive experiment was complete, Prof. George Miley did something that has become the halmark of cold fusion research. He denied the results of his own investigations, simply because he did not like the outcome! Faced with data which clearly indicates that no nuclear reactions occur as a result of electrolysis, Prof. Miley resorted to the claim that these cold reactions (which he is certain occur) magically select a very specific set of final states. We are then left with his hypothesis that a very complex set of reactions involving, it seems, a great deal of random behavior are actually incredibly selective. So, as Miley would have it, there are no reaction rate constants to be determined for the production of a various elements. That's pretty much a matter of chance. But we do know with absolute certainty that a certain specific subset of possible final states are never produced. Well, George, it just is not physically reasonable. Dick Blue From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 17:38:05 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA27093; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <35830CEA.7CBF earthlink.net> Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 18:36:10 -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: role in CF network, Little Lily Theory 6.13.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MrY982.0.Fd6.7inWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19731 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: June 13, 1998 Hello all, No, I'm very unlikely to try experiments myself, unless a very easy one shows up that is being presently replicated by competent others. I am fairly unqualified by intelligence, education, experience, available time, and funding for CF research, but much more suited to work on parapsychology and expanded consciousness, which I am starting to focus on this year. For CF and new energy, I am content to network my role as the little boy who piped up in the crowd, "The Emperor has no clothes on!" That was one of the first things I ever read that registered in my mind, in the second grade. I am diligently working out the details of my Little Lily Theory, to suggest an explanation of Ohmori's 20 micron wide pumice-like volcano lily-shaped ears on his Au cathodes, as caused by bubbles of O2 reacting with the higly H loaded Pt, Pd, Ni, and Os deposited in spots, from the anode. So far, the numbers work out very neatly: a 0.1 cm3 bubble of O2 will generate 2.3 J heat [equal to 1 A at 1 V for 2.3 sec], enough to heat and melt 5.6 X 10exp-5 mole Au, mass 11 mg, a cube .84 mm on each side, while Ohmori found ~1 mg precipitates. The 0.1 cm3 O2 bubble can be divided into as many tiny bubbles as needed. So, the heat generated, which, of course, is recombination energy, is minute compared to the cell input electric energy, 1 A or so at a few volts for weeks. I will this week post the details. Rich Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-986-9103 rmforall earthlink.net From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sat Jun 13 20:54:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26484; Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:47:11 -0700 Resent-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:47:11 -0700 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 11:46:53 +0800 (SGT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980614115013.2d3f2a46 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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads Resent-Message-ID: <"V6ZXv2.0.eT6.-UqWr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19732 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Tom Miller posted the following (edited for brevity) at 13:00 1998.06.12 -0700: >> electrons". In fact, free electrons exist in metals and plasmas, but >> otherwise are rare. In the environment, mobile charges take the form of + >> and - ions in electrolytes. >> >> > But, indicing a positive charge must >> > necessarily mean pushing away free electrons. I can see this happening >> > in a conductor, which would leave behind positive ions. Is it reasonable >> > that the ground, trees, houses, people, all contain massive amounts of >> > positive ions underneath a thunderstorm? Wouldn't this have serious >> > chemical repercussions? >> >> Maybe, but these objects are already full of positive ions. A huge >> e-field only makes a tiny fraction of the ions in a conductive object >> migrate to the surface. >> > >That leaves the problem (to me) of largely non conductive items on the >ground, including humans, gradually having neutral ions changed into >positive ions, and then changed back, after the storm (or lightning >strike). Most biochemical systems require that the reactants have an >appropriate charge. If masses of these reactants ionized and deionized >by a thunderstorm, there should be sever disruptions to the biosystem. > >Since there is apparently no serious disruption, it has been assumed >that ionization and deionization can take place without any problem. > But there IS a serious disruption. The atmospheric ionization preceding and accompanying strong winds, thunderstorms, etc. has a profound effect on the blood chemistry and mental processes. It is not biologically damaging, but what these ionizations do to people's behaviour is serious. cheers From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 03:43:40 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA08639; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 03:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 03:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980614063802.007dc180 world.std.com> X-Sender: mica world.std.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:38:02 -0400 To: rmforall earthlink.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Blue: three very cogent missives on CF research 6.13.98 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Resent-Message-ID: <"_jeNy.0.s62.sZwWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19734 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Richard A Blue has written: >I don't think we can emphasize too much the fact that this "theory" >is totally bogus -- utter nonsense. These people really ought to >have their feet held to the fire until they acknowledge that the >processes they suggest don't meet a simple, fundamental requirement >for energy conservation. Exactly which theory does not follow energy conservation? Please be specific with description and equations. Do they all? Will the skeptics put "their feet to the fire" with some specificity and quantitation? Can Dick Blue support this contention with some numbers? ----------------------------------------------- >I would really like to hear what kind of energy compensation effect >has been offered by Patterson and Miley. I challange them, and all >their supporters to actually specify a reaction process that will >"compensate" and still match the experimental claims. > >Let us not overlook the fact that the addition of a single nucleon >to a stable nucleus in its ground state will, in general, not lead >to the formation of another stable nucleus in its ground state. >At the very least there is energy conservation to be considered. > >Now are we actually supposed to believe that each time one reaction >occurs that is exoergic there is another reaction occurring half the >universe away that is endoergic and exactly compensates? Are a few thousand lattice sites, "half the universe"? Will Dick Blue please explain his error of very large magnitude? And what is the Dick's estimate for the half-width of said universe? No wonder the skeptics rarely use quantitation. ----------------------------------------------- >While I have not examined all such data to find a pattern in the >production of elements, my impression is that the outcome is pretty >random in that regard as well. This appears to not be accurate. The reported outcomes do not appear random, and should be covered in the reviews of COLD FUSION TIMES issue 6-3, as well as the ANS and ICCF7 papers. It might also help if the skeptics refer to RECENT papers instead of preprints from several years ago. ----------------------------------------------- > For example, in Miley's first >presentation, chromium as overwhelmingly present as one of the >major constituants of the reacted beads, but that does not seem >to be the case in his second presentation. Where has all the >chromium gone if it was, indeed, a reaction product as claimed? > >Isn't it now clear that chromium was actually an impurity, and that >by "cleaning up" his experiment Miley significantly reduced the >chromium available for deposit on the beads? Let me suggest >that Miley has now proven me correct in my old assertion that >his data is all consistant with contamination and not with >any reasonable nuclear reaction hypothesis. > Neither Dick Blue nor that cited preprint had semiquantitative corrections or a full differential diagnosis in their statements. Both should consider that BOTH electrodeposition AND possible transmutation(s) may be involved (and other issues which we have cited in articles submitted). ----------------------------------------------- >One of the essential features for "Cold Fusion" research is >that you always look for a signal that would be present even >if there were no nuclear reactions occuring. So, for example, >heat has been frequently selected as the indicator of a reaction >under circumstances where heat is generated by a known input. It is not heat, but excess heat - output integrated energy minus the input electrical energy (plus the ambient noise power *t) - which is the correct indicator to which Dick presumably refers. More accuracy in the descriptions of the cold fusion literature would be helpful. ----------------------------------------------- >So one obvious way to improve "nuclear transmutation" investigations >is to seek signals that are truly unique to such processes. The >analyses based on the same isotopes that occur in nature are just >excercises in futility. Look for isotopes that don't occur in nature! >Since we know contamination is going to occur at some level, design >an experiment that will not be sensitive to trace levels of >contamination. Isn't that the obvious thing to do? Dick Blue is encouraged to do some experiments as he suggests. Hope that helps. Mitchell Swartz From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 03:50:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA05287; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 03:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 03:19:21 -0700 (PDT) From: JNaudin509 aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:16:16 EDT To: freenrg-l eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com, jdecker@keelynet.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: My Newman's motor "Blueprint" is on the Web.... Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 116 Resent-Message-ID: <"3YFhR1.0.VI1.YEwWr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19733 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi All, I am glad to give you, the complete and detailled diagrams of my Newman's motor that I have build successfully. You will find all these informations and some detailled pictures at : http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jlnaudin/html/qmmv11.htm I hope that this will interest you, Sincerely, Jean-Louis Naudin (France) Email : JNaudin509 aol.com my Overunity WEB Server : http://members.aol.com/JNaudin509/ Jean-Louis Naudin (France) From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 07:53:34 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA23038; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:49:50 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:49:50 -0700 Message-ID: <002401bd97a3$511165c0$a8b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "DIY_EFI" Cc: "Vortex-L" , "George" , Subject: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 08:46:24 -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: <"YJgVm1.0.ud5.DC-Wr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19735 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Since food production is a basic necessity, the availability of low cost energy to support agriculture worldwide is essential. Biomass waste is a readily available energy source that can support agriculture,if it can be processed cheaply. Most plants (on a dry ash-free basis) contain about 40% fixed carbon. The mineral content (ash) runs from 5% to 15%. Animal manures can double these numbers since the animal has used the carbohydrate (starch and cellulose) portion of the plant. Over the past two decades much research has gone into processing biomass into liquid and gaseous fuels, and many thermochemical and biological processes have proven feasible but the costs are generally not competitive with fossil fuels as shown by the tax-supported ethanol industry and the economic disaster of methane (biomass fermentation)installations. It might be possible that the Hydrothermal treatment approach can be cost-effectively scaled for Do-it-Yourself, or large scale processing facilities using ag wastes/manures. The necessary processing steps: 1, Gathering 2, Comminution (size reduction) 3, Mineral (ash) removal treatment 4, Hydrothermal Treatment 5, Combustion in I.C. Engines Steps 4 and 5 can be done on any size engine using an a small high pressure metering pump and an exhaust heat-exchanger and a suitably modified fuel injection system on the engines. A good project for a "Do-it-Yourself - EFI hobbyist". :-) Regards, Frederick From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 12:19:01 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA10307; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:12:51 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:12:51 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980614191331.00687cb4 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, 14 Jun 1998 15:13:31 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Resent-Message-ID: <"JNs0O.0.zW2.o22Xr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19736 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 08:46 AM 6/14/98 -0600, you wrote: >Since food production is a basic necessity, the availability of low cost >energy to support agriculture worldwide is essential. > >Regards, Frederick > > Ideas on converting or using natural products to usable fuel in vehicles has been a challenge to me for many years. Ideas I have had and tried but were unsuccsessful: Use of carbohydrates in a fuel cell to generate electricity. Reduction of carbohydrates directly to hexane by electolysis. Reduction of CO2 by electrolysis to methanol. Since Fleischmann and Pons' discovery, I gave up on these approaches. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 13:00:02 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA14897; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:56:18 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:56:18 -0700 Message-ID: <003d01bd97ce$27986d80$a8b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: Cc: "George" , "DIY_EFI" Subject: Re: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 13:53:45 -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: <"tVily1.0.he3.Yh2Xr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19737 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: Sunday, June 14, 1998 1:17 PM Subject: Re: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Ed Strojny wrote: >At 08:46 AM 6/14/98 -0600, you wrote: >>Since food production is a basic necessity, the availability of low cost >>energy to support agriculture worldwide is essential. >> >>Regards, Frederick >> >> >Ideas on converting or using natural products to usable fuel in vehicles has >been a challenge to me for many years. > >Ideas I have had and tried but were unsuccessful: > >Use of carbohydrates in a fuel cell to generate electricity. Easy, ferment it to hydrogen,ethanol,acetone, butanol, or pryolyze it to CO + 3 H2 and convert it to Methanol, or use the PNL process and Hydrothermally convert it to Methane and CO2. The PNL Hydrothermal system powers itself as long as the biomass ratio is 10% or more in the water-biomass slurry. Good way to get rid of sewage sludge that is processed by engines burning the methane that the bacteria are making. >Reduction of carbohydrates directly to hexane by electrolysis. Put a pound of sugar in the oven at 400 F and see what you get. Then dissolve a pound of sugar in a half-gallon of water and put in a pressure vessel that will withstand at least 1,000 psi and put it in the same oven at 400 F and see what you get. :-) C6H12O6 + 6 H2O + Heat ----> 6 CO2 + 12 H2 if you have the right catalyst in the water, then you can use the H2 and CO2 to EXOTHERMALLLY synthesize about any organic product you want. That is how Nature makes FOSSIL FUELS. If you stop at lower temperature Hydrothermal Conversion you get H2, CH4, C2H4, and various volatile alcohols and a "Pyroligneous"fuel that will burn in an I.C. Engine. Why go to all of that High-tech CRAP? If nothing else you can light a fire in an old wood stove and set a Stirling Engine on top of it. :-) Too much energy going into the electricity, unless you are using Solar Photovoltaics and they ain't cheap yet. >Reduction of CO2 by electrolysis to methanol. Without Hydrogen, Ed? Takes 24 kilowatt hours per pound of hydrogen with electrolysis of water. At 10 cents/kW-hr that's $2.40/pound for the Btu equivalent of a half gallon of gasoline. :-) > >Since Fleischmann and Pons' discovery, I gave up on these approaches. Not a very good idea, Ed. :-) Regards, Frederick > >Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 15:57:55 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA05531; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980614224935.00689ce4 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: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:49:35 -0400 To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Resent-Message-ID: <"K3GnT1.0.HM1.0K5Xr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19738 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 01:53 PM 6/14/98 -0600, Fred Sparber wrote: > > >Easy, ferment it to hydrogen,ethanol,acetone, butanol, or pryolyze it to CO >+ 3 H2 and convert it to Methanol, or use the PNL process >and Hydrothermally convert it to Methane and CO2. Fermentation requires a lot of processing. I like the pyrolysis idea. > > >>Reduction of carbohydrates directly to hexane by electrolysis. Put a pound >of sugar in the oven at 400 F and see what you get. You get charred sugar. Then dissolve a pound of >sugar in a half-gallon of water and put in a pressure vessel that will >withstand at least 1,000 psi and put it in the same oven at 400 F and see >what you get. :-) No catalyst? >C6H12O6 + 6 H2O + Heat ----> 6 CO2 + 12 H2 if >you have the right catalyst in the water, then >you can use the H2 and CO2 to EXOTHERMALLLY synthesize about any organic >product you want. That is how Nature makes FOSSIL FUELS. This idea I like. What is the right catalyst? > >Too much energy going into the electricity, unless you are using Solar >Photovoltaics and they ain't cheap yet. I was thinking of using solar cells. > >>Reduction of CO2 by electrolysis to methanol. > >Without Hydrogen, Ed? > >Takes 24 kilowatt hours per pound of hydrogen with electrolysis of water. > >At 10 cents/kW-hr that's $2.40/pound for the Btu equivalent of a half gallon >of gasoline. :-) I retired 10 years ago. Is industrial electricity now 10c/KWH? It was 5c in 1986. What happens when gasoline gets to be $5-10/gallon? >> >>Since Fleischmann and Pons' discovery, I gave up on these approaches. > >Not a very good idea, Ed. :-) > >Regards, Frederick >> I have high hopes for this "new energy". Ed Strojny >> > > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 16:50:53 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA04203; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 16:44:16 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 16:44:16 -0700 Message-ID: <00a201bd97ee$001c30a0$a8b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "Vortex-L" Cc: "George" Subject: Re: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 17:37:45 -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: <"BFg_h3.0.Z11.G16Xr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19739 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: Sunday, June 14, 1998 4:55 PM Subject: Re: Hydrothermal Biomass Motor Fuel (Sermonette) Ed Strojny wrote: >At 01:53 PM 6/14/98 -0600, Fred Sparber wrote: >> >> >>Easy, ferment it to hydrogen,ethanol,acetone, butanol, or pryolyze it to CO >>+ 3 H2 and convert it to Methanol, or use the PNL process >>and Hydrothermally convert it to Methane and CO2. > >Fermentation requires a lot of processing. I like the pyrolysis idea. So do I for the biomass wastes such as straws,corn stover, bagasse, and manures, not to mention apple and potato peels, grape pomice produced as nuisance wastes in the food industry and the meat processing wastes by the megaton. Then dairy and feedlot manures also in the megatons. I would rather see them burn chicken shit in a Honda than mix it with cattle feed probably causing "Mad Cow Disease". > >>>Reduction of carbohydrates directly to hexane by electrolysis. > Put a pound >>of sugar in the oven at 400 F and see what you get. > >You get charred sugar. Right, almost pure carbon, expensive charcoal. > >Then dissolve a pound of >>sugar in a half-gallon of water and put in a pressure vessel that will >>withstand at least 1,000 psi and put it in the same oven at 400 F and see >>what you get. :-) > >No catalyst? It helps speed things up. Believe it or not, potassium carbonate K2CO3 (about 1% K) in most plants. Easily gotten from burning biomass.Mother nature knows Her chemistry. :-) > >>C6H12O6 + 6 H2O + Heat ----> 6 CO2 + 12 H2 if >>you have the right catalyst in the water, then >>you can use the H2 and CO2 to EXOTHERMALLY synthesize about any organic >>product you want. That is how Nature makes FOSSIL FUELS. > >This idea I like. What is the right catalyst? PNl is using a combination supported nickel and an "Alkali Carbonate" catalyst. The Alkali attacks the alumina support catalyst though forming water soluble aluminates. Same thing Nature does to make clays. :-) > >> >>Too much energy going into the electricity, unless you are using Solar >>Photovoltaics and they ain't cheap yet. > >I was thinking of using solar cells. > >> >>>Reduction of CO2 by electrolysis to methanol. >> >>Without Hydrogen, Ed? >> >>Takes 24 kilowatt hours per pound of hydrogen with electrolysis of water. >> >>At 10 cents/kW-hr that's $2.40/pound for the Btu equivalent of a half gallon >>of gasoline. :-) > >I retired 10 years ago. Is industrial electricity now 10c/KWH? It was 5c in >1986. I retired 3 years ago at age 62. The Industrial electricity is nearer or more than 10c/KWH if you plug in the demand and power factor costs. even at off-peak rates. >What happens when gasoline gets to be $5-10/gallon? Figure $5-10/loaf of bread or per gallon of milk and lots of starving people if agriculture goes under. (waiting for P&F to rescue them) :-( > >>> >>>Since Fleischmann and Pons' discovery, I gave up on these approaches. >> >>Not a very good idea, Ed. :-) >> >>Regards, Frederick >>> >I have high hopes for this "new energy". High hopes don't feed hungry children. Regards, Frederick > >Ed Strojny > > >>> >> >> >> > > From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Sun Jun 14 18:31:27 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA11573; Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:23:42 -0700 Resent-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:23:42 -0700 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 18:23:39 -0700 Message-Id: <199806150123.SAA11525 mx1.eskimo.com> X-Sender: stephens pop.enteract.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l eskimo.com From: Scott Stephens Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers Resent-Message-ID: <"D_YbR2.0.Yq2.TU7Xr" mx1> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19740 X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:45 PM 6/12/98 -0400, you wrote: >> You do not need to go to anywhere near this much trouble. Read >> up on MHD.... you can build a test set up with a propane torch and >> permanent magnets.... and some wire screen. I know a little about it. That's not the type of MHD generator I'm considering. >I never really considered building one.. if a simple one can be built with a >propane torch, magnets and a wire screen, then I might try to build one! > >can you tell me where this info is? Also.. it'd work with hydrogen instead >of propane, >right? I'm working on a hydrogen generator too.. it'd be nice to find a use >for it! > It might make for a concept demonstration, but it won't light a light bulb :( From vortex-l-request eskimo.com Mon Jun 15 06:15:42 1998 Received: (from smartlst localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA05649; Mon, 15 Jun 1998 06:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 06:13:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <002e01bd9857$e1d2b0a0$a0b4bfa8 default> From: "Frederick J Sparber" To: "DIY_EFI" Cc: "Vortex-L" Subject: MIT SCWO (http://scwo.mit.edu/) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 06:17:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD9825.46317460" 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: <"f_k1f2.0.AO1.stHXr" mx2> Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19741 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_0004_01BD9825.46317460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIT Supercritical Water Oxidation Research -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- As yet, this is an UNOFFICIAL MIT SCWO homepage. Until it becomes more = official, it will only contain links to other SCWO material. -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Energy Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1 Amherst Street, Room E40-455 Cambridge, MA 02139-4307 Telephone: 617.253.3401 FAX: 617.253.8013 MIT SCWO Links a.. Waste Remediation at the Energy Laboratory.=20 b.. Energy Laboratory Director Prof. Jefferson Tester.=20 c.. Corrosion Laboratory Director Prof. Ronald Latanision.=20 d.. A document from the Department of Materials Science and = Engineering's web server containing some abstracts relating to corrosion = research (about half-way down).=20 e.. Ab initio corrosion modelling being investigated by Dr. Diane = Rigos, Prof. Tom=E1s Arias, and Jason Cline.=20 f.. MIT SCWO personnel.=20 g.. An article from JCP on chemical kinetics of supercritical CO2. = Please read their agreement before viewing.=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- Non-MIT SCWO Links This list was just started. Feel free to contribute your URL. Academic = people, this means you too. Let's make the web webby!=20 a.. General Atomics' SCWO home page.=20 b.. The Fraunhofer Institut f=FCr Chemische Technologie (Pfinztal, = Germany) has a continuous SCWO plant for wastewater treatment.=20 c.. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is doing supercritical = fluids research, including supercritical water.=20 d.. Eco-Waste Technologies of Austin, TX. Includes operational = results and photographs of their facilities.=20 e.. Five links for SCWO and supercritical fluids research at = ETH-Z=FCrich.=20 f.. Web page of Daniel Wade, a graduate student at U. of Texas who's = working on SCWO and was cool enough to link to this page.=20 g.. Summit Research Corporation in Santa Fe, NM, supplies products = and services (and software) to developers and users of SCWO and other = hydrothermal processing systems.=20 h.. A 1994 NATO Workshop on destruction of military toxic waste.=20 i.. NIEHS' publications list for Prof. J. Howard=20 j.. LANL's take on SCWO as an option for environmentally acceptable = remediation of energetic materials.=20 k.. US Department of Defense (DoD) ESTCP Project includes SCWO.=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- SCWO-Research Related and Utility Links This section is for stuff like online reference data, web-based = properties calculators, and whatever other neat stuff you can find.=20 a.. CRCT of Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal's collection of web = sites on inorganic chemical thermodynamics.=20 b.. Reference data from NIST.=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- MIT Internal Documents a.. Discussion of temperature measurement.=20 Mail questions, additions, corrections, comments (especially = notification of dead URLs) regarding this web site to: = webmaster scwo.mit.edu.=20 Maintained by J. Cline ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD9825.46317460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIT SCWO
 

MIT Supercritical Water Oxidation Research

As yet, this is an UNOFFICIAL = MIT SCWO=20 homepage. Until it becomes more official, it will only contain links to = other=20 SCWO material.
Energy=20 Laboratory
Massachusetts = Institute of=20 Technology
1 Amherst Street, Room E40-455
Cambridge, MA=20 02139-4307
Telephone: 617.253.3401
FAX: 617.253.8013


MIT SCWO Links

Non-MIT SCWO Links

This list was just started. Feel free to contribute your URL. = Academic=20 people, this means you too. Let's make the web webby!=20

SCWO-Research Related and Utility Links

This section is for = stuff like=20 online reference data, web-based properties calculators, and whatever = other neat=20 stuff you can find.=20
  • CRCT of Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal's collection of = web sites=20 on inorganic chemical thermodynamics.=20
  • Reference data from = NIST.

MIT Internal Documents

  • Discussion of temperature = measurement.


Mail questions, additions, corrections, comments (especially=20 notification of dead URLs) regarding this web site to: webmaster@scwo.mit.edu.=20





Maintained by J. = Cline


------=_NextPart_000_0004_01BD9825.46317460--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 10:07:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01244;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:01:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:01:15 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:46:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: MIT SCWO (http://scwo.mit.edu/)
Resent-Message-ID: <"ROcbD3.0.GJ.QDLXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19742
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 6:17 AM 6/15/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>MIT Supercritical Water Oxidation Research
>
[snip good stuff]


Thanks for including the text in your message (instead of as an attachment)
so I can read it!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 11:37:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA14633;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Schaffer gav.gat.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <3581AAC9.F854814B darknet.net>
References: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:32:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: High power plasma MHD generator for Tesla Coils & lasers
Resent-Message-ID: <"y7xTh1.0.Wa3._ZMXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19743
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Steve writes:

>Anyway, I've been looking for some MHD info on the net, but haven't been able
>to find anything that explains clearly how to build one.. any suggestions?
>I found one on KeelyNet I believe, that's somewhere in my bookmarks.. I'll
>dig that up and read thru it again. Anyone know of any other places where I
>could find construction details about MHD generators?

I came back in the middle of this and don't know what kind of MHD generator
you want. Unless you want just a dinky demo, most MHD generators you can
build in the home will be very inefficient (much, much less than 1 %). The
reason is high electrical resistivity. This is true of electrolyte
solutions (salt solutions, acid solutions, etc.). It is true of any
home-scale plasma (you need lots of power to get plasmas hot enough to
conduct well enough to show stronger MHD effects than resistive effects).

One exception is liquid metals. They conduct well enough to show strong MHD
effects in moderate magnetic fields. Hg is expensive, and you need to use
some care, because its vapor is seriously toxic. Don't let it get hot,
which makes more vapor. It has a rather high vapor pressure with
temperature. Ventilate well. Better, there are some low-melting alloys,
e.g. Wood's metal and the Cerroloy (or Cerralloy or ?) alloy series of
Cerro metals Co. that melt below 50 C and are non toxic. Other companies
probably offer similar low melting alloys.

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 Jun 15 12:14:19 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22834;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:08:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:08:29 -0700
From: Schaffer gav.gat.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <8fd955cb.3581d1f0 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:59:40 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Resent-Message-ID: <"BtxYK2.0.ba5.i4NXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19744
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vince,

I suggest that you make your voltage divider 1000:1 for a couple of
reasons. 1000 is a convenient number. A 1 volt reading on your meter
corresponds to 1 kV on your tube. The 1 volt scale of most cheap DVMs still
offers you 3 digit resolution, which is all you need for now.

To make 1000:1, you can stay with 10 Mohm at the HV end. You need about
10010 ohm at the ground end, if the 10 Mohm were exactly 10,000,000. Of
course, neither resistor can be measured with the requisite accuracy with
cheap digital multimeters. So, yes, trim the low resistance with a trim pot
when you calibrate the divider. To calibrate, apply a voltage that you can
measure well with your existing DMVs (probably 500 V) while you read and
trim with the digital readout you plan to use in the experiment. I strongly
recommend that you read the 500 V (or whatever it is) high voltage with as
many meters as you can get your hands on. Do not rely on one meter alone.
If the meters are in good condition, the spread of the measurements should
be only 1 or 2 percent.

Keep at 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  Mon Jun 15 12:45:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA32166;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:40:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:40:24 -0700
Message-ID: <01BD986B.D06BF2E0 209-113-17-90.insync.net>
From: Tractebel Energy Marketing 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: My Newman's motor "Blueprint" is on the Web....
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:05:28 -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 MAA32142
Resent-Message-ID: <"hVg7h1.0.Us7.cYNXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19745
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hello Mr. Naudin,

	I have a simple question.  I notice there are some wires attached to your device.  Have you been able to get your device to be self-sustaining?  If so, I would like to see your device running without external wires connected.  If not, do you expect it to
 be self-sustaining in the near future?

Allen

-----Original Message-----
From:	JNaudin509 aol.com [SMTP:JNaudin509@aol.com]
Sent:	Sunday, June 14, 1998 5:16 AM
To:	freenrg-l eskimo.com
Cc:	vortex-l eskimo.com; jdecker@keelynet.com
Subject:	My Newman's motor "Blueprint" is on the Web....

Hi All,

I am glad to give you, the complete and detailled diagrams of my Newman's
motor that I have build successfully.

You will find all these informations and some detailled pictures at :

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jlnaudin/html/qmmv11.htm

I hope that this will interest you,

Sincerely,

Jean-Louis Naudin (France)
Email : JNaudin509 aol.com
my Overunity WEB Server : http://members.aol.com/JNaudin509/


Jean-Louis Naudin (France)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 12:55:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01624;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:49:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:49:53 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
Reply-To: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: <3582198E.F45733D0 gorge.net>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"lYECa2.0.IP.XhNXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19746
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Fri, 12 Jun 1998, Tom Miller wrote:

> Frank and Bill:
> 
> Thanks a lot. What spoilsports, ruining a perfectly good argument with 
> objective reality. ;-)

Yeah, I was very aware the whole time that THIS is what skeptics feel when
they are arguing against unconventional discoveries.  Obviously it is easy
to go overboard and believe that everything in everyday physics is 100%
perfectly understood, and there is no room for ANY weird things ANYWHERE.
Sometimes this attitude comes from insecurity.  But sometimes it comes
from overreaction against those who think that physics has taught us
nothing at all.  The real mistake is in thinking it is easy to know just
where to draw the line.

Surface charge on human skin is probably too small to have direct chemical
effects.  However, it does cause through-the-skin electric currents which
would not otherwise exist.  These probably are concentrated on sweat
glands and hair follicles.  It also fills the air with ions, ozone,
nitrides, (and threads of ion wind flowing upwards?), all of which we
would be breathing in.  The chemical environmemt is altered by e-fields. 
I'm not suprised that people respond to this.

> 
> Maybe looking at this site:
> 
> 
> http://www.novacap.com/broch006.htm
> 
> about dipoles in dielectrics,
> will better explain what I am trying to get across.

If people were made of good insulating material, this effect could be
important and e-fields from the environment could extend into our tissues. 
But since we are conductive, we are more like metal objects.  The outer
skin of metal objects acts as a shield, and excludes DC e-fields from the
interior.  Since human skin isn't a perfect conductor, AC fields can
probably penetrate.  But DC fields should be shielded by the atom-thin
arrangement of ions at the top of the dead epidermis.

I would be more suspicious of the little electric currents that the high
voltage coronas cause.  There is probably some abnormal electrochemistry
going on in sweat glands and hair follicles whenever we go outside during
a thunderstorm, or let a VDG machine raise our hair.


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 15 14:16:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16620;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:12:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:12:03 -0700
Message-ID: <35858E35.31B9 interlaced.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:12:21 -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: [Fwd: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads]
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"Jgu1U2.0.b34.YuOXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19747
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Message-ID: <35858E03.70F6 interlaced.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:11:31 -0400
From: "Francis J. Stenger" 
Organization: NASA (Retired)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: William Beaty 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

William Beaty wrote:
>
(snip a bunch of Bill's good-as-always sermon on open-mindedness in
science)

 There is probably some abnormal electrochemistry
> going on in sweat glands and hair follicles whenever we go outside during
> a thunderstorm, or let a VDG machine raise our hair.

Right, Bill, and then there's that excitement I felt when I grabbed the
still-charged high-voltage terminal of that *%&# &_#@$^%_ power supply
I cobbled up to look for air threads...BILL!

Frank (still wired) Stenger



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 16:38:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA04646;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:34:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:34:41 -0700
From: Schaffer gav.gat.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <357FE05E.80FDC739 css.mot.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:35:55 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery
Resent-Message-ID: <"UMhlQ.0.Q81.G-QXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19748
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>03:51 PM ET 06/10/98
>Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery
>
>LONDON (Reuters) - Astronomers and mathematicians have
>solved a mystery that has perplexed scientists for half a
>century -- why the atmosphere of the sun is so much hotter than
>its surface.
>
>Full Story: 

Actually, the full story says nothing more than:
   The researchers used a telescope on a space satellite called
Yohkok to measure, for the first time, how the temperature
varies along the giant loops.
   "The findings matched one model that showed the heat was
uniformly released, probably by a clash of magnetic field lines
causing dozens of explosions that release energy along the loop.
    ...the explosions occur in tiny regions of intense
electric current that heat the atmosphere in the same way as an
electric current in a light bulb or electric fire."

"CLASH of magnetic field lines" means nothing to me. He probably meant to
say RECONNECTION of magnetic field lines. This is a theory that has been
around for a long time, and it is the theory I have favored. We know from
our earthbound fusion energy research plasmas that magnetic reconnection in
a plasma can release a large amount of energy stored in a magnetic field
rapidly as heat into the plasma. Note that BOTH plasma excess magnetic
field energy are necessary ingredients.

The sun's roiling surface, driven by thermal convection from below,
randomly twists the magnetic field that extends up into the solar corona
plasma, which stores excess energy in the magnetic field. Eventually, the
combination of  energy and magnetic geometry reaches the point of
instability with respect to reconnection, and the reconnection proceeds
rapidly from there. This process is going on at many places and on many
length scales at any given time. It deposits energy well into the corona.
The corona is very thick, so it does not cool rapidly to the cooler visible
surface (photosphere) of the sun. This is how the corona gets heated to
high temperature and stays heated.

The new contribution is detailed observations by Yohkok.

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 Jun 15 16:48:53 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA06835;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:43:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:43:42 -0700
Message-ID: <01BD990B.4BE794C0 pc038---brendan>
From: Brendan 
To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" 
Subject: Pulsed Combustion
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:43:57 +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 QAA06786
Resent-Message-ID: <"AgVyA1.0.gg1.j6RXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19749
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vortex

A couple of weeks ago I proposed that sound played a role in the thermal variations that were seen by Scott Little for the Case experiment, specifically by influencing the transport of the thermal eddies to the thermocouple.  I thought that you all may be
 interested in a web site by the CSIRO which shows a cine picture of a Bunsen burner flame undergoing pulsed (ie sound influenced) combustion.

http://www.dbce.csiro.au/ind-serv/brochures/combust/combust.htm

The photograph is located just over half way through the page and does not have a caption.  However, I can vouch that it is sound enhanced combustion as I have seen this phenomenon live (the changes to the flame, not Scott's thermal eddies) in two differe
nt experimental set ups, as well as quite a comprehensive report by a third group.  

Enjoy

Brendan Hall

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 16:55:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29694;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:44:39 -0700
Message-Id: <199806152344.QAA03143 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: ;-)   "Historic" chuckle
Resent-Message-ID: <"Jqz0i.0.tF7.QERXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19750
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>> Before the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, the French, anticipating
>> victory over the English, proposed to cut off the middle finger of
all
>> captured English soldiers.  Without the middle finger, it would be
>> impossible to draw the renowned English longbow and therefore be
>> incapable of fighting in the future.
>>
>> This famous weapon was made of the native English Yew tree, and
>> the act of drawing the longbow was known as "plucking the yew."
>> Much to the bewilderment of the French, the English won a major
>> upset and began mocking the French by waving their middle fingers
>> at the defeated French,saying, "See, we can still
>> pluck yew!  PLUCK YEW!"
>>
>> Over the years, some 'folk etymologies' have grown up around
>> this symbolic gesture.  Since 'pluck yew' is rather difficult
>> to say (like "pleasant mother pheasant plucker", which is who you
>> had to go to for the feathers used on the arrows for the longbow),
>> the difficult consonant cluster at the beginning has gradually
>> changed to a labiodental fricative 'F', and thus the words often
>> used in conjunction with the one-finger-salute are mistakenly
>> thought to have something to do with an intimate encounter.
>>
>>  It is also because of the pheasant feathers on the arrows that
>> the symbolic gesture is known as "giving the bird".
>
>Have a nice day "aye"


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 17:04:08 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA09159;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:59:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:59:14 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:59:04 -0700
Message-Id: <199806152359.QAA06016 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: BS.......; Re: Scientists solve 50-year-old astronomy mystery
Resent-Message-ID: <"JW-LY1.0.vE2.HLRXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19751
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Michael, we went over this a short while ago and I wrote a long email
explaining why nothing is solved, they just swept one mystery under a carpet
of a different name.  ie, what causes the magnetic fields they discovered to
act as they do.  The answer is simple, fusion leads to aether emission and
so what we call empty space is flowing out of the sun. 

I shouldn't care, but vortex readers ought to at least be aware that one of
the members has studied this concept in great detail, and has found that the
common ideas are incorrect beyond reasonable doubt based on dozens of
predicted and subsequently observed, phenomena.  And I have made numerous
other predictions which have yet to be verified, but which I am confident
SOHO and other observations will verify.

For example, O and H ions are heated to the same velocity dispersion.  This
is easy if you are inertially heating them, but it is very hard if you are
magnetically heating them.  the O and H under these conditions are at 100M
and 6M degrees respectively, ie, not in thermal equilibrium.  There is no
reason for the two ions to magically get heated to just the right
temperatures that they are at the same velocity dispersions because the
frequencies of EM energy to do that are very much different for the two
ionic species.  

Worse, you have the same sort of things going on outside of t-tauri stars
where you get jets of atoms accelerated to produce 2 light year long jets
and Herbig Haro objects at their ends.  The problem is, many of the
particles in the jets accelerated to high velocities are neutral, and
magnetic fields cannot accelerate neutral particles!  Equally as bad, many
or most of the particles are cold, not hot.  Hot things accelerate jets, and
then magnetic fields can magically collimate them.  but then you add that
the particles are often neutral and you have a problem explaining it.

For the sun, the problem doesn't end with the coronal heating.  It heads
right out into space as the solar wind continues to accelerate way out past
Jupiter.  Now the particles should be getting really cold and slowing down
out there due to their gaining in gravitational potential energy.  but that
is not what they do, they are accelerating. 

the answer is simple, but no one wants to hear it.  Empty space isn't empty,
and, it is flowing out of our sun due to mass to energy conversions.  ie,
the aether ocean we live in and call a universe has a finite density to it,
and the mass to energy conversions in the core of the sun are releasing
aether from the solitons we call particles due to a structural change to
their wave geometries and a reduced capacity to confine aether in a
localized density gradient we could call a soliton.

Look at any star where the luminosity is varying, and you will find
anomalous accelerations of matter where the accelerations are coupling to
mass, not charge to mass ratio.  No one expects this if you consider GR and
QM to be correct because they think that mass is not conserved.  but in a
wave model of particle physics, the mass of the soliton is the amount of the
medium associated with it.

Ergo, exothermy leads to aether emission, and inertial thrusts directed away
from the region of emission.

Ross Tessien

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 20:35:58 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA17864;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:28:33 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: <"bds-G1.0.wM4.yTUXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19752
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-15 15:12:38 EDT, you write:
> Vince,
>  I suggest that you make your voltage divider 1000:1 for a couple of
>  reasons. 1000 is a convenient number. A 1 volt reading on your meter
>  corresponds to 1 kV on your tube.

Yes Mike, the resistors arrived UPS today (Monday) and some 
preliminary testing shows that you are right on.
 1k on the low end of the divider draws too much current through the 10 Mohm
resistor. It is rated at 10kv 5 watts and got too warm for my liking. I
subsituted a 10k at the low end and it was perfect. The power supply puts out
4 kv open circut.
 I did a quick/dirty measurment at 500 volts and 1kv. The reading
thru the divider was a little high. That, at least, makes it easier as a
trimpot
shunting the low end of the divider will lower the reading to the correct
value. 

>  To make 1000:1, you can stay with 10 Mohm at the HV end. You need >about
10010 ohm at the ground end, if the 10 Mohm were exactly >10,000,000. Of
course, neither resistor can be measured with the requisite >accuracy with
cheap digital multimeters. 

I think my meters ($15) qualify as cheap.  :)...but then even my Fluke 8060
meter is unable to measure 10Mohms. Hmmm, just remembered I do
have access to an Ecos megger, that we use for ground testing. I think
that thing will measure to 100Mohms.  Have to check it out.

> So, yes, trim the low resistance with a trim pot when you calibrate the
>divider. 
> To calibrate, apply a voltage that you can measure well with your 
>existing DMVs (probably 500 V) while you read and trim with the digital
>readout you plan to use in the experiment.

My meters will read 1kv dc max.

> I strongly recommend that you read the 500 V (or whatever it is) high
>voltage with as many meters as you can get your hands on.

Right! I bought four of them.
 
> Do not rely on one meter alone.
>  If the meters are in good condition, the spread of the measurements >should
be only 1 or 2 percent.

The meters are specd' 0.1% accurate

>  Keep at it!
>  Michael J. Schaffer

Thanks for your help. I owe you at least a cuppa coffee if you're ever
out this way....in fact, I owe everybody on Vortex a cup for all the 
assistance given. No problem, just don't all come at the same time. I
don't have that many cups. :)

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 15 21:00:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA12497;
	Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:54:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:54:25 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980615225527.0085e820 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:55:27 -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: <"lkbjQ.0.933.mnUXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19753
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:28 PM 6/15/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:

> 1k on the low end of the divider draws too much current through the 10 Mohm
>resistor. It is rated at 10kv 5 watts and got too warm for my liking. I
>subsituted a 10k at the low end and it was perfect. The power supply puts out
>4 kv open circut.

Whoa, Vince.  Something's fishy.  If you're looking at a 4 kv voltage with
this divider, you should have 1.600 watts dissipated in the 10Mohm R using
the 1k lower R and 1.597 watts with the 10k lower R...i.e. an imperceptible
difference!  Check that 10k R with your ohmmeter.


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 Jun 16 00:11:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA31622;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:05:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 00:05:23 -0700
Message-ID: <35860B96.3AD8 earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 01:07:18 -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: details Ohmori little lily theory 6/17/98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"At9mX1.0.xj7.oaXXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19754
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 17, 1998

Hello all,  The report in May, 1998 Fusion Technology by Ohmori, Mizuno,
and Enyo describes 7 to 30 day runs at 1 to 3 A on 2.5 to 5 cm2 Au
electrodes in 0.5 M Na2CO3 and Na2SO4 H2O electrolyte, from a Pt anode.
producing after a few days up to ~1 mg mostly Au precipitates, and
leaving myriad little lily volcano-like or ear-like foam structures on
scraped (rough) sites on the Au, as large as 20 microns wide and 30
deep, with detected Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and other elements, with
claimed isotopic ratio anomalies.

I am disputing their claim that the precipitates and spots are evidence
of low energy nuclear transmutations, and suggesting a chemical reaction
theory, namely that the most abundant and obvious and reactive chemicals
present, naturally enough, H2 and O2, are recombined at the cathode.
I don't know how much the Au will load with H2.  However, Pt, Pd, Ni,
Os, and Ti will naturally be electrodeposited as concentrations at any
tiny rough spots, and then will both load with H and catalyze the swift
reaction of that H with any tiny O2 bubbles that are also attracted from
the anode to attach to the rough spot.  The bubble and the spot will
heat up quickly, so quickly that there is little time for heat loss by
radiation , conduction, or convection at the Au-H2O interface.  As the
Au heats and softens, the contained H will build up pressure and to
expand it like popcorn, creating a popped blister of frozen foam,
expelling some of the metal, and leaving the impressively ugly little
lily vocanos.  The process would tend to reoccur at the thus even
rougher spot, building up a cluster of lilies of various sizes, as is
shown in Ohmori's dramatic images.

I will calculate the details for a 0.1 cm3 amount of O2.

Au melts at 1063 degrees C, 1336 degrees K. 
The molar specific heat Cm = 26.9 J/mol degC.

For Au, 197 g/mol   5.08X10E-3 mol/g   19.32 g/cm3   9.81X10E-2 mol/cm3

10.2 cm3/mol      To heat from 27 to 1063 deg C, a delta of 1036 deg C,

takes heat (1036 deg C)(26.9 J/mol) = 2.79X10E4 J/mol, and to melt takes

1.27X10E4 J/mol, known as the molar heat of fusion.  These conveniently 

add up to 4.06X10E4 J/mol, or 40.6 KJ/mol to heat and melt the Au.  That 

certainly sounds like a lot!

Now, we get the moles of O2 in the 0.1 cm3 O2:

n = PV/RT = (1 atm X 10-4 L)/(8.2X10E-2 atm L/degK mol)X(300 deg K) =

4.065X10E-6  mol O2.  That's not very much.

We know that one mole O2 reacts with 2 moles H2, and may as well assume
with 50% loading that the H2 is held within 4 moles of Au.

The reaction is 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) ->  2H2O (g), and the enthalpy is

2 X 241.8 KJ/mol = 483.6 KJ/mol.

So the enthalpy released is

Ec = (4.065X10E-6 mol)X(483.6 KJ/mol) = 1.97X10E-3 KJ = 1.97 J.

Now, 2 J is the energy from 1 A at 1 V for 2 sec.  Note: this is the 

range that heats W to incandescence in a flashlight.

The moles of Au heated and melted by this heat are

Nm = (1.97X10E-3 KJ)/(40.6 KJ/mol) = 4.85X10E-5 mol

and the volume of Au melted is

Vm = (4.85X10E-5 mol)X(10.2 cm3/mol) = 4.95X10E-4 cm3, which, assuming
 
for convenience a cube, has a width .791 mm, and 

mass Mm = (4.85X10E-5 mol)X(197 g/mol) = 9.56 mg, or ten times the

maximum precipitates found by Ohmori after 30 days of electrolysis at up

to 3 A and a few volts, an input energy for 2.592X10E6 sec, if at 5 V

and 3 A, of 38,880,000 J.  So the 2 J to create 10 mg of melted Au is a

most minute fraction of the available input energy.

Now, the results are the same if we have one 0.1 cm3 O2 bubble, or a 
million bubbles of size 10E-7 cm3, spread out randomly over the 30 day 
run, about 2-3 event/sec,  creating the same total of 10 mg melted Au.  
These million bubbles would as little cubes have widths .004641 cm = 
46.4 micron, about the right size for our little lilies.  Each of these 
events would have an average energy of 2X10E-6 J.  It should be possible 
to detect IR, visible, and UV radiation, and acoustic signals, about 2-3 
event/sec.  Another test would be to use an anode which does not 
contribute Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and in contrast, to use an anode 
enriched in these metals.  Also, a barrier could be used to prevent O2 
bubbles from reaching the cathode from the anode, and in contrast,

positioning the anode to maximize O2 bubble transfer.

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 Jun 16 03:13:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA17551;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <003301bd990d$e1797560$98b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "DIY_EFI" ,
        "Vortex-L" 
Cc: "George" , , 
Subject: Carbonated Water Demineralization (De-ashing) of Biomass?
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 04:01:42 -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: <"jKRWr.0.8I4.uJaXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19755
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Water charged with CO2 at 40 to 80 psi should facilitate ion exchange with
the ions locked up in biomass.

At the higher pressures:
CO2 + H2O <---> H+ +HCO3 or 2 H+ + CO3= thus
effecting cation and anion exchange with the
ions tied up in the biomass.

This should be effective in lowering the ash content in manures with room
temperature water.

This "soda pop" approach should be particularly
effective with chicken manure, yielding a fowl
tasting tonic.

Regards,    Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 07:18:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA26554;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 07:16:47 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 07:16:47 -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: <35867D16.41848DA9 css.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:11:34 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Discussion Group - Vortex 
Subject: Device brings back dying heart cells
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"VlXB31.0.pU6.DvdXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19756
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

A last-ditch effort to save patients with heart failure by putting them on a
machine not only kept them alive but helped their hearts to recover,
researchers reported Monday. It was the first time any therapy had been shown
to improve a damaged heart cell's function, and could open a door to treating
heart failure, the researchers said. The machine, known as a left ventricular
assist device, is used to keep patients alive while they wait for a heart
transplant. Dr. Kenneth Margulies and colleagues at Temple University Cardiac
Transplant Center in Philadelphia found the device did more than just keep the
patients alive. It made their heart cells work better. 

Full Story 


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 08:13:02 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA07716;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"tY_bq2.0.Fu1.cfeXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19757
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 15 Jun 1998, Francis J. Stenger wrote:

> Right, Bill, and then there's that excitement I felt when I grabbed the
> still-charged high-voltage terminal of that *%&# &_#@$^%_ power supply
> I cobbled up to look for air threads...BILL!
> 
> Frank (still wired) Stenger

The extra energy lets us keep working into the wee hours.

Or should I sow paranoia by claming that air-threads don't exist, the
whole thing was an attempt to get people to hold their hand close to a wet
plate charged to 10KV!  :) 


I bought more dry ice finally.  By gluing a 1cm carbon fiber to the bent
edge of a floating Al-foil "island", I was able to see an air-thread.  It
entrained the mist into a vertical jet.  Looked like cigarette smoke,
complete with a turbulent region at the top of the laminar jet.  I could
see a dark line at the core of the white mist, looked to be a fraction of
a mm in diameter. 

The torn edge of a post-it note created a row of parallel air-threads
which duplicated the details of the paper edge as a pattern in the mist!
Move and rotate the paper, and the "scar" in the mist would follow along
instantly.  Just now I realised that I should have tried BENDING the
paper.  Form it into a triangle, and it should punch a triangular slot in
the mist.  Gotta try writing my name in the mist via shapes made of torn
paper on edge.

Latest brainstorm:  Create a gigantic air-thread, punch a hole in the
stratus clouds (or possibly carve a slot as the clouds drift along.)  I
only need to supply positive air, the earths sky-voltage will pull it
aloft like warm air rushing up a heated chimney.  Will rain pour forth
from the spot where the ion stream mixes with the suspended mist droplets? 
If so, then project a "wall" of air-threads which sweep along the clouds. 
Downwind of the "wall" will be sunshine...    :)
(What 'smiley' symbol denotes maniacal mad scientist laughter?)


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 16 08:38:51 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA30933;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:34:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:34:18 -0700
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:18:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"FRJDQ2.0.AZ7.w1fXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19758
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A



	Bill,

	MAD scientists do NOT laugh ... they sputter and curse....
	Crazy scientists sometimes laugh ....

	I love this air thread thing.... please make a section on your 
page with collected information....   

			Thanks,

					JHS

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 08:40:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA31208;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:34:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:34:45 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:02:53 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: [OFF TOPIC] World Cup, US vs Iran!!!
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"drQY53.0.Xd7.L2fXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19759
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Er, Vo,

You may not like football (soccer) or even understand it, but don't miss
US vs Iran (IIII-ran that it) Jun 21st 19:00 GMT!!! If you can get BBC 1,
it'll be there, or try any internation sports channel provider.

Er, football, war in disguise? The English (Ingerrland) still go on about
Agincourt(1400 and something!!!), Waterloo(1800 and something!!!), 1918,
'45, '66.

USA should field an all womens team in shorts and tight T-shirts.

In very, very bad taste,
Remi.
(No, really, football, it's a yob's game)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 11:35:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24074;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:30:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:30:55 -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: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:29:46 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] World Cup, US vs Iran!!!
Resent-Message-ID: <"pk9iG1.0.4u5.UdhXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19760
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Remi -

On our TV's here were some nice shots of French people being beaten up in
the streets after the tournament, and their English tormenters being
offered the highest honor a hosting country can give to a football fan:
deportation due to unseemly behavior.

Must have been  _very_ good day in England.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 11:46:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA23168;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:42:43 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:42:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 14:44:01 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: billb eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <199806070416.XAA08012 mirage.skypoint.com>
References: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"zENpU2.0.kf5.SohXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19761
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 11:16 PM 6/6/98 -0500, John Logajan wrote:

>I don't even know why those spherical "neon" globes seem to produce
>narrow channels from the central electrode to the glass globe.

   Try this (mental if you wish) experiment.  Run two strands of magnet
wire between wooden posts so that the strands are about 1/2 inch apart.
Run return leads at a foot or more distance so that the current flow
through the strands of magnet wire is in the same direction.  Now run a DC
current through the wires.

   They are attracted to each other, and if the current is high enough,
they will touch.  (Hint: Use an electrolytic capacitor if you try this for
real.) 

   What happened?  The magnetic fields around the two strands are at 90
degrees to the flow of the current, and in the region between the wires,
the fields attract.  Outside the two wires, the field compresses them
together.  When building large magnets, this self-compressing field is a
serious problem--I have literally seen 4" by 1/2" busbars twisted out of
shape by it (at the National Magnet Lab).

   Okay, back to your plasma ball.  Any two electrons moving through the
plasma on parallel paths will be attracted to each other, due to the
magnetic field.  They will repel each other due to electric charge, but the
charge is constant, and the magnetic attraction is proportional to the
speed/voltage.  Of course, in a plasma, the current is also carried by
positive ions, so you get an electrically neutral thread of charged
particles held together by the self generated magnetic field.

                                        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 Jun 16 12:06:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA29077;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:59:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:59:03 -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: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 08:22:20 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"ulMc72.0.867.s1iXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19762
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Bill -

   >  Latest brainstorm:  Create a gigantic
   >  air-thread, punch a hole in the stratus clouds [...]

Can you say "Cloud Buster"? Maybe there is something to the recipe of using
clear running water as 'ground'.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 13:14:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11186;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:07:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:07:14 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 13:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"cMftP2.0.gk2.n1jXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19763
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, John Schnurer wrote:

> 	Bill,
> 
> 	MAD scientists do NOT laugh ... they sputter and curse....
> 	Crazy scientists sometimes laugh ....
> 
> 	I love this air thread thing.... please make a section on your 
> page with collected information....   

See: http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/unusual/airthred.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  Tue Jun 16 14:48:53 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA29659;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 14:43:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 14:43:59 -0700
From: DColling vines.gems.gov.bc.ca
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 14:21:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
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: <"RA5fH2.0.DF7.USkXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19764
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Thanks for a very clear explanation!  But the explanation raises the a new
question:  why don't all the threads in the ball collapse into one big one?
---------- Original Text ----------

From: "Robert I. Eachus" , on 6/16/98 4:42 AM:

At 11:16 PM 6/6/98 -0500, John Logajan wrote:

>I don't even know why those spherical "neon" globes seem to produce
>narrow channels from the central electrode to the glass globe.

   Try this (mental if you wish) experiment.  Run two strands of magnet
wire between wooden posts so that the strands are about 1/2 inch apart.
Run return leads at a foot or more distance so that the current flow
through the strands of magnet wire is in the same direction.  Now run a DC
current through the wires.

   They are attracted to each other, and if the current is high enough,
they will touch.  (Hint: Use an electrolytic capacitor if you try this for
real.) 

   What happened?  The magnetic fields around the two strands are at 90
degrees to the flow of the current, and in the region between the wires,
the fields attract.  Outside the two wires, the field compresses them
together.  When building large magnets, this self-compressing field is a
serious problem--I have literally seen 4" by 1/2" busbars twisted out of
shape by it (at the National Magnet Lab).

   Okay, back to your plasma ball.  Any two electrons moving through the
plasma on parallel paths will be attracted to each other, due to the
magnetic field.  They will repel each other due to electric charge, but the
charge is constant, and the magnetic attraction is proportional to the
speed/voltage.  Of course, in a plasma, the current is also carried by
positive ions, so you get an electrically neutral thread of charged
particles held together by the self generated magnetic field.

                                        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 Jun 16 16:24:17 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA25175;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <006901bd997c$afe72f00$8c8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Subject: Unusual Phenomena (http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:15:23 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0066_01BD994A.65439740"
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: <"FSdqM.0.H96.uslXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19765
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_0066_01BD994A.65439740
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

FBI Freedom of Information Act Released Files on UFOs,Cattle
mutilations,Roswell etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm

------=_NextPart_000_0066_01BD994A.65439740
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Unusual Phenomena.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Unusual Phenomena.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm
Modified=C0F664377C99BD0124

------=_NextPart_000_0066_01BD994A.65439740--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 20:52:28 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA10138;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 20:46:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 20:46:03 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 03:45:53 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358b3b4a.9312635 mail-hub>
References:  <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0@spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"VJnci2.0.KU2.wlpXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19766
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 14:44:01 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
[snip]
>   Okay, back to your plasma ball.  Any two electrons moving through the
>plasma on parallel paths will be attracted to each other, due to the
>magnetic field.  They will repel each other due to electric charge, but the
>charge is constant, and the magnetic attraction is proportional to the
>speed/voltage.  Of course, in a plasma, the current is also carried by
>positive ions, so you get an electrically neutral thread of charged
>particles held together by the self generated magnetic field.
[snip]
I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
them). What is the force keeping them together?


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 21:08:30 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA28245;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Logajan 
Message-Id: <199806170402.XAA22933 mirage.skypoint.com>
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: <358b3b4a.9312635 mail-hub> from Robin van Spaandonk at "Jun 17, 98 03:45:53 am"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:02:54 -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: <"eAS-q1.0.Fv6.r1qXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19767
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robin van Spaandonk  wrote:
> I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
> two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
> them). What is the force keeping them together?

Any two electrons "moving together" must be moving in reference to some
third object, otherwise their velocity would not be apparent.  Therefore
any alteration of their mutual electrostatic repulsion must be due
to interaction with the objects against which they reference their
mutual motion.

-- 
 - 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  Tue Jun 16 21:13:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA12874;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:05:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:05:37 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <6cccee5b.35873fd7 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:02:30 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: <"KgNG-.0.093.G2qXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19768
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 Another small step. 
 I built the voltage divider for measuring tube voltage. Miracle of miracles,
it was exactly correct with just the two resistors, a 10 megohm 5 watt
rated for 10 kV at the high end and a 10 kohm 2 watt at the low end.
 I calibrated it at 1000 volts with a Fluke 8060 digital meter that was 
calibrated to ISO 9001 standards a month ago.
 
 The K Type bead thermocouple was brand new and for this run was
strapped directly to the tube wall for a more accurate reading.
 This accounts for the higher temperature observed.  
 In all the previous runs the thermocouple was cemented into 
either a bronze or carbon shoe that was tied to the tube wall. 
 I was not satisfied with this as after each run at high temperature the
thermocouple cement was loose indicating probable lousy 
thermal coupling between the thermocouple and the shoe. 
 So now the bead is in direct tube wall contact and strapped using
ss wire and woven fiberglass tubing, the tubing used to insulate the 
thermocouple wire from the ss mounting wire. Works fine, much
simpler and more accurate temperature reading.

 Recalling some numbers from a couple of days ago when I ran a joule
heater in the tube;   149.8 watts gave 627.7 C 

 Tonights run, H2 with K at fill pressure of 6.0 in Hg;  751.5 C +/- 0.1 C,
2030 volts DC measured across the tube, 45.6 milliamps tube current.
 That works out to 92.568 watts folks.

 Now if ~150 watts gets me ~628 C joule heater and ~93 watts get me
~751 C is this not an indication that there may be some excess heat
being produced?

 When I ran the joule heater (resistor wound of ss wire) I was careful
to size the resistor to the length of the electrode spacing in the
reactor tube. Also the thermocouple was mounted to the tube exactly
alike for both of these runs.

Meters are specd' at +/- .1%. Resistors are all 1%

More runs planned to confirm or deny this evenings readings.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada   

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 21:18:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA13165;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:08:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:08:06 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:02:22 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: <"QRseG1.0.dD3.c4qXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19769
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-16 00:02:03 EDT, you write:

> Whoa, Vince.  Something's fishy.  If you're looking at a 4 kv voltage with
>  this divider, you should have 1.600 watts dissipated in the 10Mohm R 
> using the 1k lower R and 1.597 watts with the 10k lower R...i.e. an 
> imperceptible difference!  Check that 10k R with your ohmmeter.
>  Scott Little 
>  EarthTech International

Fishy indeed Scott! More like 2 day laying in the sun fishy....that low R
was _100_ ohms, not 1000.  Finger check on the keyboard. Sorry
for not proofreading my post.

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 21:37:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA04828;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980616233033.008583c0 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:30:33 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Scott Little 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
In-Reply-To: <6cccee5b.35873fd7 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"pp3r83.0.JB1.sQqXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19770
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:02 AM 6/17/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:

> Now if ~150 watts gets me ~628 C joule heater and ~93 watts get me
>~751 C is this not an indication that there may be some excess heat
>being produced?

That's putting it mildly, Vince.  Assuming your room is 25C, you're seeing
almost a factor of 2 "gain" (1.942 to be exact)!!!!!!!!

Either;

1. You've got real excess heat...and lots of it.

or

2. Something is wrong with your measurements in a pretty big way.

While I hope that #1 is the case, my experience tells me that #2 is the
most likely.  I suggest you start the inquisition by simply repeating both
tests...to see if the results are substantially similar.


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 Jun 16 21:47:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA08150;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:45:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:45:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980616234323.0086c6e0 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:43:23 -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: <"txhiT.0.5_1.IdqXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19771
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:02 AM 6/17/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:
>Fishy indeed Scott! More like 2 day laying in the sun fishy....that low R
>was _100_ ohms, not 1000.  Finger check on the keyboard. Sorry
>for not proofreading my post.

Well, that still doesn't do it.  Calculated power dissipation in the 10 Meg
R with a 100 ohm lower R is 1.599997 watts.  With the 10k lower R, it
decreases imperceptibly to 1.5968 watts...a 0.2% difference.  You should
not be able to tell the difference in "hotness" of the 10 Meg R when
switching between 100 and 10000 ohms for the lower R.  



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 Jun 16 22:09:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA12918;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 22:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 22:06:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <263d1c59.35874cdd aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 00:58:03 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: <"Ihhu71.0.h93.bxqXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19772
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 00:34:48 EDT, you write:

>>Vince wrote:............ some excess heat being produced?
>     
>  That's putting it mildly, Vince.  Assuming your room is 25C, you're seeing
>  almost a factor of 2 "gain" (1.942 to be exact)!!!!!!!!
>  
>  Either;
>  
>  1. You've got real excess heat...and lots of it.
>  or
>  2. Something is wrong with your measurements in a pretty big way.
>  
>  While I hope that #1 is the case, my experience tells me that #2 is the
>  most likely.  I suggest you start the inquisition by simply repeating both
>  tests...to see if the results are substantially similar.
>  Scott Little 
>  EarthTech International

Yes Scott, I am going into this with the assumption that I am doing 
something wrong and to try to find it. 
Nichrome wire for the joule heater for a start. The ss wire burned open
after 10 minutes at 627.4 C. Need better metering for the heater too on
the current side. Voltage was right on....I used two meters and they 
agreed to within 1% but I only had one shunt fot the current. 
The K will remain in the tube under vacuum and I will rerun with another
new thermocouple and then again with the old one tomorrow night.
Thanks for your support.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 16 22:29:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA17831;
	Tue, 16 Jun 1998 22:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 22:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 05:24:36 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358c51a0.15031782 mail-hub>
References: <199806170402.XAA22933 mirage.skypoint.com>
In-Reply-To: <199806170402.XAA22933 mirage.skypoint.com>
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: <"Kevx73.0.OM4.bErXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19773
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:02:54 -0500 (CDT), John Logajan wrote:

>Robin van Spaandonk  wrote:
>> I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
>> two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
>> them). What is the force keeping them together?
>
>Any two electrons "moving together" must be moving in reference to some
>third object, otherwise their velocity would not be apparent.  Therefore
>any alteration of their mutual electrostatic repulsion must be due
>to interaction with the objects against which they reference their
>mutual motion.
Ok, say they move relative to a neutral object (i.e. one composed of
an equal number of + and _ pairs - say a piece of wood). What is the
nature of the force exerted on them by this neutral object?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 01:08:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA12004;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:05:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35876018.4D825614 gorge.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:20:08 -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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
References: <199806161418.HAA27074 mx2.eskimo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"LTwi72.0.Sx2.QZtXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19774
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

BillB:
> Yeah, I was very aware the whole time that THIS is what skeptics feel when
> they are arguing against unconventional discoveries.

Due to my inability to communicate, this discussion has gotten 
completely away from what I was trying to say.

If anyone wants to work together to attempt to discover how air threads,
magnets, electricity, maybe even gravity work,
I would be glad to share by private e-mail. 

I have nothing to sell.

I have nothing to prove.

I will not waste bandwith trying to get people interested.

Thank you for your patience. 

Tom Miller

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 02:15:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA08946;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 02:11:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 02:11:20 -0700
Message-Id: <358785CE.E9ECB5C5 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:01:02 +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: Unusual Phenomena (http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm)
References: <006901bd997c$afe72f00$8c8f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"YSnk-.0.iB2.tWuXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19775
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> 
> FBI Freedom of Information Act Released Files on UFOs,Cattle
> mutilations,Roswell etc.
> 
> http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm
> 


A significant conclusion at "http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo/ufo16.pdf" at its last page.

This file is 7MB long but acrobat reader can jump to the last page (p.169), and could be read instantly.

Frederick thanks lot for the announcement.

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 03:16:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA11447;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 03:12:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 03:12:37 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:12:30 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] World Cup, US vs Iran!!!
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"j0xTp2.0.no2.LQvXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19776
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote:

> Must have been  _very_ good day in England.
> 
A disgrace.

It's just a game.

I dip in and out of vortex. We're building a UK network, certainly around
London area. Watchout, the Brits are comming!
Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 06:45:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA28323;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 06:40:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 06:40:19 -0700
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:33:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: NiCr heater...
In-Reply-To: <263d1c59.35874cdd aol.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"mD5R4.0.Tw6.2TyXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19777
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Dear Vince...

	What atmosphere are you 'burning' the NiCr in?  I suggest either 
inter, ie argon, or N... then it should not burn through.
	Does the heater extend the length of the tube... emulating the 
plasma... or similar?

	I think you are getting more heat... the error, otherwise... is 
too big, to me anyway... I do not think you are a dummy.   Call in an 
friend not close to the work, show she or he the set up and explain.  I 
often do this, especially with someone not in the field, helps a lot, 
they see things I do not.

			Great luck,


					J




On Wed, 17 Jun 1998 VCockeram aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-06-17 00:34:48 EDT, you write:
> 
> >>Vince wrote:............ some excess heat being produced?
> >     
> >  That's putting it mildly, Vince.  Assuming your room is 25C, you're seeing
> >  almost a factor of 2 "gain" (1.942 to be exact)!!!!!!!!
> >  
> >  Either;
> >  
> >  1. You've got real excess heat...and lots of it.
> >  or
> >  2. Something is wrong with your measurements in a pretty big way.
> >  
> >  While I hope that #1 is the case, my experience tells me that #2 is the
> >  most likely.  I suggest you start the inquisition by simply repeating both
> >  tests...to see if the results are substantially similar.
> >  Scott Little 
> >  EarthTech International
> 
> Yes Scott, I am going into this with the assumption that I am doing 
> something wrong and to try to find it. 
> Nichrome wire for the joule heater for a start. The ss wire burned open
> after 10 minutes at 627.4 C. Need better metering for the heater too on
> the current side. Voltage was right on....I used two meters and they 
> agreed to within 1% but I only had one shunt fot the current. 
> The K will remain in the tube under vacuum and I will rerun with another
> new thermocouple and then again with the old one tomorrow night.
> Thanks for your support.
> 
> Regards,
> Vince Cockeram
> Las Vegas Nevada
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 07:10:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA06971;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:07:23 -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: <3587CD10.C4D9F2F7 css.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:05:05 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Unusual Phenomena (http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm)
References: <006901bd997c$afe72f00$8c8f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"SB00a3.0.ni1.NsyXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19778
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> FBI Freedom of Information Act Released Files on UFOs,Cattle
> mutilations,Roswell etc.
> http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm


...and lots of other neat stuff too :

NIKOLA TESLA - 252 pages : 
General information about the electrical inventor and inquiries from members of
the public about
what federal agency seized his papers after his death. As of 1943, the papers
were retained by
the Alien Property Custodian. 

Alphabetical listing of everything posted at this site :


BTW, big brother DOES keep track who accesses goverment information sites.  If
this makes you nervous go check out :  

"Many people use the Internet under the illusion that their actions are private
and anonymous. Unfortunately, it isn't so. Every time you visit a site, you
leave a calling card that reveals where you come from, what kind of computer
you have, and other details about your identity and viewing habits. Most sites
keep logs of all your visits. In many cases, this keeping of records may
violate your right to privacy." 

See what information you're revealing :  

8^)


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 07:17:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA08251;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:14:10 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:14:10 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 22:11:05 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980617221435.2cbf18a0 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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"F5Bws3.0.q02.lyyXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19779
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robert I. Eachus posted the following (edited for brevity) at 14:44
1998.06.16 -0400:
>At 11:16 PM 6/6/98 -0500, John Logajan wrote:
>
>>I don't even know why those spherical "neon" globes seem to produce
>>narrow channels from the central electrode to the glass globe.
>
>   Try this (mental if you wish) experiment.  Run two strands of magnet
>wire between wooden posts so that the strands are about 1/2 inch apart.
>Run return leads at a foot or more distance so that the current flow
>through the strands of magnet wire is in the same direction.  Now run a DC
>current through the wires.
>
>   They are attracted to each other, and if the current is high enough,
>they will touch.  (Hint: Use an electrolytic capacitor if you try this for
>real.) 
>
>   What happened?  The magnetic fields around the two strands are at 90
>degrees to the flow of the current, and in the region between the wires,
>the fields attract.  Outside the two wires, the field compresses them
>together.  When building large magnets, this self-compressing field is a
>serious problem--I have literally seen 4" by 1/2" busbars twisted out of
>shape by it (at the National Magnet Lab).
>
>   Okay, back to your plasma ball.  Any two electrons moving through the
>plasma on parallel paths will be attracted to each other, due to the
>magnetic field.  They will repel each other due to electric charge, but the
>charge is constant, and the magnetic attraction is proportional to the
>speed/voltage.  Of course, in a plasma, the current is also carried by
>positive ions, so you get an electrically neutral thread of charged
>particles held together by the self generated magnetic field.
>
>                                        Robert I. Eachus
>

I got a mental block on this.

If parallel magnets repel each other
 how the bloody hell does it happen that
  two electrons generate parallel mag fields that 
   attract each other ?

The only way I can speculate this is if
 the two electrons are serial monogamists
  creating and sharing the same mag field -
   albeit separated by some amount of time.

Help !

confused, as usual.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 07:38:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA13755;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:35:06 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:35:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <8d32bb2.3587d15c aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:23:23 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: <"_Rpd83.0.qM3.KGzXr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19780
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 00:44:37 EDT, you write:
> Well, that still doesn't do it.  Calculated power dissipation in the 10 Meg
>  R with a 100 ohm lower R is 1.599997 watts.  With the 10k lower R, it
>  decreases imperceptibly to 1.5968 watts...a 0.2% difference.  You should
>  not be able to tell the difference in "hotness" of the 10 Meg R when
>  switching between 100 and 10000 ohms for the lower R.  
>  Scott Little 
>  EarthTech Interna

Thats the problem with "subjective science".  All I know is it "seemed"
to get to hot too fast with the 100 ohm and "seemed about right" with
the 10kohm. 
I will however try a second 10megohm/10kohm divider set (I bought 3
of the 10 megohm resistors, 9 bucks each!) tonight.

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 07:43:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA07116;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:37:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 07:37:42 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:33:51 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: NiCr heater...
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62
Resent-Message-ID: <"Orv3A.0.3l1.rIzXr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19781
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From:	herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer)

In a message dated 98-06-17 09:43:50 EDT, you write:
>  	Dear Vince...
>  
>  	What atmosphere are you 'burning' the NiCr in?

Hydrogen at the same fill pressure I use for the glow discharge.
I could use Argon, it's on site.

>  I suggest either  inter, ie argon, or N... then it should not burn through.
>  	Does the heater extend the length of the tube... emulating the 
>  plasma... or similar?

Heater length was the exact length of the glow tube plasma (2 inches)
which is the gap between the upper and lower electrodes. 
>  
>  	I think you are getting more heat... the error, otherwise... is 
>  too big, to me anyway... I do not think you are a dummy.   Call in an 
>  friend not close to the work, show she or he the set up and explain.

Good suggestion, will try that.

>  I often do this, especially with someone not in the field, helps a lot, 
>  they see things I do not.
>  
>  			Great luck,
  
>  					J

Thanks,
Vince
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 08:39:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA21029;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 08:31:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 08:31:09 -0700
From: "R. Wormus" 
Reply-To: rwormus lock-load.com
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:05:16 -0700
Message-ID: 
In-Reply-To: <6cccee5b.35873fd7 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: <"D6Bw4.0.N85.y4-Xr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19782
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 16-Jun-98, VCockeram aol.com wrote:

> Now if ~150 watts gets me ~628 C joule heater and ~93 watts get me
>~751 C is this not an indication that there may be some excess heat
>being produced?

> When I ran the joule heater (resistor wound of ss wire) I was careful
>to size the resistor to the length of the electrode spacing in the
>reactor tube. Also the thermocouple was mounted to the tube exactly
>alike for both of these runs.

>Meters are specd' at +/- .1%. Resistors are all 1%

>More runs planned to confirm or deny this evenings readings.


Vince,
Great work!  Very interesting results.  I still think a run substituting HE for
the H2 would be instructive as to what effect the K alone has on the temp. 
Good luck.

___Ron

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 09:28:02 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA01186;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:19:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:19:39 -0700
Message-ID: <19980617162121.24422.rocketmail send1c.yahoomail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:21:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anton Rager 
Subject: Re: Unusual Phenomena (http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"hgvCf1.0.RI.Qo-Xr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19783
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


If big brother is really curious, they will find what sites and
documents you visit anyway.  It is rumored that the NSA/CIA have the
ability to monitor internet traffic via the major routers on the
internet backbone.  Anonymizers can't prevent this. You've got
establish some sort of link to the anonymizer for it to proxy your
reqeusts. The best you can do [if in the US -- pesky export laws and
encryption will limit options for others] is find an anonymizer that
will allow >64 key length encrypted tunnels for you, and then browse
from there....I personally like 128bit key lengths.  Still no
garurantees......NSA has some powerfull stuff.....who knows...they
probably already have Quantum Computers, and can break any size keys
in near real-time.  

This email probably trigger some sort of key-word based alarm, and our
friends in black will be waiting for me this everning ;|


Anton Rager
Network Engineer
a_rager yahoo.com

---John Steck  wrote:

> 
> BTW, big brother DOES keep track who accesses goverment information
sites.  If
> this makes you nervous go check out :  
> 
> "Many people use the Internet under the illusion that their actions
are private
> and anonymous. Unfortunately, it isn't so. Every time you visit a
site, you
> leave a calling card that reveals where you come from, what kind of
computer
> you have, and other details about your identity and viewing habits.
Most sites
> keep logs of all your visits. In many cases, this keeping of records
may
> violate your right to privacy." 
> 
> 
> John E. Steck
> --------------------------------o]{:
>   Senior Mechanical Engineer
>   Rapid Tooling Applications
>   Motorola CSS, Libertyville
> 
> 

==
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 Jun 17 09:44:53 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA09708;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3587CD6F.4840 interlaced.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:06:39 -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: <263d1c59.35874cdd aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"82nBS3.0.UN2.-4_Xr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19784
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

VCockeram aol.com wrote:
> 

> Nichrome wire for the joule heater for a start. The ss wire burned open
> after 10 minutes at 627.4 C. Need better metering for the heater too on
> the current side. 

Vince, these results are getting really interesting!  But, heat
transfer being the complicated thing it is, I wish you could make some
"null" runs with just H2 in the tube.  The Joule heaters are a start,
but it would be nice to see the heat produced by a discharge in both
cases (i.e., the K case and the non-K case).  If that still shows
excess, then only a good calorimeter will tell the tale!

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 10:10:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA16193;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:05:42 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:05:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Schaffer gav.gat.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <6cccee5b.35873fd7 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:29:40 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Resent-Message-ID: <"9vntZ1.0.sy3.UT_Xr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19785
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vince writes:

> Now if ~150 watts gets me ~628 C joule heater and ~93 watts get me
>~751 C is this not an indication that there may be some excess heat
>being produced?

This looks interesting on the surface of it, and I will join others on
Vortex to help Vince with it.  (My participation is being limited by an
unusually severe lack of time.)

I do have a big concern that right now Vince's setup is neither designed to
do calorimetry, nor does it behave as a calorimeter.  He wrote

> Recalling some numbers from a couple of days ago when I ran a joule
>heater in the tube;   149.8 watts gave 627.7 C

But also remember how non linear Vince's relation between temperature and
heater power is.  At low powers he gets a much larger ratio of temperature
per watt.  This means that his temperature is not related just to heat
flowing across a fixed thermal impedance.  Therefore, there are at least
two heat transport mechansims at work, perhaps more.  Since there is a big
differnece in the primary mechanisms by which the discharge and the
calibration resistor liberate heat, their respective heats might flow out
of the tube by different means (e.g. thermal conduction, visible light, IR,
UV).  Also, there is no guarentee that the thermocouple arrangement
intercepts each thermal component equally.

Fortunately, Vince's experiment is compact, and it will be rather easy to
surround it with a flow calorimeter in the form of a water cooled cylinder.
It might take the form of a length of Cu pipe, large enough to enclose the
experiment, with soft Cu tubing helical soldered to it to carry the water.
The outside should be wrapped with thermal insulation and the ends plugged
with same.  A few small view windows are permitted.  The water flow system
can be made cheaply by a variation of Carlos Henry Castano's method.  You
can put a water "source" tank at a small height above the experiment and
let the water flow through to a catch tank below.  Then pump the water back
up to the source tank.  As long as the height in the source tank does not
vary much, and the water temperature (viscosity, and to a lesser extent,
density, vary with temperature) does not vary much, the water flow rate
will not vary much, either.  This ought to be the case as long as the pump
can keep up with the flow and keep the catch tank nearly empty at all
times.  The calorimeter is calibrated by joule heating (resistor).
Calibration can be checked by measuring flow, measuring the time to fill a
known calibrated catch volume.  If the flow calorimeter is doing its job,
it should record all the heat liberated within its interior, regardless of
where and how it is produced.

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 Jun 17 10:32:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20981;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980617121720.00d735c4 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:17:20 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Scott Little 
Subject: Re: NiCr heater...
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"DDgm53.0.k75.yn_Xr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19786
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:33 6/17/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:

>>  	What atmosphere are you 'burning' the NiCr in?
>
>Hydrogen at the same fill pressure I use for the glow discharge.
>I could use Argon, it's on site.

You probably need to stay with H mainly because that's what's in the tube
when you're running K, right?  If so, you don't want to change to Ar...it
is 10 times less thermally conductive than 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  Wed Jun 17 10:58:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA27057;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:42:58 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806171742.MAA25556 dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Fwd: Potapov's main manufacturing line
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
To: little eden.com
To: jlogajan skypoint.com
To: RMCarrell aol.com
To: mica world.std.com
To: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil
To: britz kemi.aau.dk
To: jaeger ENECO-USA.com
To: tohmori cat.hokudai.ac.jp
To: mizunohune.hokudai.ac.jp ix.netcom.com
To: Puthoff aol.com
To: 72240.1256 compuserve.com
Cc: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro
Cc: aki ix.netcom.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"g05Ob.0.gc6.y70Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19787
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 17, 1998

To Vortex and some individuals that have dealt with vortex experiments 
and other o/u devices:

Dr. Yuri Potapov of Moldova is alive, well, and expanding. In a latest 
update from Dr. Peter Glueck, Dr. Potapov has shown himself to have 
left well behind the initial difficult period of his developing 
manufacturing period. 
Dr. Glueck has personally met with Dr. Potapov again and received the 
latest information of his invention and enterprise. He is now in the 
midst of translating all the Russian literature for western 
consumption. Part of this is below:
  
For English inquiries to Potapov, perhaps it is recommended that they 
be directed through Dr. Peter Glueck who has been Dr. Potapov's friend, 
 consultant and advisor. Otherwise, Dr. Potapov's address is listed 
below for direct contact. 

I have been permitted to foward the message below to whoever else that 
may be interested in Potapov's situation.

As I understand it, these models are in production for sale today. The 
primary focus of his sales have been in the lesser developed countries 
where the need is the greatest and the barriers to development, the 
least.

There is a Sept. 1998 Budapest International Fair where Potapov will 
have a representation of his products.

-AK-

Foward:

June 17, 1998

Ecologically clean production of heat!

"YUSMAR-KM" THERMAL PUMPS.

Aimed for heating and for warm water supply for homes and industrial
buildings. The "YUSMAR-KM" devices work without burning of fuels and
are ecologically clean. The efficiency of the devices is the highest
on the world level. The working principle of these new devices is based
on the extraction of heat from moving liquids. The compressing pumps 
used are manufactured by the English company "ES&G SEALOL"/. The 
maximum temperature of the liquid is + 115 deg C.
.....................................................................
Technical characteristics of the "YUSMAR-KM" heating systems.

            Pumps               Thermal productivity   Weight    Price
            Power(kW)   Voltage (V)  kcal/hour          kg       US $
YUSMAR 1KM   5.5          380         6662              135      1900
YUSMAR 2KM  15            380        18060              220      2850
YUSMAR 3KM  30            380        36120              400      4500
YUSMAR 4KM  45            380        54180              545      5400
YUSMAR 5KM  55            380        66220              570      9950
Working regime: automatic.
Working temperature: 70-90 deg C.

.....................................................................
The thermogenerators and the new heating systems are manufactured 
according to patents of Russia, Moldova and other countries.

1. Guarantee period--- 12 months.
2. Form of payment-----10% pre-payment.
3. Expenses for transport and for the corresponding documents are paid
   by the buyer.

Address of the manufacturer:
2005 RM, MOLDOVA REPUBLIC
Kishinev, Fabrichnaia Street, 4 STC "YUSMAR"
Phone: (0422) 54-50-43, 54-50-44, 54-50-45
Fax : (0422) 54-02-72  Telex: 163118 "OMEGA" MD 


SETUP FOR YUSMAR 1-7 THERMAL PUMPS.

1.  Pump.
2.  Electrical motor.
3.  "YUSMAR" thermogenerator.
4, 5, 6- Valves
8.  Pipe.
9.  Dilatation vessel.
10. Control panel.
11. Thermometer.
12. Filter.
13. Heat exchanger
14. Recirculation pump.

"YUSMAR TSG" THERMAL PUMPS.
(Description as above at the KM types; the pumps here are made from
stainless steel; working range of the liquid 50 - 100 deg. C.

.......................................................................

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 11:45:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA07205;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:39:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:39:06 -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: <35880D40.944D8275 css.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:38:56 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Unusual Phenomena (http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm)
References: <19980617162121.24422.rocketmail send1c.yahoomail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"HAdS43.0.Om1.Ar0Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19788
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Anton Rager wrote:

> is find an anonymizer that
> will allow 64 key length encrypted tunnels for you, and then browse
> from there....I personally like 128bit key lengths.  Still no
> garurantees......NSA has some powerfull stuff.....who knows...they
> probably already have Quantum Computers, and can break any size keys
> in near real-time.
 
Interesting stuff along these lines in the June 1998 Scientific American.  They
have a nice piece on quantum computing and where there are with it.  

Full Article: 


Also, they discuss encryption and using a relatively old technique to combat
the new potential quantum computing power, steganography.  Hiding the secret
message within a larger one.

Full Article:



John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 11:54:28 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09940;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:46:10 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:42:30 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806171842.NAA17958 dfw-ix7.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Fwd: Potapov's main manufacturing line
To: little eden.com
To: 72240.1256 compuserve.com
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
To: Puthoff aol.com
To: jlogajan skypoint.com
To: RMCarrell aol.com
To: mica world.std.com
To: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil
To: britz kemi.aau.dk
To: tohmori cat.hokudai.ac.jp
To: jaeger ENECO-USA.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"kaBDW.0.AR2.ix0Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19789
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 17, 1998

OOPS! knocked out part of the foward: 
Apologies.
-AK-

Foward:
Ecologically clean production of heat!

"YUSMAR-KM" THERMAL PUMPS.

Aimed for heting and for warm water supply for homes and industrial
buildings. The "YUSMAR-KM" devices work without burning of fuels and
are ecologically clean. The efficiency of the devices is the highest
on the world level. The working principle of these new devices is based
on the extraction of heat from moving liquids. The compressing pumps 
used are manufactured by the English company "ES&G SEALOL"/. The 
maximum temperature of the liquid is + 115 deg C.
.......................................................................
...
Technical characteristics of the "YUSMAR-KM" heating systems.

                  Pumps             Thermal productivity   Weight    
Price
            Power(kW)   Voltage (V)       kcal/hour          kg       
US $
YUSMAR 1KM   5.5          380              6662              135      
1900
YUSMAR 2KM  15            380             18060              220      
2850
YUSMAR 3KM  30            380             36120              400      
4500
YUSMAR 4KM  45            380             54180              545      
5400
YUSMAR 5KM  55            380             66220              570      
9950
                                      Working regime automatic.
                                      Working temperature 70-90 deg C.

.......................................................................
...
The thermogenerators and the new heating systems are manufactured 
according
to patents of Russia, Moldova and other countries.

1. Guarantee period--- 12 months.
2. Form of payment-----10% pre-payment.
3. Expenses for transport and for the corresponding documents are paid
   by the buyer.

Address of the manufacturer:
2005 RM, MOLDOVA REPUBLIC
Kishinev, Fabrichnaia Street, 4 STC "YUSMAR"
Phone: (0422) 54-50-43, 54-50-44, 54-50-45
Fax : (0422) 54-02-72  Telex: 163118 "OMEGA" MD 


SETUP FOR YUSMAR 1-7 THERMAL PUMPS.

1.  Pump.
2.  Electrical motor.
3.  "YUSMAR" thermogenerator.
4, 5, 6- Valves
8.  Pipe.
9.  Dilatation vessel.
10. Control panel.
11. Thermometer.
12. Filter.
13. Heat exchanger
14. Recirculation pump.


"YUSMAR TSG" THERMAL PUMPS.
(Description as above at the KM types; the pumps here are made from
stainless steel; working range of the liquid 50 - 100 deg. C.

.......................................................................

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 12:12:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA15215;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5C8F097D xch-cpc-02>
From: "Scudder, Henry J" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: NiCr heater...
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:50:06 -0700
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Content-Type: text/plain
Resent-Message-ID: <"K5wRm3.0.Fj3.UF1Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19790
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vince
	You have radiation losses through your quartz tube which are
different when heated by the glow, and when heated by the resistor. If
you wrap the tube with copper foil, you will absorb the radiation. The
copper foil will also conduct heat fast enough to make its outside at a
uniform temperature, so your thermocouple mounted on it should give you
a reading representative of the process inside. If you adjust the
current through the resistor, so the temperature is the same as that
with the glow, the overall losses should be about the same, and you have
at least a rough calorimeter.

Hank

> ----------
> From: 	Scott Little[SMTP:little eden.com]
> Reply To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Sent: 	Wednesday, June 17, 1998 10:17 AM
> To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: 	Re: NiCr heater...
> 
> At 10:33 6/17/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:
> 
> >>  	What atmosphere are you 'burning' the NiCr in?
> >
> >Hydrogen at the same fill pressure I use for the glow discharge.
> >I could use Argon, it's on site.
> 
> You probably need to stay with H mainly because that's what's in the
> tube
> when you're running K, right?  If so, you don't want to change to
> Ar...it
> is 10 times less thermally conductive than 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  Wed Jun 17 12:20:58 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA18138;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:16:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:07:52 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806171907.OAA13232 dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Fwd: Potapov's main manufacturing line
To: little eden.com
To: 72240.1256 compuserve.com
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
To: Puthoff aol.com
To: jlogajan skypoint.com
To: RMCarrell aol.com
To: mica world.std.com
To: chubb ccsalpha2.nrl.navy.mil
To: britz kemi.aau.dk
To: tohmori cat.hokudai.ac.jp
To: jaeger ENECO-USA.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"WpFFn2.0.IR4.TO1Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19791
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 17, 1998

Looks like its not my fault that the message is being chopped off.
Here goes again:

Foward:

Ecologically clean production of heat!

"YUSMAR-KM" THERMAL PUMPS.

Aimed for heting and for warm water supply for homes and industrial
buildings. The "YUSMAR-KM" devices work without burning of fuels and
are ecologically clean. The efficiency of the devices is the highest
on the world level. The working principle of these new devices is based
on the extraction of heat from moving liquids. The compressing pumps 
used are manufactured by the English company "ES&G SEALOL"/. The 
maximum temperature of the liquid is + 115 deg C.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Technical characteristics of the "YUSMAR-KM" heating systems.

            Pumps             Thermal productivity   Weight    Price    
      Power(kW)   Voltage (V)       kcal/hour          kg       US $
YUSMAR 1KM   5.5    380              6662              135      1900
YUSMAR 2KM  15      380             18060              220      2850
YUSMAR 3KM  30      380             36120              400      4500
YUSMAR 4KM  45      380             54180              545      5400
YUSMAR 5KM  55      380             66220              570      9950
Working regime: automatic.
Working temperature: 70-90 deg C.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The thermogenerators and the new heating systems are manufactured 
according to patents of Russia, Moldova and other countries.

1. Guarantee period--- 12 months.
2. Form of payment-----10% pre-payment.
3. Expenses for transport and for the corresponding documents are paid
   by the buyer.

Address of the manufacturer:
2005 RM, MOLDOVA REPUBLIC
Kishinev, Fabrichnaia Street, 4 STC "YUSMAR"
Phone: (0422) 54-50-43, 54-50-44, 54-50-45
Fax : (0422) 54-02-72  Telex: 163118 "OMEGA" MD 

SETUP FOR YUSMAR 1-7 THERMAL PUMPS.

1.  Pump.
2.  Electrical motor.
3.  "YUSMAR" thermogenerator.
    4, 5, 6- Valves
8.  Pipe.
9.  Dilatation vessel.
10. Control panel.
11. Thermometer.
12. Filter.
13. Heat exchanger
14. Recirculation pump.

"YUSMAR TSG" THERMAL PUMPS.
(Description as above at the KM types; the pumps here are made from
stainless steel; working range of the liquid 50 - 100 deg. C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical characteristics of the "YUSMAR - TSG" systems.

             Pumps             Thermal productivity   Weight    Price
          Power(kW) Voltage (V)     kcal/hour            kg       US $
YUSMAR 1TSG      4     380            5160               130      1950
YUSMAR 2TSG      5.5   380            6662               150      2962
YUSMAR 3TSG     11     380           11918               200      3900
YUSMAR 4TSG     22     380           27552               350      5803
YUSMAR 5TSG     35     380           48160               490      7950
YUSMAR 6TSG     45     380           57848               550     10250
YUSMAR 7TSG     75     380           96320               570     12800
Working regime: automatic.
Working temperature: 70-90 deg C
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Setup identical with that of YUSMAR KM.

"YUSMAR-M  THERMAL PUMPS
(Description as above, immersion pumps are used)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical  characteristics of the "YUSMAR-M" systems.
            Pumps             Thermal productivity   Weight    Price
          Power (kW) Voltage (V)     kcal/hour           kg      US $
YUSMAR 1M     2.8       380            3612              130       530
YUSMAR 2M     5.5       380            6662              200      1700
YUSMAR 3M    11         380           13321              350      2100
YUSMAR 4M    30         380           57848              550      3700
YUSMAR 5M    55         380           77540              650      4900
Working regime: automatic
Working temperature: 70 deg C
--------------------------------------------------------------------

SETUP FOR THERMAL PUMPS "YUSMAR-M" AND "YUSMAR-TB"

1. Thermal generator.
2. Electrical pump.
3. Boiler.
4. Recirculating pump.
5. Electrical fan.
6. Radiators.
7. Control panel.
8. Thermometer.

Drawing: "YUSMAR" Scientific Technical Company offers an ecologically 
clean system of heating.

       1. Thermal generator "YUSMAR"
       2. Recirculating pump.
       3. Control panel.
       4. Temperature control.

Drawing: "YUSMAR" Scientific Technical Company offers an ecologically 
clean system of hot water supply.
       1. Thermal generator "YUSMAR"
       2. Recirculating pump.
       3. Control panel.
       4. Thermometer.
       5. Heat exchanger.

(The combinations of YUSMARs with renewable energy sources and the 
renewables -- hydro, wind, solar will be described later)

--------------------------------------------------------------------
QUANTUM THERMO-ELECTRICAL GENERATORS.

Aimed for supply of electrical energy, heat and hot water for plants,
factories, buildings, houses, cottages, remote military objectives,
vehicles, banks and other buildings. The generator works at low water
pressure and temperature up to 70 deg C.
The working principle of the device is the transformation of the 
dynamic energy of the water in electrical and thermal energy with
high coefficients of performance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Name   Electrical Thermal       Sizes, mm        Weight     Price
       power, kWh power, kWh                     kg         US $
--------------------------------------------------------------------
QTEG-1        65         195   2600X2700x2800    2100       47,200
QTEG-2        75         225   2600x2700x2800    3100       54.900
QTEG-3       100         300   2600x2700x2800    4200       57,000
QTEG-4       200         600   2800x2700x3800    5700       83,000
QTEG-5       800        2400   2800x2700x3800   12100      280,000
QTEG-6      1000        3000   2800x2700x3800   21200      550,000
QTEG-7      2000        6000   2800x2700x3800   47800    1,350,000
------------------------------------------------------------------
For the electrical part: voltage 400 V, frequency of the tri-phasic
current- 50 Hz. Synchronous generators in accordance to the Russian
standard GOST 15150-69
For the thermal part: "YUSMAR" thermogenerators with a COP not less
than 100%

Setup: 1. Quantic generator
       2. Electrical generator.
       3. Control panel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnote: the QTEG's have at this stage of technical development,
a global COP of approx. 180% in thermal energy and 30%  in electrical
energy; 210% global. That means for example in case of QTEG-1, a total
of 65 + 195 = 260 kW produced, need a continuous consume of 123 kW.
In one year a 300% global COP will be attained, followed by self-
sustained generators, needing external energy supply only for the
start-up. The development problems are technical, as increasing the
efficiency of the pumps and eliminating energy losses.

translated by Peter Gluck, June 17, 1998
-------
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 Jun 17 13:43:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA05444;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:38:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 13:38:16 -0700
From: "George Holz" 
To: 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:43:45 -0400
Message-ID: <01bd9a30$9f4ccc40$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: <"wNogL2.0.tK1.ta2Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19792
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vince Cockeram wrote:
>Tonight's run, H2 with K at fill pressure of 6.0 in Hg;  751.5 C +/- 0.1 C,
>2030 volts DC measured across the tube, 45.6 milliamps tube current.
>That works out to 92.568 watts folks.
>Now if ~150 watts gets me ~628 C joule heater and ~93 watts get me
>~751 C is this not an indication that there may be some excess heat
>being produced?
-
Hi Vince,
This is very impressive!  It's hard to suggest an error resulting in
this large a power difference. I don't recall the description of the
measurement method you used for the AC voltage and current measurement
to the calibration heater coil. Hopefully these were measured
using true RMS instruments. It would also be a good idea to use a
scope for a quick look to be sure that no oscillations are 
present across the tube during the H2/K run. Just holding
the probe tip near the tube would be an interesting test.
-
I was about to make a somewhat similar
set of suggestions when Hank Scudder beat me to vortex-l with the
following:
>You have radiation losses through your quartz tube which are
>different when heated by the glow, and when heated by the resistor. If
>you wrap the tube with copper foil, you will absorb the radiation. The
>copper foil will also conduct heat fast enough to make its outside at a
>uniform temperature, so your thermocouple mounted on it should give you
>a reading representative of the process inside. If you adjust the
>current through the resistor, so the temperature is the same as that
>with the glow, the overall losses should be about the same, and you have
>at least a rough calorimeter.
-
These are excellent practical suggestions. If you still have the
large power difference after this type of test I think it's time
to enlist Scott for some real calorimetry.
Now, how can we modify the excitation/geometry/gas fill etc. to
further increase the COP ?
-
George Holz      george varisys.com
Varitronics Systems
 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 14:07:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA12373;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:48:46 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: NiCr heater...
Resent-Message-ID: <"qw1TN2.0.913.py2Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19793
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:33 AM 6/17/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote:
>From:   herman antioch-college.edu (John Schnurer)
>
>In a message dated 98-06-17 09:43:50 EDT, you write:
>>       Dear Vince...
>>
>>       What atmosphere are you 'burning' the NiCr in?
>
>Hydrogen at the same fill pressure I use for the glow discharge.
>I could use Argon, it's on site.
[snip]

Vince,

It is very important to continue to use H2, the same as in your run, to
calibrate for calorimetry.  That is because H2 has about 10 times the
thermal conductivity of Ar (2.13 mW/cm-C-sec vs 0.27 mW/cm-C-sec.)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 14:35:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA18277;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:30:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:30:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:22:24 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806172122.QAA28522 dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: On validating the CF phenomenon
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Cc: 72240.1256 compuserve.com
Cc: peter itim.org.soroscj.ro
Cc: mica world.std.com
Cc: rdnelson princeton.edu
Cc: britz kemi.aau.dk
Cc: Puthoff aol.com
Cc: rgeorge hooked.com
Cc: halfox slkc.uswest.net
Resent-Message-ID: <"PnsdN1.0.QT4.cL3Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19794
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 17, 1998

Vortex,

One point that is mentioned over and over is the seeming inability of 
the cold fusion experimentors to replicate the experiments that 
evidences excess heat and other effects of cold fusion. And yet we do 
have claims of replicability here and there.

And thre is the general lack of replicability that is the primary 
reason to deny the cf phenomenon legitimacy for formal research and 
development by the larger Physics community. And yet there has been 
nine years, going on ten of cf experiments that indicate it is not mass 
errors of experimentors that is indicating excess heat and other 
"anolomies".

In the last few days of reading, I have come to think that what we need 
at this time is for the cold fusion studies to be scutinized 
independantly by analysis, i.e. Statistical Analysis, i.e. 
Meta-(statistical)-Analysis methods independant of believers and 
sceptics to see whether the efforts up to date indicates we are running 
up a blind alley. I do not think we are. But rather than waiting for 
that absolutely replicable experiment that proves CF, perhaps a 
meta-analysis of the all the efforts to date should indicate to the 
world that there is something there that is worth pursuing and not 
ignored.

The reading? "Alternative Science" by Milton. The book Chris Tinsley 
mentioned he helped write the chapter on cold fusion. The book covers 
meta-analysis on another subject but applicable, I feel, to cold 
fusion. Also there are internet websites dealing with 'meta-analysis, 
using'.

-AK-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 14:50:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26214;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:47:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:47:28 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980617164815.00d7bb0c mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:48:15 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Scott Little 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
In-Reply-To: <01bd9a30$9f4ccc40$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"IieJv3.0.VP6.lb3Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19795
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 16:43 6/17/98 -0400, George Holz wrote:

>These are excellent practical suggestions. If you still have the
>large power difference after this type of test I think it's time
>to enlist Scott for some real calorimetry.

Yes, if the dust settles and your thing still looks substantially o-u, it
would be a relatively easy matter to run it in our VWFC (Versatile Water
Flow Calorimeter) system that I've been using for BLP, Case, etc.



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 Jun 17 17:46:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA31326;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 17:42:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 17:42:10 -0700
Message-Id: <199806180035.TAA25281 neon.prysm.net>
From: "Robert Calloway" 
To: 
Subject: Magnetic Motor
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 19:43:03 -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: <"DGZBa1.0.Ff7.X96Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19796
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


 The design is quite simple, but much patience is needed in the building
and
adjustment of the magnets for the motor to work properly.
 If this motor has a previous patent, Im not aware of it. I give the design
away as shareware. Use it as you wish, but remember who offered this
design!
Send all huge donations to me personaly.:). I got the motor to work twice.
As I said, adjustment of the magnets must be precice. Maybe one of you
engineers out there can perfect this design.
  Ok..the design works on the principle of a hamster cage effect. 
Have you ever seen a hamster exercise in the wheel in his cage? As he tries
to run up the wheel he goes nowhere, but the wheel goes around and around.
If you take 2 rather large cylinder magnets and turn them so they oppose
each
other, one will roll away from the other. You can actually make the magnet
go uphill with the other magnet without touching the second one. Keep in
mind
that the magnet is not trying to turn to escape the other magnet, it is
only
getting away from the other magnet by rotating because it is round.
 Can we use this energy of the magnet rolling away from the other as work?
I did twice. It is not as simple as it seems, this motor requires (4)
cylinder
magnets. Mine are 1 inch by 3 and 3/8 inch long alnico magnets. I used a
10"
id pcv pipe cut 3 and 1/2 wide, schedule 40. Then take some  1/8 inch
plexiglass and cut out (2) plates 11 inches across. The plates will extend
beyound the edge of the pipe, this is what it must do. We are building a
hamster cage for the magnets. Mount bearings in the center of each plate
and
attach them to each side of the pvc pipe using brass screws. I used all
thread
material for the shaft. Let me say here that it is of the most importance
that
the wheel be in perfect balance. I used pennies taped to the side of the
wheel to obtain this. Now, build a bracket to hold one of the magnets
inside
the wheel attached to the shaft. I call this the "chaser" magnet. The
chaser
magnet must not contact the wheel anywhere. Make your shaft a little long
so as to adjust the chaser magnet from outside the wheel. I built mine out
of
aluminum carpet strips. It also helps to cut a 2" hole in each plate to
access
the magnets. When the wheel it built, build a stand to hold the wheel
supported by the shaft on each side. Purchase (2) stainless steel bearings
1" id by 2" od. Place one on each end of the "running" magnet. Be carefull
of your choice of bearings, some stainless steel bearings are attracted to
magnets depending on the material they are made of. I suppose brass
bearings
would work if they can be found. Place this "running" magnet inside the
wheel
through the 2" access holes in the plates in front of the chaser magnet.
If you have your chaser magnet and bracket built right, you should be able
to move the running magnet back and forth by turning the shaft by hand
outside the wheel. Now, back the chaser magnet up away from the running
magnet untill the wheel starts to move in the opposite direction. Keep it
in
this position for now. Take the other 2 magnets and place them on top of
the
wheel opposing one another. Note: these are a chasing and running magnets
also. Using the chasing magnet towards the bottom of the wheel gradually
come down the side of the wheel holding the running magnet suspended
against
the wheel. This is why the plate sides overhang the wheel to keep the
magnets
in line and to stay on the wheel. Note: these magnets do not have bearings
on them. I did wrap the running magnet with one turn of electrical tape to
give it "traction" so to speak against the wheel. When the wheel starts to
turn, stop and build a adjustable bracket to hold the chaser magnet in this
position. This is, as should be a "hands off" motor. Build brackets and a
adjustable stop for the shaft also. Go back to the shaft and bring down the
chaser magnet slowly and the wheel will turn if the adjustments are made
correctly. Adjustment of the bracket holding the magnet inside the wheel
should be made adjustable. All these adjustments are critical and takes
much
patience to do. But if you get them right, you will be humbled to watch it
work. The rpm on mine was slow maybe 50 rpm. It turned about 16 turns
before
the top magnet hung up on the side plate. I have not been able to get it to
work that long since. I dont have the capability to send a picture on the
internet, but if anybody wants a picture of it email me and I'll send one
snail mail. Regards, Robert H. Calloway   billc9 prysm.net



















From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:22:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05023;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:17:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:17:06 -0700
From: "Brendan Hall" 
To: 
Subject: RE: Unusual Phenomena (http://www.fbi.gov/foipa/ufo.htm)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 11:19:38 +1000
Message-ID: <000001bd9a57$2b1d1380$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: <35880D40.944D8275 css.mot.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"g3Wii.0.PE1.Hg6Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19797
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Anton Rager wrote:
> NSA has some powerfull stuff.....who knows...they
> probably already have Quantum Computers, and can break any size keys
> in near real-time.

John Steck wrote:

>Interesting stuff along these lines in the June 1998 Scientific American.
They
>have a nice piece on quantum computing and where there are with it.

>Full Article:
>

This article says "Such a computer would look nothing like the machine that
sits on your desk; surprisingly, it might resemble the cup of coffee at its
side."  It further says "All along, ordinary molecules have known how to do
a remarkable kind of computation. People were just not asking them the right
questions."

I can see it now.  A cup of coffee (quantum computer) hooked up to a nice
hot cup of tea (randomiser).  Maybe an improbability drive, or a time
machine that drags the universe along with it in its wake.  But obviously we
have to understand the right question first, else it wastes a lot of time
answering if we don't understand it.  ;-)

Brendan Hall

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:26:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09100;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <49543bb9.35886b47 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:20:06 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: <"XfESp2.0.5E2.Mm6Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19799
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 16:42:50 EDT, you write:
> From:	george varisys.com (George Holz)

    >

> I don't recall the description of the measurement method you used for the 
> AC voltage and current measurement to the calibration heater coil. 
> Hopefully these were measured using true RMS instruments.

 Just one meter was, the digital voltmeter.  The ammeter was an off the 
shelf analog panel meter that is wired into the power supply  to
indicate variac output amperes.
 I had no suitable shunt to measure current with the digital meters. 
I have one now.

> It would also be a good idea to use a
>  scope for a quick look to be sure that no oscillations are 
>  present across the tube during the H2/K run. Just holding
>  the probe tip near the tube would be an interesting test.
>  -
>  I was about to make a somewhat similar
>  set of suggestions when Hank Scudder beat me to vortex-l with the
>  following:
>  >You have radiation losses through your quartz tube which are
>  >different when heated by the glow, and when heated by the resistor. If
>  >you wrap the tube with copper foil, you will absorb the radiation. The
>  >copper foil will also conduct heat fast enough to make its outside at a
>  >uniform temperature, so your thermocouple mounted on it should give 
>  > you a reading representative of the process inside. If you adjust the
>  >current through the resistor, so the temperature is the same as that
>  >with the glow, the overall losses should be about the same, and you have
>  >at least a rough calorimeter.
>  -
>  These are excellent practical suggestions. If you still have the
>  large power difference after this type of test I think it's time
>  to enlist Scott for some real calorimetry.
>  Now, how can we modify the excitation/geometry/gas fill etc. to
>  further increase the COP ?

I have already done some of that. I ran at a set power input and varied
the fill pressure up and down to find the "sweet spot". The highest
temperature was at a fill pressure of 6.0 in Hg. Greater or less than 
6.0  pressure the temperature fell

>  -
>  George Holz      george varisys.com
>  Varitronics Systems

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:27:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09387;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <1301fd50.35886b49 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:20:08 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: NiCr heater...
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62
Resent-Message-ID: <"dVHBF.0.aI2.Gn6Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19801
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 17:05:11 EDT, you write:
>  Vince,
>  It is very important to continue to use H2, the same as in your run, to
>  calibrate for calorimetry.  That is because H2 has about 10 times the
>  thermal conductivity of Ar (2.13 mW/cm-C-sec vs 0.27 mW/cm-C-sec.)
>  Regards,
>  Horace Heffner 

I always have worries when changing operating parameters Horace,
and your numbers here kind of underline that worry. So, yes, I will
stay with the H2 for now. Thanks.

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas
         

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:25:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05927;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:21:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:21:44 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <81c725c4.35886b3a aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:19:53 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: <"NJfLY.0.XS1.dk6Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19800
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 12:41:29 EDT, you write:
> Vince, these results are getting really interesting!  But, heat
>  transfer being the complicated thing it is, I wish you could make some
>  "null" runs with just H2 in the tube.  The Joule heaters are a start,
>  but it would be nice to see the heat produced by a discharge in both
>  cases (i.e., the K case and the non-K case). 
 
Frank,
I have made runs (H2 no K) and posted results here. NOT with good
power input metering though.
I will indeed re-do these runs with the new metering.

> If that still shows excess, then only a good calorimeter will tell the tale!
>  Frank Stenger

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:28:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09569;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:25:25 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:25:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <5189f9f0.35886b35 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:19:48 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: <"OT3pF2.0.GL2.wn6Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19803
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 11:36:20 EDT, you write:
> From:	protech frii.com (R. Wormus)
 Very interesting results.  I still think a run substituting HE 
> for the H2 would be instructive as to what effect the K alone has on the
>temp. 
>  Good luck.
>  ___Ron

Ron, 
I have performed runs with K  and substituting Argon for Hydrogen.
Nowhere near the heat output I see with H2, however the input electrical
power was not measured for these runs....but I was running the power
supply at the same setting. Full throttle.

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:26:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05854;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:21:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:21:16 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <1678d8c2.35886b4a aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:20:09 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: <"KLXT52.0.9R1.Bk6Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19798
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 17:49:25 EDT, you write:

> Yes, if the dust settles and your thing still looks substantially o-u, it
>  would be a relatively easy matter to run it in our VWFC (Versatile Water
>  Flow Calorimeter) system that I've been using for BLP, Case, etc.
>  
>  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)

Agreed Scott. But the dust still hangs deep here. Before some real
calorimetry I want to be absolutly positive about ALL the numbers.
This is going to involve a lot of runs.  I have enlisted (drafted?) one
of my fellow technicians to assist me. Two heads are always better
than one.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:30:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09541;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <12ed086f.35886b43 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:20:02 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: NiCr heater...
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62
Resent-Message-ID: <"aiQX03.0.yK2.un6Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19802
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 13:29:00 EDT, you write:
> You probably need to stay with H mainly because that's what's in the tube
>  when you're running K, right? 

That is correct Scott.

> If so, you don't want to change to Ar...it
>  is 10 times less thermally conductive than H.
>
>  Scott Little

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 18:32:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA08992;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:28:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 18:28:47 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <16c29c5.35886b45 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:20:04 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: NiCr heater...
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62
Resent-Message-ID: <"j8p5t3.0.FC2.Er6Yr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19804
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-17 15:10:01 EDT, you write:
>  From:	Henry.Scudder West.Boeing.com (Scudder, Henry J)
>  
>  Vince
>  	You have radiation losses through your quartz tube which are
>  different when heated by the glow, and when heated by the resistor. If
>  you wrap the tube with copper foil, you will absorb the radiation.

This is doable for the heater (calibration) but difficult for a glow
discharge run. Approx 2kV across the tube and I fear all that metal
around the tube.

> The copper foil will also conduct heat fast enough to make its outside at a
>  uniform temperature, so your thermocouple mounted on it should give you
>  a reading representative of the process inside. If you adjust the
>  current through the resistor, so the temperature is the same as that
>  with the glow, the overall losses should be about the same, and you have
>  at least a rough calorimeter.
>  Hank

If metal around the tube turns out NOT to be a problem, then I was 
thinking how about tightly coiled 1/8 od copper tubing? Keep the 
spacing between the coils as small as possible, or even hard solder
them together, and it just may make a neat water flow heat pickup unit.

Tie this in with Michael Schaffer's post suggesting a big Cu pipe around
the tube and maybe I'll work something up here. Now, the tube is
around 5/16 inch od, so a coil of tubing with an inside diameter of the 
coil of around 3/4 inch will leave enough room for the thermocouple
and keep the metal tubing far enough away from the glow tube to
avoid possible problems if the tube voltage wants to burn through to
a handy ground.

Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 17 19:32:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA25810;
	Wed, 17 Jun 1998 19:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 19:30:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <00ca01bd9a60$57ba3180$118f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Subject: CNN - Fossilized dinosaur dung may shed light on T. rex eating habits - June 17
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 20:25:02 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01BD9A2E.01E50000"
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: <"uLGie3.0.8J6.lk7Yr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19805
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_0012_01BD9A2E.01E50000
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806/17/dino.dung.ap/

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BD9A2E.01E50000
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="CNN - Fossilized dinosaur dung may shed light on T. rex eating habits - June 17, 1998.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="CNN - Fossilized dinosaur dung may shed light on T. rex eating habits - June 17, 1998.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9806/17/dino.dung.ap/
Modified=C0926939609ABD01AC

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BD9A2E.01E50000--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 08:10:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA19192;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980618103551.01629cd0 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 10:35:51 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"ICQc-3.0.mh4.cpIYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19806
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 02:21 PM 6/16/98 -0700, DColling vines.gems.gov.bc.ca wrote:
>Thanks for a very clear explanation!  But the explanation raises the a new
>question:  why don't all the threads in the ball collapse into one big one?

   Two answers actually...  First, it does.  Almost all of the current in
any single pluse will flow through a single path if the globe is not in
coronal discharge mode.  But the next pulse will take some other path.  If
the frequency of the pulses is high enough, you will see multiple steady
paths.  Part of the design for these globes is to provide a DC source with
high enough AC "ripple" so that the current does flow in packets.  Most are
run about 15-20 kiloHertz, so you may be able to hear the buzzing.

   Second, because the (inner) surface of the ball has a high impedence
connection to ground.  As more of the charge flows to a particular point on
the surface of the ball, the relative voltage drop to other areas is
higher, and current flows to those points.  If you provide a low impedence
path to ground, such as a grounded metal object touching the outer surface
of the globe, you may get a single current path.

   Now, if the current were MUCH higher you could max out the current flow
through a single thread, but we are talking order of one amp as opposed to
the actual which is probably tens of microamps.

                                        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 Jun 18 08:33:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA32649;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:28:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 08:28:28 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 11:20:09 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <358b3b4a.9312635 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
 
 <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"yvU5d1.0.2-7.R8JYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19807
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 03:45 AM 6/17/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
>two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
>them). What is the force keeping them together?

   The net visible charge of the rest of the universe moving past.  If you
use wormholes or other strategies to give the local area a net negative
charge, then they wouldn't attract each other. ;-)

   Seriously, this is one of the strongest reasons for believing that the
entire universe has no net charge--if it did, we would see the effects of
even an extremely slight imbalance in asymmetries between electron and
proton beams.

                                        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 Jun 18 12:31:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA11073;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:27:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:27:35 -0700
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 15:59:12 -0700
From: Lynn Kurtz 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
In-reply-to: <3.0.1.32.19980617164815.00d7bb0c mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <199806172257.PAA25610 smtp1.asu.edu>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
References: <01bd9a30$9f4ccc40$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"kyAvG2.0.qi2.ceMYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19808
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 04:48 PM 6/17/98 -0500, you wrote:

>Yes, if the dust settles and your thing still looks substantially o-u, it
>would be a relatively easy matter to run it in our VWFC (Versatile Water
>Flow Calorimeter) system that I've been using for BLP, Case, etc.

...speaking of Case, am I the only one to notice the pregnant silence?
What's happening?

--Lynn

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 12:53:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19017;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:47:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:47:41 -0700
Message-ID: <35896EFB.1F1C interlaced.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 15:48:11 -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: <01bd9a30$9f4ccc40$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com> <199806172257.PAA25610@smtp1.asu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"l5y7P.0.0f4.SxMYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19809
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Lynn Kurtz wrote:
> 
> ...speaking of Case, am I the only one to notice the pregnant silence?
> What's happening?

No, Lynn, we were just trying to be polite!  Or, not mentioning that the
King has no clothes? :-)

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 16:38:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07538;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Brendan Hall" 
To: 
Subject: RE: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:38:53 +1000
Message-ID: <000001bd9b12$41f16e60$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: <49543bb9.35886b47 aol.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Resent-Message-ID: <"TajCG1.0.hr1.PCQYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19810
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 




> From:	george varisys.com (George Holz)

> I don't recall the description of the measurement method you used for the
> AC voltage and current measurement to the calibration heater coil.
> Hopefully these were measured using true RMS instruments.

Vince, have you got a paper that you could give to us vorts describing the
experiment as a whole?  With so many threads on this list, I have only
recently had the time to start to look into this one, and a short paper
would be no end of help.

Thanks

Brendan Hall

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 18:58:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA09019;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:56:15 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 18:56:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <13047c4f.3589c46c aol.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:52:43 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: <"rYzWE2.0.rC2.zKSYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19811
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-18 19:36:13 EDT, you write:
> Vince, have you got a paper that you could give to us vorts describing the
>  experiment as a whole?  With so many threads on this list, I have only
>  recently had the time to start to look into this one, and a short paper
>  would be no end of help.
>  Thanks
>  Brendan Hall

Sorry, no. The only paper involved in this experiment is my (two now)
lab notebooks, and everything in them has been posted here on Vortex-l.
The only thing not posted is the many photographs and some of the
actual Lotus graphs. The data used to generate those graphs has
been posted.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 20:20:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA09113;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 20:11:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 20:11:26 -0700
Message-ID: <3589D662.4807 keelynet.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:09:22 -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: Excellent Tesla and related patents (full Adobe files!!)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Cebmj1.0.uD2.URTYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19812
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Folks!

Fred Walters - fredw mks.com was kind enough to post these amazing
patents, please download, print them and pass them around to everyone
you know...they are in .pdf (Adobe format) so you'll need Adobe to view
and/or print...check out http://www.adobe.com to download the free .pdf
VIEWING software...if you like them say thanks to Fred, this was NOT an
easy job and he's not asking ANYTHING, just being a good guy, such a
rare thing today where many try to capitalize or take credit for the
work and efforts of others....this is rare stuff, jump on it;
=====================
I've finally had the time to add the rest of the Tesla patents (that
were recently mailed to me) to my Patents web-page:

        http://www.u36.com/~fredw/patents/index.htm

Are there any USENET newsgroups that would be appropriate to post to
about this?

Here is the table of contents:

    Alternative Health
        Multiwave Oscillators
            US Patent #1962565 by George Lakhovsky (June 12, 1934)
            US Patent #2351055 by George Lakhovsky (June 13, 1944)
        Resonant Frequency (Rife) Devices
            US Patent Application by John Francis Crane (March 26,
1973);
            this patent application is useful for historical purposes,
            as it contains a partial history of Rife devices and
            a health-problem/frequency-list.

    Nikola Tesla
        British Patent 1,877
            Improvements in Electric Lamps
        British Patent 2,801
            Improvements in Reciprocating Engines and Means for
Regulating
            the Period of the same
        British Patent 2,812
            Improvements in Methods of and Apparatus for the Generation
            of Electric Currents of Defined Period
        British Patent 2,975
            Improvements in Dynamo Electric Machines
        British Patent 6,481
            Improvements relating to the Electrical Transmission of
Power
            and to Apparatus therefor
        British Patent 6,502
            Improvements relating to the Generation and Distribution of
            Electric Currents and to Apparatus therefor
        British Patent 6,527
            Improvements relating to Electro-motors
        British Patent 8,200
            Improvements relating to the Transmission of
            Electrical Energy
        British Patent 8,575
            Improved Methods of and Apparatus for Generating and
            Utilizing Electric Energy for Lighting Purposes
        British Patent 11,293
            Improvements relating to the Utilization of Electromagnetic,
            Light, or other like Radiations Effects or Disturbances
            transmitted through the Natural Media and to Apparatus
            therefor
        British Patent 11,473
            Improvements in Alternating Current Electro-magnetic Motors
        British Patent 13,563
            Improvements in, and relating to, the Transmission of
            Electrical Energy
        British Patent 14,550
            Improvements relating to the Insulation of Electric
            Conductors
        British Patent 14,579
            Improvements in and relating to the Transmission of
            Electrical Energy
        British Patent 16,709
            Improvements relating to the Conversion of Alternating into
            Direct Electric Currents
        British Patent 19,420
            Improvements in Alternating Current Electro-magnetic Motors
        British Patent 19,426
            Improvements in the Construction and Mode of Operating
            Alternating Current Motors
        Canadian Patent 24,033
            Improvements in Dynamo Electric Machines
        Canadian Patent 29,537
            Improvements in Methods of and Apparatus for the Electrical
            Transmission of Power
        Canadian Patent 30,172
            Improvements in Methods of and Apparatus for Converting
            and Distributing Electric Currents
        Canadian Patent 33,317
            Improvements in Methods and Apparatus for Converting
            Alternating into Direct Currents
        Canadian Patent 135,174
            Improvements in Fluid Propulsion (Tesla Pump)
        Canadian Patent 142,352
            Improvement in the Art of Transmitting Electrical Energy
            Through the Natural Mediums
-- 
               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 Jun 18 20:53:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA03667;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 20:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 20:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 03:48:41 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358bdf22.77018753 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>  <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0@spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220@spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"2_hlO2.0.8v.c0UYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19813
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 11:20:09 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>At 03:45 AM 6/17/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
>>two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
>>them). What is the force keeping them together?
>
>   The net visible charge of the rest of the universe moving past.  If you
>use wormholes or other strategies to give the local area a net negative
>charge, then they wouldn't attract each other. ;-)

I find this a little strange, in as much as it appears to imply that
the distance to that net charge is irrelevant.

>
>   Seriously, this is one of the strongest reasons for believing that the
>entire universe has no net charge--if it did, we would see the effects of
>even an extremely slight imbalance in asymmetries between electron and
>proton beams.
[snip]

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 22:16:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA10033;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:55:29 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980619115850.2ddfb554 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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZZxDY3.0.fS2.eEVYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19814
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robin van Spaandonk posted the following (edited for brevity) at 05:24
1998.06.17 GMT:
>On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:02:54 -0500 (CDT), John Logajan wrote:
>
>>Robin van Spaandonk  wrote:
>>> I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
>>> two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
>>> them). What is the force keeping them together?
>>
>>Any two electrons "moving together" must be moving in reference to some
>>third object, otherwise their velocity would not be apparent.  Therefore
>>any alteration of their mutual electrostatic repulsion must be due
>>to interaction with the objects against which they reference their
>>mutual motion.
>Ok, say they move relative to a neutral object (i.e. one composed of
>an equal number of + and _ pairs - say a piece of wood). What is the
>nature of the force exerted on them by this neutral object?
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk 
>
And furthermore
 should a beam of electrons see a 
 stronger compressive force if the beam is
 fired through the central cavity of a negatively charged
 metal pipe ?

If so, then the resistance of a piece of coax
 might show a minute change in core resistance
 dependent on the current through the core
 in conjunction with a high negative charge
 on the shield.  

(Don't have any coax here, so I can't check this
  but I reckon I would need a fairly hefty core current
   and very high voltage on the shield to see this anyway,
   which would be outside the range of my workbench capabilities...)

Is the compressive force linearly related to current magnitude ?
Do you think the mean free path of the electron to be a factor ?

cheers

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 22:32:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA03211;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:22:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:22:23 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:23:11 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: [OFF TOPIC] World Cup, US vs Iran!!!
Cc: remi exeter
Resent-Message-ID: <"ozlPd1.0.xn.BMVYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19816
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote:
>
>> Must have been  _very_ good day in England.
>>
>A disgrace.
>
>It's just a game.
>
>I dip in and out of vortex. We're building a UK network, certainly around
>London area. Watchout, the Brits are comming!
>Remi.


Sounds more like the Brits are going!  8^(

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 22:33:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA01419;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:20:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:20:07 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:21:01 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"3CYZm1.0.5M.5KVYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19815
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 11:02 PM 6/16/98, John Logajan wrote:
>Robin van Spaandonk  wrote:
>> I find this very interesting. Suppose now that you look at those same
>> two electrons in their own frame of reference (moving along with
>> them). What is the force keeping them together?
>
>Any two electrons "moving together" must be moving in reference to some
>third object, otherwise their velocity would not be apparent.  Therefore
>any alteration of their mutual electrostatic repulsion must be due
>to interaction with the objects against which they reference their
>mutual motion.


If two observers moving at widely differing speeds observe the same two
electrons, it does not seem possible that one will observe the electrons
come together and another will see them come apart.  This is a far more
important point when applied to deuteron beams.  If two deuterons come
together and fuse, which makes sense to the observer that sees the
deuterons attracted, will the observer that sees the deuterons as repelling
see an unexplainable event, i.e. fusion, gamma emission, etc. occuring at
an unexplainably large distance?  The other possibility is that the
universe splits into two universes upon the event.  In one universe the
fusion occurs, in the other it does not.  Neither of these explanations is
very satisfying.  Mother nature does not promise to be satisfying though!

Another alternative is that, as with angular momentum, there is an absolute
reference frame, provided by the universe as a whole.  This denies
relativity, and implies a need for some kind of ether-like space-time
framework.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 22:51:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA18713;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:48:10 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"9R9Bb2.0.Ga4.dlVYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19817
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:11 PM 6/17/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
[snip]
>I got a mental block on this.
>
>If parallel magnets repel each other
> how the bloody hell does it happen that
>  two electrons generate parallel mag fields that
>   attract each other ?
>
>The only way I can speculate this is if
> the two electrons are serial monogamists
>  creating and sharing the same mag field -
>   albeit separated by some amount of time.
>
>Help !
>
>confused, as usual.


Two repelling magnets (note that the same direction
   parallel field lines at X repel):


      /  \ /  \       /  \ /  \
     |    ^    |     |    ^    |
     v    |    v     v    |    v
     |    N    |     |    N    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |  X  |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    S    |     |    S    |
     v    |    v     v    |    v
     |    ^    |     |    ^    |
      \ /  \  /       \ /  \  /



Below, two attracting magnets (note that the opposite direction
   parallel field lines at X *attract*):


      /  \ /  \       /  \ /  \
     |    ^    |     |    v    |
     v    |    v     ^    |    ^
     |    N    |     |    S    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |  X  |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    S    |     |    N    |
     v    |    v     ^    |    ^
     |    ^    |     |    v    |
      \ /  \  /       \ /  \  /



Now look at the field lines of two electrons going
in same direction (toward you):


        -->--           -->--
      /       \       /       \
     |         |     |         |
     ^         v     ^         v
     |    e1   |  X  |    e2   |
     ^         v     ^         v
     |         |     |         |
      \       /       \       /
        --<--           --<--


You can see that at the point X the parallel field lines
are going in opposite directions, so they attract.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 22:57:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA20587;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:54:31 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"0fG0u.0.O15.PrVYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19818
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 11:55 AM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
[snip]
>And furthermore
> should a beam of electrons see a
> stronger compressive force if the beam is
> fired through the central cavity of a negatively charged
> metal pipe ?

Yes, the wall electrons would create a counterclockwise circular magnetic
field inside the tube.  It would be weak, though, because a very small
amount of charge creates a very large voltage. The apparentr current of the
wall would be very small, thus so would the convering field.  Much better
results could be obtained by running high current wires parallel to and
around the outside of the tube.

>
>If so, then the resistance of a piece of coax
> might show a minute change in core resistance
> dependent on the current through the core
> in conjunction with a high negative charge
> on the shield.

Infinitesimal..  Much more force would result from the central conductor's
own current.

>
>(Don't have any coax here, so I can't check this
>  but I reckon I would need a fairly hefty core current
>   and very high voltage on the shield to see this anyway,
>   which would be outside the range of my workbench capabilities...)
>
>Is the compressive force linearly related to current magnitude ?

Yes, by i^2.

>Do you think the mean free path of the electron to be a factor ?
>
>cheers

No.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 23:08:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA22880;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:43:14 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"VwTNr1.0.Jb5.pyVYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19819
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:11 PM 6/17/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
[snip]
>I got a mental block on this.
>
>If parallel magnets repel each other
> how the bloody hell does it happen that
>  two electrons generate parallel mag fields that
>   attract each other ?
>
>The only way I can speculate this is if
> the two electrons are serial monogamists
>  creating and sharing the same mag field -
>   albeit separated by some amount of time.
>
>Help !
>
>confused, as usual.


Two repelling magnets (note that the same direction
   parallel field lines at X repel):


      /  \ /  \       /  \ /  \
     |    ^    |     |    ^    |
     v    |    v     v    |    v
     |    N    |     |    N    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |  X  |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    S    |     |    S    |
     v    |    v     v    |    v
     |    ^    |     |    ^    |
      \ /  \  /       \ /  \  /



Below, two attracting magnets (note that the opposite direction
   parallel field lines at X repel):


      /  \ /  \       /  \ /  \
     |    ^    |     |    v    |
     v    |    v     ^    |    ^
     |    N    |     |    S    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |  X  |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    H    |     |    H    |
     |    S    |     |    N    |
     v    |    v     ^    |    ^
     |    ^    |     |    v    |
      \ /  \  /       \ /  \  /



Now look at the field lines of two electrons going
in same direction (toward you):


        -->--           -->--
      /       \       /       \
     |         |     |         |
     ^         v     ^         v
     |    e1   |  X  |    e2   |
     ^         v     ^         v
     |         |     |         |
      \       /       \       /
        --<--           --<--


You can see that at the point X the parallel field lines
are going in opposite directions, so they attract.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 23:36:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA08442;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:34:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:34:36 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:25:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex 
Subject: hu sci (fwd)
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY=------------412333102618
Content-ID: 
Resent-Message-ID: <"DtvNE1.0.d32.yPWYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19820
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.

--------------412333102618
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
Content-ID: 



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:20:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: John Schnurer 
Subject: hu sci



--------------412333102618
Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822
Content-ID: 

Received: from www.lyris.net (www.lyris.net [207.90.155.32]) by erinet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8.27) with SMTP id FAA19764 for ; Sat, 23 May 1998 05:02:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 38.234.171.2 by www.lyris.net (Lyris SMTP service); 22 May 98 19:25:52 PDT7 from: to:
Received: from [207.172.161.91] (207-172-161-91.s28.as6.ftw.erols.com [207.172.161.91]) by ns.corpsite.com (8.8.8/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA05935 for ; Fri, 22 May 1998 21:37:28 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: oracle pop.synapse.net
Message-Id: <620849-22042 lyris.net>
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 22:38:57 -0400
To: "Oracle Service Humor Mailing List" 
From: "Oracle Service Humor Mailing List" 
Subject: HUM: Science Quotes (***)  [CLASSIC]
X-Message-Id: 
List-Unsubscribe: 
Reply-To: "Oracle Service Humor Mailing List" 
Sender: oracle-humor-admin lyris.net
Precedence: bulk
X-Lyris-To: [nealcran erinet.com]
X-Lyris-MemberID: 22042
X-Lyris-MessageID: 620849
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-UIDL: fec1d1dc5e4853e89cca7a0a33f166d0
Status: U
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001

This is a message from the Oracle Service Humor Mailing List.  And now, a word from today's sponsor...

 ~~~~~~~ Refill your Inkjet Printer cartridges with our ink! ~~~~~~~~~
 When you buy bulk inks, you can refill your cartridge for under $3.00!
 * 1 pint (450ml) of black ink for $21.95.  Color inks are $23.95/pint.
 * Special deal: A pint of each (all 4 colors) is only $89!
 * Mention Oracle Humor when you call or write and save $5 off S/H.
 * Contact us: mailto:automate bellsouth.net or tollfree 1-888-728-2465
 ****   Open Monday - Saturday, 9 AM to 9 PM Eastern USA Time   ****
 ~~~~ ACSI Bulk Inks   ~~~~



THE FOLLOWING ARE ALL QUOTES FROM 11 YEAR OLDS' SCIENCE EXAMS:

"Water is composed of two gins, Oxygin and Hydrogin.  Oxygin is
pure gin. Hydrogin is gin and water."

"When you breathe, you inspire.  When you do not breathe, you
expire."

"H20 is hot water, and CO2 is cold water."

"To collect fumes of sulphur, hold down a deacon over a flame in
a test tube"

"When you smell an odourless gas, it is probably carbon
monoxide"

"Nitrogen is not found in Ireland because it is not found in a free
state"

"Three kinds of blood vessels are arteries, vanes, and
caterpillars."

"Blood flows down one leg and up the other."

"Respiration is composed of two acts, first inspiration, and then
expectoration."

" The moon is a planet just like the earth, only it is even deader

"Artificial insemination is when the farmer does it to the cow
instead of the bull."

"Dew is formed on leaves when the sun shines down on them
and makes them perspire."

"A super-saturated solution is one that holds more than it can
hold."

"Mushrooms always grow in damp places and so they look like
umbrellas."

"The body consists of three parts - the brainium, the borax and the
abominable cavity.  The brainium contains the brain, the borax
contains the heart and lungs, and the abominable cavity contains
the bowels, of which there are five - a, e, I, o and u."

"Momentum: What you give a person when they are going away."

"Planet: A body of earth surrounded by sky."

"Rhubarb: a kind of celery gone bloodshot."

"Vacuum: A large, empty space where the pope lives."

"Before giving a blood transfusion, find out if the blood is
affirmative or negative."

"To remove dust from the eye, pull the eye down over the nose."

"For a nosebleed: put the nose much lower than the body until the
heart stops."

"For drowning: climb on top of the person and move up and down
to make Artificial Perspiration."

"For Fainting: Rub the person's chest or, if a lady, rub her arm
above the hand instead.  Or put the head between the knees of the
nearest medical doctor."

"For dog bite: put the dog away for several days.  If he has not
recovered, then kill it."

"For asphyxiation: Apply artificial respiration until the patient is
dead."

"To prevent contraception: wear a condominium."

"For head cold: use an agonizer to spray the nose until it drops in
your throat."

"To keep milk from turning sour: keep it in the cow."

"The pistol of a flower is its only protection against insects."

"The alimentary canal is located in the northern part of Indiana."

"The skeleton is what is left after the insides have been taken out
and the outsides have been taken off.  The purpose of the skeleton
is something to hitch meat to."

"A permanent set of teeth consists of eight canines, eight cuspids,
two molars,and eight cuspidors."

"The tides are a fight between the Earth and Moon.  All water tends
towards the moon, because there is no water in the moon, and
nature abhors a vacuum. I forget where the sun joins in this fight."

"A fossil is an extinct animal.  The older it is, the more extinct it
is."

"Equator: A managerie lion running around the Earth through
Africa."

"Germinate: To become a naturalized German."

"Liter: A nest of young puppies."

"Magnet: Something you find crawling all over a dead cat."


				Submitted by: Rich Leskovec   Novartis.com

                \\|//
                (o o)                ORACLE SERVICE HUMOR MAILING LIST
------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo-----------------------------------------------

HOW DO I SUBSCRIBE?                  
It's free! Just send a message to 
oracle-humor-subscribe lyris.oraclehumor.com

WHERE DO I SEND JOKES?                  WHERE'S THE WEBSITE?
jokes oraclehumor.com                   http://www.oraclehumor.com

LEGAL STUFF: Wallaby Solutions runs this piece as submitted and
does not claim to own any copyright privileges to it.  The work was
submitted to us as an item for the mailing list, and it was posted
solely on the basis of its quality.  If this is an administrative 
posting, then follow any copyright guidelines noted on the posting.

ADVERTISERS: Reach over 81,000 people.  Write to
ad-info lyris.oraclehumor.com for automated information or check out 
http://oraclehumor.com/Wallaby/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message came to you via Lyris list server software.
http://lyris.com

To unsubscribe, forward this message to oracle-humor-unsubscribe lyris.oraclehumor.com

You are subscribed at [nealcran erinet.com].
------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------412333102618--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 18 23:46:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA02398;
	Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:37:08 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <359006af.87145012 mail-hub>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
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: <"Dg_p11.0.Lb.FZWYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19821
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:54:31 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:

>At 11:55 AM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>[snip]
>>And furthermore
>> should a beam of electrons see a
>> stronger compressive force if the beam is
>> fired through the central cavity of a negatively charged
>> metal pipe ?
>
>Yes, the wall electrons would create a counterclockwise circular magnetic
>field inside the tube.  It would be weak, though, because a very small
>amount of charge creates a very large voltage. The apparentr current of the
>wall would be very small, thus so would the convering field.  Much better
>results could be obtained by running high current wires parallel to and
>around the outside of the tube.
[snip]
If we keep this up we will reinvent the tokamak.;)
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 00:08:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA07783;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:27:52 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980619143117.08c7834e 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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"eR3NW1.0.Tv1.LrWYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19822
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 21:43 1998.06.18
-0800:
>At 10:11 PM 6/17/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>>I got a mental block on this.
>>
>>If parallel magnets repel each other
>> how the bloody hell does it happen that
>>  two electrons generate parallel mag fields that
>>   attract each other ?
>>

>
>Now look at the field lines of two electrons going
>in same direction (toward you):
>
>
>        -->--           -->--
>      /       \       /       \
>     |         |     |         |
>     ^         v     ^         v
>     |    e1   |  X  |    e2   |
>     ^         v     ^         v
>     |         |     |         |
>      \       /       \       /
>        --<--           --<--
>
>
>You can see that at the point X the parallel field lines
>are going in opposite directions, so they attract.
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner          
>

Thanks, Horace

This subject has got me in fits.

 I posted the above after sitting at a local watering hole
  trying to reconcile Bruce Harvey's interesting view of the Universe
  with something along the same line (charge flow) and I must admit, 
 mixing electron flow and alcohol before flying thru Vortex-L
  is not particularly recommended
When I realized what I had just sent, I felt lower than a dustpan,
 because I knew the answer.

*However* !

The thought occurred: is this force actually compressive from the outside
 or is it just an attraction from the center of the flows causing it ?
If it _is_ compressive, then there should exist
 some finite set of circumstances where we could:

  accelerate a flow of protons (deuterons ?) 
  to some finite velocity
  wherein the particles would be 
   subject to a compressive (or attractive !?) force 
   sufficient to cause fusion.

Unfortunately, someone somewhere in all the 
 proton/deuteron beam producing facilities 
  would have seen this by now.
Therefore, I cannot see how that this force is actually compressive
 from the outside of the fields.

cheers.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 01:02:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA32080;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:58:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:58:03 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:59:12 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"th8Z3.0.Ar7.AeXYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19823
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 2:27 PM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 21:43 1998.06.18

>
>>
>>Now look at the field lines of two electrons going
>>in same direction (toward you):
>>
>>
>>        -->--           -->--
>>      /       \       /       \
>>     |         |     |         |
>>     ^         v     ^         v
>>     |    e1   |  X  |    e2   |
>>     ^         v     ^         v
>>     |         |     |         |
>>      \       /       \       /
>>        --<--           --<--
>>
>>
>>You can see that at the point X the parallel field lines
>>are going in opposite directions, so they attract.
[snip]
>The thought occurred: is this force actually compressive from the outside
> or is it just an attraction from the center of the flows causing it ?

This force exists between two charges in parallel motion.

>If it _is_ compressive, then there should exist
> some finite set of circumstances where we could:
>
>  accelerate a flow of protons (deuterons ?)
>  to some finite velocity
>  wherein the particles would be
>   subject to a compressive (or attractive !?) force
>   sufficient to cause fusion.


Possibly so!  I don't know.  This self-attraction method would be superior
to external force because the external flux is uniform, and causes beam
oscillation, while the self-attraction effect is inverse-square and stable
- vastly superior!  Unfortuanately, it requires the magnetic field of near
light speed deuterons to overcome the coulomb force.  Assuming you have a
very efficient machine, the energy required to get the near light speed
deuterons could be recovered as heat from the resulting near light speed
helium.  Unfortunately, the fusion energy derived is from mass loss, and
the knietic energy of the mass lost could not be directly recovered.
However, that energy would go into the blue shifting of the gammas, so
maybe it is theoretically possible to make the process work.  I would
personally not bet on it in a practical way though without seeing
extraordianry evidence it would work.


>
>Unfortunately, someone somewhere in all the
> proton/deuteron beam producing facilities
>  would have seen this by now.


Yes, at least something similar - self focusing beams.  The concept has
been used in designing accelerators I believe.

Charles Cagle has developed a lot of theory along this line with the aim of
building a practical fusion device.  He has a web page that describes the
idea. I don't know if it actually will work!   8^)


>Therefore, I cannot see how that this force is actually compressive
> from the outside of the fields.
>
>cheers.


I don't either.  Maybe someone could explain?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 03:32:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA08211;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 03:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 03:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <358A3C07.C1833AB3 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:23:03 +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: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5KexO2.0.902.ItZYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19824
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

A summary in this week's Nature magazine online (www.nature.com) may be related to this phenomenon.

Regards,

hamdi ucar


Long-range electrostatic attraction between like-charge
spheres in a charged pore
 
The existence of long-range attractive electrostatic forces between
particles of like charge is one of the great current controversies of
colloid science. The established theory
(Derjaguin–Landau–Vervey–Overbeek; DLVO) of colloidal
interactions predicts that an isolated pair of like-charged colloidal
spheres in an electrolyte should experience a purely repulsive
screened electrostatic (coulombic) interaction. Direct
measurements of such interactions have shown quantitative
agreement with DLVO theory. Recent experiments, however,
provide evidence that the effective interparticle potential can have
a long-range attractive component in more concentrated
suspensions and for particles confined by charged glass walls. It is
apparent that the long-range attraction in concentrated systems is
due to multi-body interactions and may have a similar explanation
to the attraction observed for otherwise confined colloids.
Theoretical explanations have been proposed but remain the
subject of controversy. Here the authors present a quantitative
theoretical explanation of these attractive forces between confined
colloidal particles, based on direct solutions of the nonlinear
Poisson–Boltzmann equation for two like-charged spheres
confined in a cylindrical charged pore. The calculations show that
the attraction may be explained by the redistribution of the electric
double layers of ions and counterions in solution around the
spheres, owing to the presence of the wall; there is thus no need to
revise the established concepts underlying theories of colloidal
interactions. 

W R Bowen & A O Sharif 
Long-range electrostatic attraction between like-charge
spheres in a charged pore (Letter to Nature)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 05:04:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA19620;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:58:59 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: <358A3C07.C1833AB3 verisoft.com.tr>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"cn9qP1.0.So4.CCbYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19825
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vo,

(excuse if I appear rude, I can't follow all these threads through - spend
too much time)

Horace drew some diagrams about electrons attracting - yeah its text book
but (excuse the niavety) in the ref. frame of the electrons, there is only
electrostatic repulsion (I can appreciate a scaling of B or E spending on
frame, but a change of sign, nah!). Seems a paradox to me, I agree with
Mpowers.  I don't buy all this one has to consider all the other charges
in the universe. An explaination should be simple, but not retarded. 

(Oh about that regulation stuff Jed wrote weeks ago, couldn't respond I
was busy. I'm having my 'faith' in Objectivism pushed to the limits. It
regards it as enough that a business seeks to keep the image of its name
and the respect that goes with that. It regards regulation as creating
employment for 'pen-pushers' when there really is no need. If anything,
reg. allows:

bad guys to get away with things by having fiends in high
places 
or a mechanism of vile abuse (perhaps) of say anti-trust laws where
an honest trader is made to look a criminal 
or taking away the individual's right to judge a product by an often
unelected bureaucrat. Besides, who regulates the regulators huh? huh?

Oh I dunknow! There's probably some happy medium.
) 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 05:32:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA25654;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:30:22 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:30:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:27:52 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980619203126.08c7ca84 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: missing mass amongst other things
Resent-Message-ID: <"eBuy82.0.mG6.RdbYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19827
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 23:59 1998.06.18
-0800:
>At 2:27 PM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>>Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 21:43 1998.06.18
>

>Possibly so!  I don't know.  This self-attraction method would be superior
>to external force because the external flux is uniform, and causes beam
>oscillation, while the self-attraction effect is inverse-square and stable
>- vastly superior!  Unfortuanately, it requires the magnetic field of near
>light speed deuterons to overcome the coulomb force.  Assuming you have a
>very efficient machine, the energy required to get the near light speed
>deuterons could be recovered as heat from the resulting near light speed
>helium.  
.
>Unfortunately, the fusion energy derived is from mass loss, and
>the knietic energy of the mass lost could not be directly recovered.
>However, that energy would go into the blue shifting of the gammas, so

this is something I've been meaning to ask here
 but I never can remember to put it down:
If you accelerate a mass to light speed
 (start with mass m and add energy !)
 and then convert it (the mass) into energy,
 where does the energy go ?  There are two components
 to work on, the kinetic and the intrinsic.
At v=c then the kinetic energy (of the mass)
 is one half of the intrinsic energy (of the mass),
 which means that you could conceivably
 convert half of the mass to energy and have enough energy 
 to stop the remaining mass (decelerate it)
The mass left over would be one half of the mass
 you started with, but it would be stationary.
 And no energy leftover. Nothing
 So you would have annhilated one half of the mass and all 
 the energy you added accelerating it to c. 
I thought there was a legal move against that sort of thing

go figure...





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 05:30:18 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA21286;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:27:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:27:56 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:27:49 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980619203123.2ddf48bc 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: Charles Cagle
Resent-Message-ID: <"EVsY_2.0.VC5.BbbYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19826
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 23:59 1998.06.18
-0800:
>At 2:27 PM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>>Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 21:43 1998.06.18
>
>>
>>>

>>
>>Unfortunately, someone somewhere in all the
>> proton/deuteron beam producing facilities
>>  would have seen this by now.
>
>
>Yes, at least something similar - self focusing beams.  The concept has
>been used in designing accelerators I believe.
>
>Charles Cagle has developed a lot of theory along this line with the aim of
>building a practical fusion device.  He has a web page that describes the
>idea. I don't know if it actually will work!   8^)
>
I hope this ain't the fellow you're referring to:
http://www.sonic.net/~west/cagle.htm

omigawd...

These guys who go around talking to God
 are *cheating* !

On the other hand, if you want it to work,
  who better to give you a hand with the basic theory
  than the one who put it all together in the first place ;^}



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 07:21:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA04099;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:18:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:18:00 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:17:54 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: [Off-Top a bit] Regulation a pithy view
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"-q7Ag2.0.u_.NCdYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19828
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vo,

In a way you're being 'regulated' out of the running. Research goes on at
Government approved institutions. If you're not part, you are a charlatan,
a crank, etc. etc. Powerful people set the research directions - and they
are too human - vunerable to lobby pressure? like to swing the lead? (the
never ending research project that unifies nature and is always just
around the corner and consumes masses of cash)

You see it's too easy to be part of the mass: accept the mass' line and
agree, you'll get promoted, your little office and little plackards on the
wall. Nice jobs for nice people who hide behind a body of people.

Richard Milton (Forbidden Science) identified them as the 'type A'
personality (Ayn Rand did something similar in describing the struggle of
the heroic against the little people). The trait is:-

. Join a big conservative institution, the more gov. the better.
. Create jargon, mumbo jumbo to keep others out.
. Most have a domineering personality which stiffles debate - the real
poltik'er. 
. Make your opponents look like fools. Question their intellect,
santity, credentials.
. Don't stick you neck out. Don't make mistakes, you'll lose the mystique.
. Ally yourself with a greater cause that sees the rest of the World as
blind without you. You must control their wealth, work and thoughts.

(Why they do it, I don't know. Yes some are evil, most are misguided)

They (we, I included) all bloody do it. Look at the medical profession for
instance.  Everything has to fit a 'standard model'. So how do alt.
therapies work?  They don't - illusion. Or when they make mistakes and
protect their brothers. 

I don't believe in benevolent dictators.
This is not a wind up, it's been said before many times, many ways. Just
that people need reminding. Counter brainwashing.
  
Nuf said, I think the expression is. Don't want to create a thread - if
you are pro university type liberalism, *you are* misguided.

(Ah sigh, momentary anger dissipated)
Remi.
(A system to limit human excess and wickedness has to be the most free -
go figure, as they say)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 07:29:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA06048;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:25:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:25:29 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:29:16 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <358bdf22.77018753 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
 
 <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"c6SG61.0.PU1.PJdYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19829
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 03:48 AM 6/19/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>I find this a little strange, in as much as it appears to imply that
>the distance to that net charge is irrelevant.

   Why does this bother you?  Relativity does come into it, but for "local"
phenomena, distance is irrelevant.  Imagine the analogous magnetic circut,
and it becomes pretty obvious.  The length of the wire enclosing a
transformer core does not affect the induced voltage, only the number of
turns of the wire that pass through the core, and their direction affect
the induced voltage.  (Of course, if the wire is not superconducting, the
length of the wire will affect resistance losses.)

   Now there is a sense in which the distance does matter.  Think of a
hydrogen atom.  Whether or not it is moving with respect to a charge
concentration say one meter away does not affect the attraction between
electon and nucleus.  (Well, technically it does, but at that distance the
second and third order effects are negligable.

   So for computational purposes, you only need to consider local charges.
But the "local" system you select must have a net charge of zero.

   (Where I first ran into this was in analyzing ion drives for space
propulsion.  If you don't provide the electrons to neutralize the beam, the
universe will...) 

                                        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 Jun 19 07:36:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA07795;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:33:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:33:46 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:34:47 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: missing mass amongst other things
Resent-Message-ID: <"GKRqp3.0.jv1.9RdYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19830
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:27 PM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
[snip]
>
>this is something I've been meaning to ask here
> but I never can remember to put it down:
>If you accelerate a mass to light speed
> (start with mass m and add energy !)

Most everything I have said in this series of threads is personal opinion
having nothing to do with accepted theory.  It would not be very
interesting otherwise!  As it is, it would be flame bait elsewhere, but
what a joy to contemplate the strange here on vortex.

Of course you can not accelerate a mass to light speed!  At least you
cannot accelerate an object by applying *external force*  to faster than c.
This is because, from the external reference frame from which the force is
applied,  not only does E = m*c^2, but (delta E) = (delta m)*c^2.  All the
energy you put into accelerating the mass (delta E) is shows up as
equivalent mass (delta M) added to the mass.  This, and various other
effects which maintain mass and energy in perfect balance, is why I have
posted numerous times that mass is not converted into energy, that they are
not just equivalent, they are one and the same thing, always perfectly
matched, even when photons are involved.

If there is a means of applying a force that moves with the reference
frame, i.e. in a space ship,  however, the observer traveling with the
space ship can see himself traveling faster than light without any problem.
Star travel becoms very feasible.  His only problem is that there is no
return trip to visit things as they were when he left.  If instantaneous
communication is possible, however, using quantum entangled particles
brought on the voyage, for example, this would make possible, and useful,
one-way space travel for purposes of exploration.



> and then convert it (the mass) into energy,
> where does the energy go ?


The mass goes into the mass of the photons (energy).  Mass and energy
remain in perfect balance.


>There are two components
> to work on, the kinetic and the intrinsic.


No - if mean by "intrinsic energy" you mean mass, they are always in balance.


>At v=c then the kinetic energy (of the mass)
> is one half of the intrinsic energy (of the mass),


As you approach c the apparent mass dwarfs the original mass.  The E = 1/2
m*v term disappears in relation to the (delta E) = (delta m)*c^2 term.  In
other words, as m/(delta m) --> 0 as v --> c.  This is only from the
external observers point of view.


> which means that you could conceivably
> convert half of the mass to energy and have enough energy
> to stop the remaining mass (decelerate it)
>The mass left over would be one half of the mass
> you started with, but it would be stationary.
> And no energy leftover. Nothing


The energy and mass values you start with remain in balance throughout the
translation or acceleration process, from the observers point of view, so,
from the observers point of view, the final state, in terms of mass +
energy, must equal the initial state in those terms.


> So you would have annhilated one half of the mass and all
> the energy you added accelerating it to c.
>I thought there was a legal move against that sort of thing
>
>go figure...


You only break the rules when an internally accelerated object can appear
to go faster than light departing.  It then disappears!

Relativity only has meaning when the only means of communicating events is
via light.  If instantaneous communication becomes reality, as it may well,
relativity, and physics in general, will take some very bizarre turns.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 07:43:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA09161;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:39:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:39:57 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619104347.00ce9b50 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:43:47 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Wbi9A1.0.pE2.zWdYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19831
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 09:48 PM 6/18/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>Two repelling magnets (note that the same direction
>   parallel field lines at X repel)...

   Thanks, I thought of providing those diagrams, but I don't usually have
the patience to draw ASCII art.

   Incidently, there is a better way to describe what I meant in saying
that the charge on what you define as local must be zero.  If you analyze a
system in which magnetic or electrostatic field lines are not closed, you
will have errors.  But reality forces us to consider such systems, and we
try to minimize the induced error.

   However, if you analyze a system with unmatched electric or magnetic
poles, the error is unlimited.  I heard a possible explanation for the
(currently observed) accelleration in the Hubble constant--the universe may
have a net electrical charge...


                                        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 Jun 19 07:56:46 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA14334;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:54:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:54:37 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:55:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Charles Cagle
Resent-Message-ID: <"aqcS03.0.nV3.ikdYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19832
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 8:27 PM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
[snip]
>I hope this ain't the fellow you're referring to:
>http://www.sonic.net/~west/cagle.htm
>
>omigawd...
>
>These guys who go around talking to God
> are *cheating* !
>
>On the other hand, if you want it to work,
>  who better to give you a hand with the basic theory
>  than the one who put it all together in the first place ;^}


Wow!  It appears Charles has graduated well *beyond* pseudo-science into
the realm of the religious experience!

I was refering to , which has the
fusion information.  Like I said, I don't know if it actually will work!
8^)  If God is helping on the design, who am I to say it won't work!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 08:09:53 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17202;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:06:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:06:17 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619111006.00cdf120 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:10:06 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19980619143117.08c7834e po.pacific.net.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"3Co1h.0.hC4.fvdYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19833
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 02:27 PM 6/19/98 +0800, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>  accelerate a flow of protons (deuterons ?) 
>  to some finite velocity
>  wherein the particles would be 
>   subject to a compressive (or attractive !?) force 
>   sufficient to cause fusion.

>Unfortunately, someone somewhere in all the 
> proton/deuteron beam producing facilities 
>  would have seen this by now.

    Oh, yes, many times.  That's what those of us who lost the political
game complain about.  In addition to tokamaks there are several approaches
to fusion which are more suited to actual power production, instead of
research.

    The ones of interest here are the Z-pinch machines.  A high enough
current through the center of a cylindrical plasma causes enough self
compression to cause fusion.  (Theta pinches on the other hand pass the
current around the cylindrical plasma.)   Z-pinches were fairly successful.

>Therefore, I cannot see how that this force is actually compressive
> from the outside of the fields.

   Compressions of over a million to one in volume have been achieved, and
pressures in the megaPascal range.  The problem with a Z-pinch is that mass
flows within the plasma before the pinch current is applied result in
instabilities.  The plasma kinks and the pinch is lost.  One solution
proposed to this was to put a Z-pinch device in orbit, another more
practical (for research purposes) approach creates the plasma from a
lithium wire covered with liquid 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  Fri Jun 19 08:23:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA21534;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:19:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:19:39 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:20:47 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"jgMUT2.0.JG5.B6eYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19834
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 12:58 PM 6/19/98, Cornwall RO wrote:
>Vo,
>
>(excuse if I appear rude, I can't follow all these threads through - spend
>too much time)
>
>Horace drew some diagrams about electrons attracting - yeah its text book
>but (excuse the niavety) in the ref. frame of the electrons, there is only
>electrostatic repulsion

Sorry if I gave the impression that was "textbook". The notion of magnetic
field lines *directly interacting as if real entities* is not textbook, as
far as I know.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 08:36:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA26231;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:32:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:32:40 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980619111006.00cdf120 spectre.mitre.org>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"Vsp9y.0.nP6.NIeYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19835
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



On Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
> 
>    Compressions of over a million to one in volume have been achieved, and
> pressures in the megaPascal range.  The problem with a Z-pinch is that mass
> flows within the plasma before the pinch current is applied result in
> instabilities.  The plasma kinks and the pinch is lost.  One solution
> proposed to this was to put a Z-pinch device in orbit, another more
> practical (for research purposes) approach creates the plasma from a
> lithium wire covered with liquid deuterium.
>

  I jumped into this thread late but I wonder if any of the machines you
are familiar with operate on the "vortex" principle where the particles
are compressed with some kind of external rotating magnetic field and sort
of "flushed" through a small ennough area to cause ignition? 

Jim Ostrowski
 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 08:41:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA03105;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:07:53 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"7AZiM2.0.Om.sNeYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19836
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:43 AM 6/19/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
[snip]
>   However, if you analyze a system with unmatched electric or magnetic
>poles, the error is unlimited.  I heard a possible explanation for the
>(currently observed) accelleration in the Hubble constant--the universe may
>have a net electrical charge...
>
>
>                                        Robert I. Eachus


It is only logical that the net charge *not* be exactly zero.  That is
because when charge goes into a black hole, it disappears from the
universe. The photons (or virtual photons) carrying the charge can not
escape, true?  Total manifested charge for the universe may oscillate about
zero, but would rarely be expected to *be* zero.  There should be an RMS
charge value, and a non-zero value would cause expansion force.  The
question seems to be a matter of quantity.  Also, if the universe is
expanding because it does have a non-zero charge fluctuation value, it will
ultimately contract when sufficient matter is contained in black holes.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 09:56:30 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA16764;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:51:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:51:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:44:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex 
Subject: Solar energy question....
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"Kp6hs.0.p54.uRfYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19837
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Dear Vo.,

	Q:

	Suppose I take a 'plain jane' 10 foot dish concentrator ... and I 
am in bright sun, ie., in Ohio....  how much therma 'boot' do I get at 
the focal point?   Presume a 'plain jane' 85% reflective surface.

	I plan to boil water.... and maybe use it to run turbine or steam 
engine.    

	Any comments, thoughts, references and so on, much appreciated....


					JHS

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 10:06:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA20145;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:00:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:00:06 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:21:11 -0700
Message-Id: <199806191621.JAA07539 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: missing mass amongst other things
Resent-Message-ID: <"5N6681.0.cw4.LafYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19838
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Mass, never turns up missing, never.  It may at one moment be associated
with a waveform we call D, and then later two of those combine to form the
waveforms He3 and n, which confine less of the massive aether ocean around
them into those new wave geometries.  But the reason those solitons wound up
moving faster is because they shot out the excess aether in the direction of
least confinement (toward each other because that is the line along which
their respective waveforms are degraded), and then that massive aether
became just more of the aether ocean we call "empty space".  It did not
disappear, and mass must be conserved.  If it winds up missing from nuclear
reactions, then it wound up appearing as more "empty space", and the
universe just grew a tiny amount in that locale.

Space, is flowing out of stars, literally.  And the mass flow rate, is
equivalent to the luminosity.  ie, we are falling toward the sun through
space faster than we thought because space is flowing out of the sun in
proportion to the nuclear reactions inside.

The reason that scientists are amazed that the surface of the sun looks like
a boiling bubbling pot of boiling water is precisely because it is.  Aether
is boiling out of the surface of the sun, a fluidized bed of solitons.


>This is because, from the external reference frame from which the force is
>applied,  not only does E = m*c^2, but (delta E) = (delta m)*c^2.  All the
>energy you put into accelerating the mass (delta E) is shows up as
>equivalent mass (delta M) added to the mass.  This, and various other
>effects which maintain mass and energy in perfect balance, is why I have
>posted numerous times that mass is not converted into energy, that they are
>not just equivalent, they are one and the same thing, always perfectly
>matched, even when photons are involved.

Yes, these things have a common thread but you have to work with wave
structures to discover what that commonality is.  

We have a property we call "mass", and we notice how something weighs a lot
or a little, when we drop it, and think in our heads that mass is definitely
something important because we can feel it.  And we think it is something
associated with material objects because we feel it when we pick up material
objects.  But we don't think that mass has anything to do with empty space,
because we wave our arms through empty space freely without resistance and
our arms are made up of massive particles, so empty space must "obviously"
;-)  not be massive.

But what is mass, really?  No one really knows in today's physical thinking.
We only know how to figure out what objects will do, not why they do it.

If you work with wave structures in place of particles plus fields, then you
are forced to think in completely different ways than do physicists today.
And when you do that, you are forced to consider that the universe is an
ocean, that "particles" are solitonic waveforms in and composed of that
ocean, and that the medium of the ocean itself is, massive.  When you make
this huge leap of understanding, then the shackles are removed from your
brain and you can for the first time begin to think in a manner that will
lead you to the right answers.

For example, it is then obvious that mass is a measure of how much aether is
associated with your "particle" waveform.  Photons must have some of the
aether moving along with them precessing through the ocean of our universe
just like a wave across the surface of the ocean, ie, a transverse wave.
But "transverse" in the sense of a photon in a volumetric transverse wave is
really more like a smoke ring vortex, fyi.

Still, E=mc^2 doesn't tell you how much energy will appear when x amount of
mass **disappears**.  Rather, it tells you what the reaction thrust is when
a vortex waveform of one geometry changes to a new geometry due to shuffling
protons and neutrons around (nuclear reaction), and the new geometry cannot
confine as much aether.  So the aether is shot out like the exhaust out a
rocket ship, and the resulting waveforms recoil in response, and voila, you
have your energy.  And the best part is, the fact that we believe (or you
believe ;-) that empty space is not an ocean, and thus not massive, you
allow in your theory the idea that mass is not conserved.  But I cannot
allow that idea in my theory or else treating particles as waveforms would
make no sense and the things we see stars doing would be mysterious to me too.  

Instead, I don't allow mass to disappear (ie aether must be conserved).  And
that results in my expecting solitons to be blasted out of stars when they
ignite among many other things I have told you about in the past but which
most choose to ignore.  I guess it is more fun to just put up whacky ideas
without researching all of the books and literature.  I know we want to
listen to far out ideas here, but I have to laugh.

It is like my telling flat earth people a hundred times that the earth is
not flat, and yet they still are debating what happens when you fall off the
edge without having heard a single piece of the evidence (light shining
vertically down wells, curved shadow on lunar eclipses (I think Aristotle
argued that one))

When you think in terms of "particles", then you can make a statement like,
"When a massive particle is moving at c............."  But when you work
with waveforms, that statement is none sense because the kind of waveform
that you must work with in place of particles cannot move that fast.  What
they can do, is to get the ocean of aether moving around them, and thus
accelerate up to a faster velocity.  But in a real sense, a space craft like
that is pushing the rest of the universe as it accelerates.

The way to move faster than c, if you want to know, is to simply force the
aether ahead of the craft to condense into "virtual particles" so that the
craft can pierce through that barrier.  The craft should be able to form
it's own warp bubble.  I'll have nice images of what I mean by this in the
book, hopefully ready for publication early fall.

Later, Ross Tessien













From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 10:16:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA24975;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:12:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:12:48 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619121336.00c77a84 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:13:36 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex 
From: Scott Little 
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"KQbXn1.0.866.FmfYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19839
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:44 6/19/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote:

>	Suppose I take a 'plain jane' 10 foot dish concentrator ... and I 
>am in bright sun....85% reflective surface.

Typical full-sun insolation is 100 watts/ft^2 so you'll have ~1300 watts at
the focus.



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 Jun 19 10:42:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA32356;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:37:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:37:08 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:38:14 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"ljclU2.0.Pv7.37gYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19840
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:13 PM 6/19/98, Scott Little wrote:
>At 12:44 6/19/98 -0400, John Schnurer wrote:
>
>>       Suppose I take a 'plain jane' 10 foot dish concentrator ... and I
>>am in bright sun....85% reflective surface.
>
>Typical full-sun insolation is 100 watts/ft^2 so you'll have ~1300 watts at
>the focus.


A 10 foot dish has 5 foot radius.  Area = Pi*r^2 = 3.14*25 = 78.5 ft^2. At
100 watts/ft^2 I get 7850 watts.  Using 0.85 as a reflectivity factor, I
get 6673 watts.

Watts wrong?  8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 10:54:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01559;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:46:01 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: missing mass amongst other things
Resent-Message-ID: <"oZYFx3.0.GO.QGgYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19841
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 9:21 AM 6/19/98, Ross Tessien wrote:
[snip]

> ... we don't think that mass has anything to do with empty space,
>because we wave our arms through empty space freely without resistance ...
[snip]

Yep - and I've been doin' more than my share of that arm waving.  8^)

I better get back to work!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 11:52:52 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15671;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:50:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619144632.00cef470 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:46:32 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
References: <3.0.1.32.19980619111006.00cdf120 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"sRFvM2.0.bq3.LBhYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19842
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 08:33 AM 6/19/98 -0700, Jim Ostrowski wrote:
>  I jumped into this thread late but I wonder if any of the machines you
>are familiar with operate on the "vortex" principle where the particles
>are compressed with some kind of external rotating magnetic field and sort
>of "flushed" through a small ennough area to cause ignition? 

   Nope, a big enough capacitor goes boom! through a plasma, and the
compression causes fusion.  At the 1964 World's Fair in NYC, GE had a theta
pinch set-up as far as I can remember.  (The difference between the theta
and Z pinches is where the current goes, in a Z-pinch it all goes into the
plasma, in a theta pinch most of it goes into magnet coils around the plasma.)

                                        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 Jun 19 11:53:21 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA15881;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:52:49 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"ITcyP3.0.2u3.RChYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19843
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 07:07 AM 6/19/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>It is only logical that the net charge *not* be exactly zero.  That is
>because when charge goes into a black hole, it disappears from the
>universe. The photons (or virtual photons) carrying the charge can not
>escape, true?

  No, charge is not carried by photons, and a black hole can have a
non-zero charge.  In fact, proposals have been made for charging mini-black
holes so that they can be moved around.

  Think of it this way.  If you put ten (unmatched) electrons in a bag, you
can determine the charge by measuring the field at the surface of the bag.
Doesn't matter what shape the bag is, or where the electrons are inside it,
the integration will reveal that you have enclosed ten poles.  Surface
integrals ain't easy to understand, but that's the math that applies.

                                        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 Jun 19 12:43:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA03313;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:39:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:39:17 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980619144002.00c8033c mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:40:02 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Scott Little 
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"6fxwz3.0.Up.avhYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19844
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>At 12:13 PM 6/19/98, I wrote:

>>Typical full-sun insolation is 100 watts/ft^2 so you'll have ~1300 watts at
>>the focus.

Then Horace wrote:

>A 10 foot dish has 5 foot radius.  Area = Pi*r^2 = 3.14*25 = 78.5 ft^2. At
>100 watts/ft^2 I get 7850 watts.  Using 0.85 as a reflectivity factor, I
>get 6673 watts.

hmmmm! 5 times more than my result.  I suppose there IS a difference
between 5*ft^2 and (5*ft)^2 .....  My mistake, Horace is right.



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 Jun 19 13:42:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA08078;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:38:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 13:38:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <358AC015.57A6 interlaced.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:46:29 -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: Solar energy question....
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"dtFmG2.0.8-1.SniYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19845
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

John Schnurer wrote:
> 
>         Dear Vo.,
> 
>         Q:
> 
>         Suppose I take a 'plain jane' 10 foot dish concentrator ... and I
> am in bright sun, ie., in Ohio....  how much therma 'boot' do I get at
> the focal point?   Presume a 'plain jane' 85% reflective surface.
> 
>         I plan to boil water.... and maybe use it to run turbine or steam
> engine.

Well, use Scott's 100 watts per ft^2 and Horace's math.
However, mirror with a long focal length has a large solar image, so
the concentration is less than a short focal-length mirror, which has
a small solar image.  A round mirror with a spherical optical curve will
smear out the image along the focal axis, a paraboloid will give the
sharpest image but is a chore to make.
At NASA, John, we made a neat demo mirror by building a shallow wooden
box like a big bread pan.  Then, we put bulkheads across the box with
parabolic cutouts in them.  Then, we took two sheets of, I think, 1/8"
thick acrylic plastic.  Between the plastic, we located a sheet of thin
(a couple of mills - like the stuff super blankets are made of) mylar
for a reflective surface.  Then, we squashed two opposite edges of the
sandwich together and set it into retainers in the parabolic cutouts
in the box so that the sandwich was held snug against the parabolic
shape.  This made a really neat cylindrical concentrator with a
parabolic optical curve.  Then, we ran a blackened copper pipe along
the focal axis of the cylindrical paraboloid with its two ends sticking
out of the ends of the box.  We made a fake sun out of an array of about
30 or 40 auto headlamps (our show was inside with no sun!)  Each 10
auto lamps can be run on 120 volts AC if you connect them in series.
Then, we filled (I just remembered, our boiler tube was glass so we
could see inside!) the glass tube with Freon xx, which ever one boils at
about 80 degrees or so, as a working fluid.  When the rubes,...er..make
that, spectators showed up at our stop, we gave a nice talk, hit the
switch to our fake sun, got instant vigorous boiling in the Freon,
piped the vapor thru a crude turbine and EXHAUSTED THE FREON BACKSTAGE!!
All this happened before the ozone hole scare because, WE CAUSED THE
OZONE HOLE WITH THIS RIG!!  We went thru a few small drums of Freon for
the duration of the show.
Let's see, John, A 4 x 8 ft sheet of stuff - 32 ft^2 before scrunching,
3200 watts pre scrunch - maybe 2000 watts post scrunch and with Horace's
fudge factor applied - that should boil some water.
                               |||||||
                              /       \	 <--- Stenger completely
                             O| O   O |O      ignorant of the ozone
                              |   O   |       hole!
                               \ \_/ /
                                \___/

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 14:05:46 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA18863;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:01:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:01:07 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:49:57 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q5iqG3.0.fc4.J6jYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19846
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:21 PM 6/19/98, John Schnurer wrote:
>n
>
>        How many liters of water per hour will this boil?
[snip]
>> A 10 foot dish has 5 foot radius.  Area = Pi*r^2 = 3.14*25 = 78.5 ft^2. At
>> 100 watts/ft^2 I get 7850 watts.  Using 0.85 as a reflectivity factor, I
>> get 6673 watts.

It takes 2262 J/ml to boil water.  (More if it is badly contaminated or
saltwater.)  A watt is 1 J/sec, or 3600 J/hr.  Your boiler thus puts out
(6673 J/s)*(3600 s/hr) = 2.4x10^7 J/hr.  This boils (2.4x10^7 J/Hr)/(2262
J/ml) = 1.062x10^4 ml/hr, or 10.62 liters per hour, or about 2.8 gallons of
distilled water.

If your objective is to distill water there may be better ways to do it.
One way is to put a thin layer of water over a black surface area, all
under under a plastic canopy.  It works even better if you can cool the
canopy, where water condenses and drips down to the sides of the canopy
where it can be collected.  The advantage to this method is that the whole
thing can be made of inflatable plastic, and no sun following mechanism is
required.  This kind of device is used in some life rafts I think.

Your solar boiler does have other advantages though.  The steam can be used
to run a steam powered electrical generator, which can heat a resistor in
the water to accelerate the boiling.  Lets assume you feed back 30 percent
of the heat.  You then get 2.8 x 1.3 = 3.64 gal of water per hour, an extra
0.84 gal/hr.  However, you can feed bac 30 percent of that, or another
0.252 gal/hr, so you get a throughput of about 3.89 gal/hr, or you can just
stick with 2.8 gal/hr and use the 2000 W electrical power for something
else.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 17:09:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA16924;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980619195441.007c1b60 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:54:41 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Cold Fusion Times vol.6, issue 3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"p1fCG3.0.J84.EmlYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19847
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

 
 June 19,'98

Cold Fusion Times  vol 6 number 3 (Summer 98) is at
the printer, and should be in subscribers hands
by the end of next week. & the web site is updated.

 As always, the COLD FUSION TIMES (ISSN#1072-2874)
world wide web loc'n:  http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html
presents focused hard-core science, nuclear, and engineering
issues, with detailed material science and nuclear physics, including
analysis of developments in the cold fusion field.
A brief survey of this issue (Vol 6, Number 3) 
includes the following:

 -----------------------------------------------
     COLD FUSION TIMES 
MOST RECENT ISSUE  --  Summer 1998 
The Summer 1998 issue (Volume 6, number 3) of the 
COLD FUSION TIMES focuses on the material science, 
nuclear physics and engineering issues
discussed and learned at both the ICCF-7 Vancouver 
and American Nuclear Society (Tennessee) conferences.
Selected papers are reviewed in this issue, with 
continued emphasis on focus on nuclear ash issues, 
including calibrations, inert gas diffusion and other 
issues of interest to the cold fusion field.
                                                                  
          CF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 
          Cold Fusion Reports from France, China, Italy,
            Japan, Russia, USA, and elsewhere 
          Engineering and Research Update 
          COLD FUSION CONFERENCES FLOURISH 
          Reports   on   ICCF-7 and ANS98  CONFERENCES 
          Two full pages of color photographs 
          Summary review, and excerpts, of selected papers 
          Developing Techniques, Theories, Metallurgy & 
              Elucidation of Nuclear Ash 
          Analysis of ICCF-7 CF Conference Material available
               nowhere else 
          Nuclear Products in gas and electrolytically 
              loaded D/PD  and  H/PD systems 
          Metanalysis of the Cold Fusion Literature 
          Material Science and Surface Studies 
          Alloys and Multi-layer Cathodes  (Pd/CaO/Pd) 
          Acoustic Systems 
          Nuclear Shell Magic Numbers 
       
      Practical Information and Reference Vectors
     More journal articless which you may have missed 
     Updates on Equipment, Supplies, Consulting Available 
     "What's Happening", "Material Science and Engineering" and more 
     The best of the world's literature 
 ----------------------------------------------------------

   The cover page, as always, is available at the
COLD FUSION TIMES web site, located at
   http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 17:12:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA17972;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:05:26 -0700
Message-Id: <199806200005.RAA28606 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: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"xtc98.0.fO4.DrlYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19848
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>At 2:21 PM 6/19/98, John Schnurer wrote:
>>n


>Your solar boiler does have other advantages though.  The steam can be used
>to run a steam powered electrical generator, which can heat a resistor in
>the water to accelerate the boiling.  Lets assume you feed back 30 percent
>of the heat.  You then get 2.8 x 1.3 = 3.64 gal of water per hour, an extra
>0.84 gal/hr.  However, you can feed bac 30 percent of that, or another
>0.252 gal/hr, so you get a throughput of about 3.89 gal/hr, or you can just
>stick with 2.8 gal/hr and use the 2000 W electrical power for something
>else.

Horace, I'm sorry but this is just a blatent misapplication of
thermodynamics.  You can't take power out of the steam, and dump it back
into a resistor to get yet more steam out than if you just opened up the top
and let the steam boil out freely.  Every working mechanical device or
process suffers an effeciency drop of some magnitude.  So if you were
producing a certain amount of steam via the heating from the concentrated
solar energy, and you try to use that steam to drive a turbine, power an
electric generator, and then drive a resistor, you are lossing energy at
each stage of that scheme.

Thus, the total steam produced will drop, and total useful work obtained
will drop, and you will have reduced your effeciency of the entire system.

Here is one for you that you will get wrong if you think like above:

If I place a refrigerator in a **perfectly** insulated room (ie no heat
flows into or out of the room), and turn the refrigerator on but leave the
door to the refrigerator open, then will the temperature in the room:

A)  Go down?
B)  Stay the same?
c)  Go up?


Ross Tessien


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 18:41:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA03181;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:34:19 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:34:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:33:14 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"QCsbR2.0.Zn.M6nYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19849
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:05 PM 6/19/98, Ross Tessien wrote:
[snip]
>Horace, I'm sorry but this is just a blatent misapplication of
>thermodynamics.  You can't take power out of the steam, and dump it back
>into a resistor to get yet more steam out than if you just opened up the top
>and let the steam boil out freely.


Totally wrong.  The steam is at or above 100 C and a gas besides. The
ambient temp is way less, so there is energy to be had.  Old steam engines
ran with the steam at ambient pressure, except in the condensing cylinder,
where it created a partial but strong vacuum that moved the piston.


>Every working mechanical device or
>process suffers an effeciency drop of some magnitude.  So if you were
>producing a certain amount of steam via the heating from the concentrated
>solar energy, and you try to use that steam to drive a turbine, power an
>electric generator, and then drive a resistor, you are lossing energy at
>each stage of that scheme.


No - just putting back 30 percent of what was taken.  The main advantage of
adding the steam engine is the ability to get power, run pumps, etc.  When
in "idle" the power can be fed back to improve efficiency.  In fact, just
feeding the steam back through a heat exchanger to heat incoming water can
recover a significant amount of heat.  It is better to do that heat
exchange in the jacket of a steam engine though, I think.


>
>Thus, the total steam produced will drop, and total useful work obtained
>will drop, and you will have reduced your effeciency of the entire system.

More gallons is better.

>
>Here is one for you that you will get wrong if you think like above:
>
>If I place a refrigerator in a **perfectly** insulated room (ie no heat
>flows into or out of the room), and turn the refrigerator on but leave the
>door to the refrigerator open, then will the temperature in the room:
>
>A)  Go down?
>B)  Stay the same?
>c)  Go up?

Obviously go up in proportion to the amount of energy fed to the refrigerator.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 18:50:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA05332;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:37:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex 
Subject: NEW Solar calcs....
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"uAepq2.0.CJ1.yHnYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19850
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Dear Vo.,

	Let us change the parameters.....

	The dish is 15 feet diameter.  It still is boiling water.....at 
what rate? 

	The steam will be used to run generator.   Reflector efficiency 
is 85 percent.   What is a typical medium grade steam engine-electrical 
generator efficiency?   Not the most expensive, but a reasonable "OK" 
engine or turbine and generator.  The goal is a PRACTICAL remote area 
power generator.    300 days a year full sun.  Figure Middle East.

	How does it look now?   I figure about 4 Kw ... and MAYBE we also 
get 4 to 6 gal/hr 'clean' water.


					J

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 19:35:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA08744;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:31:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:31:47 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:31:51 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358b1bec.158128214 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0@spectre.mitre.org>  <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0@spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.016282
20 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30@spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"tvYvy3.0.X82.IynYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19851
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:29:16 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>At 03:48 AM 6/19/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>I find this a little strange, in as much as it appears to imply that
>>the distance to that net charge is irrelevant.
>
>   Why does this bother you?  Relativity does come into it, but for "local"
>phenomena, distance is irrelevant.  Imagine the analogous magnetic circut,

The reason it bothers me is this. I thought you were implying that in
the frame of the electrons, the positive charge on the rest of the
universe could be seen as a positive current (as opposed to the
negative current of the electrons in the lab frame). And this positive
current would then create a magnetic field which caused the electrons
to move together. 
However if this were the case, then I would expect the distance
between the electrons and this "positive current" to be a determining
factor in the strength of the magnetic field "felt" by the electrons.
But somehow my intuition says that the actual attractive force between
the electrons is dependant on the distance between the electrons, and
independent of the distance to the positive charges. 
Thence, the apparent discrepancy.
So which step in the above "logic" isn't :).

>and it becomes pretty obvious.  The length of the wire enclosing a
>transformer core does not affect the induced voltage, only the number of
>turns of the wire that pass through the core, and their direction affect
>the induced voltage.  (Of course, if the wire is not superconducting, the
>length of the wire will affect resistance losses.)
>
>   Now there is a sense in which the distance does matter.  Think of a
>hydrogen atom.  Whether or not it is moving with respect to a charge
>concentration say one meter away does not affect the attraction between
>electon and nucleus.  (Well, technically it does, but at that distance the
>second and third order effects are negligable.
>
>   So for computational purposes, you only need to consider local charges.
>But the "local" system you select must have a net charge of zero.
>
>   (Where I first ran into this was in analyzing ion drives for space
>propulsion.  If you don't provide the electrons to neutralize the beam, the
>universe will...) 

I think in this case the negative voltage on the ship just builds up
to the point where it becomes impossible to ionise any more atoms.
Either that, or the negative ship becomes attracted to the positive
space charge of the ion cloud behind the ship, to the point where the
ship isn't going anywhere, because it's being pulled backwards just as
hard as the momentum transfer from the ejected ions is pushing it
forwards.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 19:40:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA09730;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:37:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:37:34 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:37:30 -0700
Message-Id: <199806200237.TAA11797 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: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"2CSnq2.0.tN2.k1oYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19852
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>At 5:05 PM 6/19/98, Ross Tessien wrote:
>[snip]
>>Horace, I'm sorry but this is just a blatent misapplication of
>>thermodynamics.  You can't take power out of the steam, and dump it back
>>into a resistor to get yet more steam out than if you just opened up the top
>>and let the steam boil out freely.
>
>
>Totally wrong.  The steam is at or above 100 C and a gas besides. The
>ambient temp is way less, so there is energy to be had.  Old steam engines
>ran with the steam at ambient pressure, except in the condensing cylinder,
>where it created a partial but strong vacuum that moved the piston.

If I am not understanding what the goal is, then explain it to me.  But
according to what has been written you are still incorrect and here is why.
If you think I am in error, please identify the point I make a mistake on.

First, if the steam is above 100 C, then it is because you placed a
restriction between the steam chamber and the outside ambient.  If it is at
ambient pressure, then it boils at 100 C.

Second, the thermodynamic losses are in proportion to the temperature
differential.  So if you have pressurized the system, and raised the
temperature at which the water boils, then you have increased your
conductive, convective and other temperature related losses due to the
thermal transfer to the outside environment.

Third, old steam engines boiled the steam at high temperature and pressure,
then discharged that steam through the pistons to drive the wheels.  Most of
the steam was exhausted and so that is why they had to stop to get more
water all the time.  But the vacuum is definitely not what drove the
pistons.  I am not aware, though haven't studied them closely, so it may
well be that they used condensers as that is logical, and they may have
connected the vacuum to the back side of the pistons, but I doubt it.

The reason is, you have at maximum 14.7 psi for a perfect vacuum, but you
have hundreds of psi for the pressurized side of things.  You are better off
making a push push piston arrangement (which they used), and to drive the
piston in both directions in the cylinder.

And they absolutely did not use the steam at ambient pressure, that is wrong.

My degree is in mechanical engineering, so this stuff is not foreign to me
in the least.



>
>
>>Every working mechanical device or
>>process suffers an effeciency drop of some magnitude.  So if you were
>>producing a certain amount of steam via the heating from the concentrated
>>solar energy, and you try to use that steam to drive a turbine, power an
>>electric generator, and then drive a resistor, you are lossing energy at
>>each stage of that scheme.
>
>
>No - just putting back 30 percent of what was taken.  

Again incorrect because you are forgeting about the added losses of your
scheme.  To get out the energy via a turbine you lose energy at every stage,
so there are efficiency problems to deal with at each energy conversion
stage.  And then you dump the energy back in as heat via a resistor, it
makes no sense.

If you want to gain additional energy while the power output sits idle, then
get a larger resevoir of water and pre-heat it.  That would improve the
amount of work you get out of the system.

But if your goal is to just boil water, then don't pressurize the system and
you will get the most steam possible in that manner.  Increase the surface
area to improve the process of vaporization.



>>Here is one for you that you will get wrong if you think like above:
>>
>>If I place a refrigerator in a **perfectly** insulated room (ie no heat
>>flows into or out of the room), and turn the refrigerator on but leave the
>>door to the refrigerator open, then will the temperature in the room:
>>
>>A)  Go down?
>>B)  Stay the same?
>>c)  Go up?
>
>Obviously go up in proportion to the amount of energy fed to the refrigerator.

It should be obvious, but it isn't to most people.  They miss the fact that
energy is sneaking into the system via the electric cord.  In the above
scenario it is exactly the opposite.  You are missing that to drive a
turbine you must increase the temperature of the entire system, and thus the
thermal heat losses go up.  Ergo, amount of steam produced goes down,
contrary to your original comments.

The amount of work available is fixed by the input power arriving from the
sun.  So the best you can do is to boil the water at ambient temperature, or
if you are patient, then you vaporize it at lower temperature using a larger
surface area.

Now, if your goal changes from "amount of water boiled", to "amount of
boiled water we can recover as distilled water", then the situation changes
and you will find some temperature pressure condition that maximizes the
amount of liquid recovered in your condensor and minimizes the amount of
heat lost in your high temperature side of things.  But that is a different
problem.

Either way, if you try to add a generator to either scenario, you must drive
the temperature up further, and you will increase your thermodynamic losses.
So the generator resistor problem is flat out wrong for precisely the
reverse reason as the room will heat up in the above example.

Ross Tessien


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 19:47:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA16018;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 19:37:32 -0700
Message-Id: <199806200237.TAA11801 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: NEW Solar calcs....
Resent-Message-ID: <"yEME-.0.8w3.n3oYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19853
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>
>	Dear Vo.,
>
>	Let us change the parameters.....
>
>	The dish is 15 feet diameter.  It still is boiling water.....at 
>what rate? 
>
>	The steam will be used to run generator.   Reflector efficiency 
>is 85 percent.   What is a typical medium grade steam engine-electrical 
>generator efficiency?   Not the most expensive, but a reasonable "OK" 
>engine or turbine and generator.  The goal is a PRACTICAL remote area 
>power generator.    300 days a year full sun.  Figure Middle East.
>
>	How does it look now?   I figure about 4 Kw ... and MAYBE we also 
>get 4 to 6 gal/hr 'clean' water.


A scenario like this begins to work, and the larger the system the more
efficient the project becomes.  ie, dollars investment in equipment per KWhr
output capacity.  By this I am meaning the total amount of energy produced
prior to the machinery and equipment being scrap.  A generator, it turns
out, would be overall more economical under all circumstances.  At least
this was the case 10 years ago, and I don't think the cost of oil has
changed by enough to throw that study off as of yet.

That said, you can definitely accomplish the above and if you are in a place
where you have sun, and not regular access to fuel, then it is the way to
go.  for a real home in the modern world, the most efficient device is a
passive solar water heater to pre-heat your hot water in a holding tank.
These devices place the insulated hot water holding tank at the peak of the
roof, and then the solar collectors are placed lower on the roof.  A small
pump can be added with little degradation to the efficiency, and a
reasonable improvement to the heat gain.

I did some calculations on these sort of things way back when, and was
discouraged by the results.  Solar heating is not very efficient when you
consider the overall economics.  We had to do a study on this in college,
and compare the energy conversion rates and economics for different kinds of
power plants.  It turned out that an oil fired plant was more economical,
and it runs when the sun don't shine ;-)

Basically, it turned out that programs like wind turbines for air power, and
the solar power generators could be profitable if they were in places like
you describe, but oil power was more profitable.  Meaning, if you consider
the expense of installed equipment, cost of operations, etc. ie the whole
shebang, then oil won out.  And this should come as no surprise because you
don't see solar power plants all around the world.

In California, we have a lot of wind farms, and some solar power plants.
but these exist solely because they are government subsidized.  PG&E, the
local power company, is required by law to buy the power at a premium price.
Thus, some venture schemes got involved and built lots of different kinds of
generators.  Some have been torn down.  Some of the wind mills had to be
feathered because the Golden Eagles built nests on top of them and kept
turning up on the ground dead due to being smacked by the rotating blades!

I originally went into engineering to learn how to build solar powered homes
and buildings.  But after studying the reality of it, became discouraged
about the prospects.  It may well come to pass that if we do not succeed in
vortex and other lists to find a way to build reliable CF reactors, that as
the cost of oil rises, then these devices will finally become economical.

But even a simple solar hot water heater, if you considered the cost of
materials, and the life expectancy of the panels and components, was not the
best choice when compared to propane, natural gas, or oil.  It inched out
electricity, but remember that has already gone through a generation cycle
and so you suffer loss of efficiency in energy conversion and electricity
transmission.

The best natural form of energy out there is hydro electric power.  That is
a real winner.  But you have to dam up a natural environment to get it, so
in the end you have to decide you want a lake instead of a scenic river I guess.

Ross Tessien



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 20:24:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA18390;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:21:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 20:21:43 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 03:21:49 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358c1fd8.159133046 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"TuUho1.0.BV4.6hoYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19854
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:52:49 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
[snip]
>  No, charge is not carried by photons, and a black hole can have a
>non-zero charge.  In fact, proposals have been made for charging mini-black
>holes so that they can be moved around.
[snip]
Charge may not be carried by photons, but the information pertaining
to the change in charge of the black hole should be. And these photons
can't escape. In short, the charge of the black hole may change, but
it will be an eternity (literally) before we find out about it.
(Don't forget the time gradient.)


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 21:13:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA02108;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <358B36BC.23AE ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:12:44 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki 
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320  (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Cold Fusion Times vol.6, issue 3
References: <3.0.5.32.19980619195441.007c1b60 world.std.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"gB5gc1.0.rW.SPpYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19855
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 19, 1998

Oops, was looking at your spring 1998 webpage pictures of the APS
presentation. My error.

-ak-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 23:18:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA20402;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:12:22 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: <"-KuHH.0.i-4.LDrYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19856
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

All,
Another run tonight (Friday 6-19-98) using the same tube, H2 with K, 
as the last run on June 16th. No changes were made to the setup.
Since the last run the tube has been under vacuum.
Nothing was added or removed. The thermocouple was not touched
and remained in the exact position as it was in the last run.
Recall in the June 16th run a Tc of 743.5 C was reached with a power
input of 2130 volts at 43.9 milliamps. Why was the temperature higher
for this run....?...I don't know. The ambient was higher tonight (32.8 C) 
than June 16th (~25 C). The tube was not opened between runs.

Here follows all the raw data as recorded in my lab notebook during
the run.
If anyone wants the Lotus spreadsheet wk4 file (about 10k) with chart
of the run let me know and I will upload it to you. I don't want to waste
Bill Beattys bandwidth.
I took readings every minute during the run.  
Tc=Degrees C  +/-0.1 C
Volts is  +/-10 volts
Milliamps is  +/-0.1 mA

Time  Tc
0	    32.8	Vacuum 26.8 in Hg. Power on to tube					
1	  155.1						
2	   315.6						
3	   350.2						
4	   426.1	 	 				
5	   430.0	 H2 fill to 6.0 in Hg (20.8 guage vacuum)					
6	   578.1						
7	   765.2						
8	   783.8     Tube	     	Tube				
9	   783.5	Voltage	Milliamps				
10	   783.1	1740	      51.4				
11	   782.9	1750	      51.1				
12	   782.0	1760	      50.8				
13	   780.1	1780	      50.4				
14	   778.6	1790	      50.1				
15	   778.2	1800	      50.1				
16	   775.5	1810	      49.9				
17	   777.5	1810	      50.0				
18	   777.7	1820	      49.8				
19	   777.2	1820	      50.0				
20	   776.8	1830	      49.9				
21	   776.5	1840	      49.8				
22	   776.0	1840	      49.7				
23	   775.8	1850	      49.5				
24	   774.6	1850	      49.6				
25	   776.1	1860	      49.7				
26	   775.2	1860	      49.4				
27	   774.7	1870	      49.4				
28	   773.7	1870	      49.2				
29	   773.6	1880	      49.1				
30	   773.1	1880	      49.0				
31	   772.3	1880	      49.0				
32	   772.7	1890	      48.8				
33	   771.5	1900	      48.7				
34	   771.2	1900	      48.6				
35	   770.9	1900	      48.7				
36	   770.8	1910	      48.5				
37	   770.3	1910	      48.4				
38	   769.8	1920	      48.4				
39	   769.3	1920	      48.2				
40	   769.4	1920	      48.2				
41	   768.4	1930	      48.0				
42	   768.5	1930	      48.0				
43	   768.1	1940	      47.8				
44	   767.9	1940	      47.7				
45	   767.2	1940	      47.7				
46	   766.9	1950	      47.7				
47	   767.5	1950	      47.6				
48	   768.4	1950	      47.8				
49	   768.0	1950	      47.8				
50	   768.5	1960	      47.8				
51	   767.9	1960	      47.7				
52	   767.5	1960	      47.7				
53	   767.6	1970	      47.7				
54	   767.7	1970	      47.6				
55	   766.6	1970	      47.5				
56	   766.0	1980	      47.4				
57	   766.3	1980	      47.4				
58	   766.8	1980	      47.3				
59	   765.8	1980	      47.3				
60	   765.4	1980	      47.0	 H2 purge to 1 psi,pump down to 6.0 in Hg
61	   759.0	2010	      46.6				
62	   760.6	2010	      46.6				
63	   760.9	2010	      46.6				
64	   760.2	2010	      46.6				
65	   760.8	2010	      46.6				
66	   760.4	2010	      46.3				
67	   759.8	2010	      46.4				
68	   759.6	2010	      46.4				
69	   759.6	2010	      46.4				
70	   759.5	2010	      46.4				
71	   758.8	2010	      46.5				
72	   760.0	2020	      46.4				
73	   758.9	2020	      46.4				
74	   758.8	2020	      46.1				
75	   757.1	2030	      46.0				
76	   756.6	2030	      46.0				
77	   756.8	2030	      46.0				
78	   757.1	2030	      46.0				
79	   758.5	2030	      46.2				
80	   757.3	2040	      46.0				
81	   757.9	2040	      46.1				
82	   758.3	2050	      46.0				
83	   758.6	2050	      46.0				
84	   759.3	2060	      45.8				
85	   758.6	2060	      45.8				
86	   759.1	2070	      45.7				
87	   758.6	2070	      45.4				
88	   756.6	2070	      45.5				
89	   756.5	2070	      45.5				
90	   756.4	2070	      45.5	 Power Off			
91	   376.1	 					
92	   201.2						
93	   132.9						
94	     99.3						
95	     81.9						
96	     70.4	 Shield removed					
97	     55.6						
98	     46.1						
99	     40.6						
100    38.1						
101    36.6						
102    35.9						
103    34.4						
104    34.0	 					
105    33.1	 End of run	 Pump down to full vacuum 26.8 in Hg.				
Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 19 23:45:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA24942;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 22:43:20 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"rd0_51.0.e56.5frYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19857
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:37 PM 6/19/98, Ross Tessien wrote:
>>At 5:05 PM 6/19/98, Ross Tessien wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>Horace, I'm sorry but this is just a blatent misapplication of
>>>thermodynamics.  You can't take power out of the steam, and dump it back
>>>into a resistor to get yet more steam out than if you just opened up the top
>>>and let the steam boil out freely.
>>
>>
>>Totally wrong.  The steam is at or above 100 C and a gas besides. The
>>ambient temp is way less, so there is energy to be had.  Old steam engines
>>ran with the steam at ambient pressure, except in the condensing cylinder,
>>where it created a partial but strong vacuum that moved the piston.
>
>If I am not understanding what the goal is, then explain it to me.  But
>according to what has been written you are still incorrect and here is why.
>If you think I am in error, please identify the point I make a mistake on.


>
>First, if the steam is above 100 C, then it is because you placed a
>restriction between the steam chamber and the outside ambient.  If it is at
>ambient pressure, then it boils at 100 C.


Not true.  The water stays at 100 C, but the steam is at or above 100 C. It
depends on the intensity of the boiler.  When the steam bubbles form on the
boiler surface, they can be further heated, and they provide insulation
from the water as well.  The staem can be above 100 C.


>
>Second, the thermodynamic losses are in proportion to the temperature
>differential.  So if you have pressurized the system, and raised the
>temperature at which the water boils, then you have increased your
>conductive, convective and other temperature related losses due to the
>thermal transfer to the outside environment.


I didn't say anything about pressurization, except to refer to the lack the
necessity for it.  Pressurization makes for heavy unsafe stuff.

>
>Third, old steam engines boiled the steam at high temperature and pressure,
>then discharged that steam through the pistons to drive the wheels.


I'm talking older than you are talking, apparently.


>Most of
>the steam was exhausted and so that is why they had to stop to get more
>water all the time.


The steam engines to which I refer pumped water from mines.


>But the vacuum is definitely not what drove the
>pistons.  I am not aware, though haven't studied them closely, so it may
>well be that they used condensers as that is logical, and they may have
>connected the vacuum to the back side of the pistons, but I doubt it.


I think the pistons on some of the mine engines had both a forward and
backward power cycle.


>
>The reason is, you have at maximum 14.7 psi for a perfect vacuum, but you
>have hundreds of psi for the pressurized side of things.  You are better off
>making a push push piston arrangement (which they used), and to drive the
>piston in both directions in the cylinder.


Yes, pressurized might be better, but also might not.  Depends on expense,
power requirements, maintenance considerations, use of appropriate
technology etc.  A sterling engine might be even better, depending on
cost/benefit.   If used in the Middle East maybe solar cells would be
better for electricity.  Also, membrane systems are very good for water
purification.  Much depends on knowing the exact particulars of the
operating requirements.


>
>And they absolutely did not use the steam at ambient pressure, that is wrong.


I am sure that ambient pressure (or at least very low pressure) steam was
used in some engines.  Maybe I can dig up a reference next time I go to
Anchorage.  One nice thing about ambient pressure engines is people don't
get killed from failing pressure relief valves, etc.  Another is they
rarely break down. The down side is efficiency and engine size.


>
>My degree is in mechanical engineering, so this stuff is not foreign to me
>in the least.


This is amazing information!  I am stunned that you have spent years
conveying your theory on vortex, yet have not posted the formulations or
quantifications of your theory, at least that I recall.  Now there are no
excuses!   8^)


>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>Every working mechanical device or
>>>process suffers an effeciency drop of some magnitude.  So if you were
>>>producing a certain amount of steam via the heating from the concentrated
>>>solar energy, and you try to use that steam to drive a turbine, power an
>>>electric generator, and then drive a resistor, you are lossing energy at
>>>each stage of that scheme.
>>
>>
>>No - just putting back 30 percent of what was taken.
>
>Again incorrect because you are forgeting about the added losses of your
>scheme.  To get out the energy via a turbine you lose energy at every stage,
>so there are efficiency problems to deal with at each energy conversion
>stage.  And then you dump the energy back in as heat via a resistor, it
>makes no sense.


If you need an engine for some purposes periodically it makes a lot of
sense.  By running the engine at full tilt all the time the energy of
condensation is better utilized.  It is either used for power or for
heating the water.  It's the cogeneration concept.


>
>If you want to gain additional energy while the power output sits idle, then
>get a larger resevoir of water and pre-heat it.  That would improve the
>amount of work you get out of the system.


Yes - like I said, you can do a heat exchange with the incoming water.
However, with a steam engine doing the heat exchange you can also get
electrical energy which might be of use.


>
>But if your goal is to just boil water, then don't pressurize the system and
>you will get the most steam possible in that manner.  Increase the surface
>area to improve the process of vaporization.
[snip]


Yes - you don't even need to boil the water, just vaporize it.  That is why
I mentioned the inflatable life raft condenser.  The inplication of using a
reflecting sun following system is that cogeneration is required.


[snip]
> In the above
>scenario it is exactly the opposite.  You are missing that to drive a
>turbine

Turbine?  What turbine?

>you must increase the temperature of the entire system, and thus the
>thermal heat losses go up.  Ergo, amount of steam produced goes down,
>contrary to your original comments.


If you divert the power (that ordinarily goes to the resistor) to other
uses then, yes, the amount of water boiled is diminished.  Never to less
than the amount boiled by the solar input, however.

The intital steam is produced by the sun.  It is already steam.  It has
potential energy.  That energy can be used to either generate power or to
add heating capacity to the incoming water.  Simple isn't it?


>
>The amount of work available is fixed by the input power arriving from the
>sun.  So the best you can do is to boil the water at ambient temperature, or
>if you are patient, then you vaporize it at lower temperature using a larger
>surface area.


This is just plain wrong.  Energy can be recovered and reused.  I gave you
numbers based on a 30 percent efficient system.  Maybe it can be made
higher (e.g with a sterling engine) or maybe it would be lower.
Regardless, you get more water boiled per hour feeding back the condensing
energy.  It is all a matter of meeting a varying demand for electrical or
mechanical pumping power, etc. and then recycling the unused energy to
obtain more distilled water..


>
>Now, if your goal changes from "amount of water boiled", to "amount of
>boiled water we can recover as distilled water", then the situation changes
>and you will find some temperature pressure condition that maximizes the
>amount of liquid recovered in your condensor and minimizes the amount of
>heat lost in your high temperature side of things.  But that is a different
>problem.
>
>Either way, if you try to add a generator to either scenario, you must drive
>the temperature up further,

Flat dead wrong.  It can all work at 100 C, or very close therabouts.


>and you will increase your thermodynamic losses.


You maximize losses by simply letting the heat of condensation go.


>So the generator resistor problem is flat out wrong for precisely the
>reverse reason as the room will heat up in the above example.


It is just not an analogous situation.  Sorry.

The ambient environment is cooler - a lot cooler if there is an ocean or
other source of water handy.  Evaporation can supply a lot of cooling in
the desert - provided you have the excess water.  By using evaporation for
cooling you are getting energy then from the local resource, the water
supply.  If you are out in the desert far from the ocean then this is not
such a good prospect.



Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 00:06:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA12007;
	Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:59:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:59:12 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:00:21 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: NEW Solar calcs....
Resent-Message-ID: <"gjNVu1.0.Rx2.0trYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19858
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 9:37 PM 6/19/98, John Schnurer wrote:
>        Dear Vo.,
>
>        Let us change the parameters.....
>
>        The dish is 15 feet diameter.  It still is boiling water.....at
>what rate?


A 15 foot dish has 7.5 foot radius.  Area = Pi*r^2 = 3.14*56.25 ft^2 =
176.7 ft^2. At 100 watts/ft^2, that's 17,670 watts solar energy.  Using
0.85 as a reflectivity factor gives about 15,000 watts.

It takes 2262 J/ml to boil water.  (More if it is badly contaminated or
saltwater.)  A watt is 1 J/sec, or 3600 J/hr.  Your boiler thus puts out
(15,000 J/s)*(3600 s/hr) = 5.41x10^7 J/hr.  This boils (5.41x10^7
J/Hr)/(2262 J/ml) = 2.39x10^4 ml/hr, or 23.9 liters per hour, or about 6.3
gallons of distilled water per hour.

[snip]
>
>        How does it look now?   I figure about 4 Kw ... and MAYBE we also
>get 4 to 6 gal/hr 'clean' water.

At 30 percent generating efficiency, which is probably high unless you use
a sterling engine, this would give you about 4500 watts.

One problem is not knowing the cooling temperature, or input water
availability.  If it is for use out in the middle of nowhere, with very
little water around, then solar cells are probably a better choice for
power generation - unless you can haul oil, etc.  Solar cells keep getting
cheaper and more efficient.  There are no moving parts.  They are fairly
light.  Cost per kWhr is not bad for remote areas.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 02:53:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA12844;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980620052313.0077d420 cnct.com>
X-Sender: knagel cnct.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 05:23:17 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Keith Nagel 
Subject: Re: Charles Cagle
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"DoUPw.0.c83.JztYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19859
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Yup, thats the guy.

Work around the site, the big G appears later in the text.
Then the inevitable and unfortunate request for funding.

The devil, as we all know, is in the details...

K.

At 06:55 AM 6/19/98 -0800, you wrote:
>Wow!  It appears Charles has graduated well *beyond* pseudo-science into
>the realm of the religious experience!
>
>I was refering to , which has the
>fusion information.  Like I said, I don't know if it actually will work!
>8^)  If God is helping on the design, who am I to say it won't work!
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner          
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 03:02:00 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA17622;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:53:55 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"xraNj1.0.GJ4.RWuYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19860
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 7:21 PM 6/19/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:52:49 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
>[snip]
>>  No, charge is not carried by photons, and a black hole can have a
>>non-zero charge.  In fact, proposals have been made for charging mini-black
>>holes so that they can be moved around.


This is nonsense.  Charge, or rather the EM field which results from
charge, which is all there is to charge, is carried by virtual photons, the
arbiter of the EM force.  Consider the fact photons consist entirely of E
and B fields, and they are affected by gravitons, or gravitational fields.
Em fields inside a black hole, i.e. charge, therefore, can not manifest
externally, beyond the event horizon.


>[snip]
>Charge may not be carried by photons, but the information pertaining
>to the change in charge of the black hole should be. And these photons
>can't escape. In short, the charge of the black hole may change, but
>it will be an eternity (literally) before we find out about it.
>(Don't forget the time gradient.)


It is not the charges in the black holes that have the effect to which I
referred, but rather the lack of charge balance in the universe that occurs
when charge disappears into a black hole.  The unbalanced charge remaining
in the universe creates the repulsive effect, is what I am saying.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 03:05:49 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA18700;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 03:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 03:04:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:03:39 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"BwHjN3.0.6a4.pauYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19861
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 2:52 PM 6/19/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
>At 07:07 AM 6/19/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>>It is only logical that the net charge *not* be exactly zero.  That is
>>because when charge goes into a black hole, it disappears from the
>>universe. The photons (or virtual photons) carrying the charge can not
>>escape, true?
>
>  No, charge is not carried by photons, and a black hole can have a
>non-zero charge.  In fact, proposals have been made for charging mini-black
>holes so that they can be moved around.
>
>  Think of it this way.  If you put ten (unmatched) electrons in a bag, you
>can determine the charge by measuring the field at the surface of the bag.
>Doesn't matter what shape the bag is, or where the electrons are inside it,
>the integration will reveal that you have enclosed ten poles.  Surface
>integrals ain't easy to understand, but that's the math that applies.


It appears there is something missing.  A unified electo-weak-gravitational
theory?  What meaning does B dot dS = 0 have in a singularity?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 06:32:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA32609;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:30:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:30:25 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:30:35 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358fb8ef.198329780 mail-hub>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
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: <"pZHLp1.0.Mz7.mbxYr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19862
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:53:55 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip]
>It is not the charges in the black holes that have the effect to which I
>referred, but rather the lack of charge balance in the universe that occurs
>when charge disappears into a black hole.  The unbalanced charge remaining
>in the universe creates the repulsive effect, is what I am saying.
[snip]
I could agree with this, were it not for the practical aspect, i.e. I
suspect that approximately an equal number of both types of charge
will be swallowed by black holes, so the net result is probably null
anyway.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 08:42:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA27608;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 08:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 08:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:37:15 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980620234040.2fafa92c 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: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"VjiBW2.0.Hl6.tUzYr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19863
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 23:59 1998.06.18
-0800:
>At 2:27 PM 6/19/98, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>>Horace Heffner posted the following (edited for brevity) at 21:43 1998.06.18
>
>>
>>>You can see that at the point X the parallel field lines
>>>are going in opposite directions, so they attract.
>[snip]
>>The thought occurred: is this force actually compressive from the outside
>> or is it just an attraction from the center of the flows causing it ?
>
>This force exists between two charges in parallel motion.
>
Ok. if the two charges are at rest then there should be
 utterly none of this "compressive force"
 If they are in parallel motion then the "compressive force"
  they experience should be related somehow to their
  velocity in the reference frame.
  Which  reference frame ?
  Who's right and where is the reference frame for this universe ?

If such a thing exists, someone oughta tell Michelson-Morley about this !


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 13:40:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA10936;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:32:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:32:35 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:14:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Resent-Message-ID: <"24mUE3.0.5g2.Wn1Zr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19864
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 5:30 AM 6/20/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:53:55 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>[snip]
>>It is not the charges in the black holes that have the effect to which I
>>referred, but rather the lack of charge balance in the universe that occurs
>>when charge disappears into a black hole.  The unbalanced charge remaining
>>in the universe creates the repulsive effect, is what I am saying.
>[snip]
>I could agree with this, were it not for the practical aspect, i.e. I
>suspect that approximately an equal number of both types of charge
>will be swallowed by black holes, so the net result is probably null
>anyway.


I think the universe would tend to be positive due to the action of double
stars.  Flares send out a burst of electrons prior to the slower ions.  The
electrons would thus tend to be absorbed first, leaving behind a positive
cloud, some of which, due to the remaining positive cloud's own
electrostatic force, might escape the black hole.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 13:41:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13209;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:40:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:40:17 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <313fe10f.358c06ba aol.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:00:09 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: <"8tPtN2.0.BE3.lu1Zr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19865
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-20 02:15:19 EDT, I wrote:
   <>
Time   Tc         Volts       miliamps
    <>
60	   765.4	1980	      47.0	 H2 purge to 1 psi,pump down to 6.0 in Hg
   <>
Just a clarification here. Maybe some are wondering why the 
purge/pump down at the 60 minute time; I was (and still am) intrigued
by the temperature rise at the beginning of the run and the very slow
fall for the remainder of the run. This happens every time I start it up.
Why? ...Good question...I don't know. So, at the 60 minute time I 
filled the tube to ~1psi with fresh H2 and pumped down to the working
pressure just to see if that got me a temperature rise. As you can see
from the recorded temperatures, no rise.  Another mystery.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 15:33:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA15386;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:31:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:31:57 -0700
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 10:01:42 -0700
Message-Id: <199806201701.KAA11170 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: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"KLVsk2.0.Im3.SX3Zr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19866
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



>>First, if the steam is above 100 C, then it is because you placed a
>>restriction between the steam chamber and the outside ambient.  If it is at
>>ambient pressure, then it boils at 100 C.
>
>
>Not true.  The water stays at 100 C, but the steam is at or above 100 C. It
>depends on the intensity of the boiler.  When the steam bubbles form on the
>boiler surface, they can be further heated, and they provide insulation
>from the water as well.  The staem can be above 100 C.

Steam, in a system with saturated vapor, is at the same temperature as it's
surroundings.  If the water were at 100C and you injected steam at 150C,
then the steam would condense on the surface of the water, ergo, no more
steam.  The liquid and vapor are by definition in equilibrium.

Horace, you are simply incorrect on this.   I spent years working problems
on this.  

OK Horace, here is a question for you that you will get wrong:

Begin with a cylinder with a piston inside (assume it is frictionless for
simplicity).  Now frictionless means that the elevation of the piston will
be rigourously controlled by the amount of energy in the steam, so this is a
good thermodynamics problem to show you where you are going wrong.

You put heat (energy) into the system to raise the system to 100 degrees C,
and you cause some of the water to boil into steam so that the piston is
lifted 3 feet.  The entire system is in equilibrium, and there is no heat
going into or out of the system (ie, frictionless piston AND "perfect"
insulation)

The piston weighs 1 pound.  I now add a weight to the piston that is 0.5
pounds.  How far down does the piston fall?

Answer at end of email.



>
>
>>
>>Second, the thermodynamic losses are in proportion to the temperature
>>differential.  So if you have pressurized the system, and raised the
>>temperature at which the water boils, then you have increased your
>>conductive, convective and other temperature related losses due to the
>>thermal transfer to the outside environment.
>
>
>I didn't say anything about pressurization, except to refer to the lack the
>necessity for it.  Pressurization makes for heavy unsafe stuff.

"Driving a turbine" implies , ie, requires, presurization.  So know it or
not, you did state that the system was pressurized.


>
>The steam engines to which I refer pumped water from mines.

OK, that sort of steam engine could have used a vacuum side since they had
plenty of cold water to force condensation.  

>
>
>>But the vacuum is definitely not what drove the
>>pistons.  I am not aware, though haven't studied them closely, so it may
>>well be that they used condensers as that is logical, and they may have
>>connected the vacuum to the back side of the pistons, but I doubt it.
>


>>
>>And they absolutely did not use the steam at ambient pressure, that is wrong.
>
>
>I am sure that ambient pressure (or at least very low pressure) steam was
>used in some engines.  Maybe I can dig up a reference next time I go to
>Anchorage.  One nice thing about ambient pressure engines is people don't
>get killed from failing pressure relief valves, etc.  Another is they
>rarely break down. The down side is efficiency and engine size.

No, the down side is that without pressure, they perform no work!  Of course
the up side is that if they perform no work, they don't ever wear out!



>[snip]
>> In the above
>>scenario it is exactly the opposite.  You are missing that to drive a
>>turbine
>
>Turbine?  What turbine?

Turbine, piston, fan, whatever.  They all work via pressure drop to extract
mechanical work.

>
>>you must increase the temperature of the entire system, and thus the
>>thermal heat losses go up.  Ergo, amount of steam produced goes down,
>>contrary to your original comments.
>
>
>If you divert the power (that ordinarily goes to the resistor) to other
>uses then, yes, the amount of water boiled is diminished.  Never to less
>than the amount boiled by the solar input, however.

Not correct.  You WILL dimish it to less than the original solar input
because you changed the conditions, pressurized the system to drive the
generator of whatever kind, and in so doing, raised the temperature of the
water, steam, and all of the mechanical components due to conduction etc.
So, your heat losses are greater, and ergo the amount of steam is reduced.
Heck, the volumetric flow rate of the steam is reduced right off the bat if
you raise the pressure.

It is like in electricity, VA is watts.  Volts is like pressure in the
steam, and amps is like the mass flow rate.  So the mass flow rate and the
temperature define how much work is coming out, and the temperature defines
the efficiency.  Raise the temperature, increase the efficiency of the
energy conversion, but, decrease the efficiency of the heat losses

So, adding the generator is changing the volume of water boiled, which was
the original goal.

>
>The intital steam is produced by the sun.  It is already steam.  It has
>potential energy.  That energy can be used to either generate power or to
>add heating capacity to the incoming water.  Simple isn't it?

Adding heat and producing steam are two different things.  I could use a
chamber filled all the way with water, no room for steam at all.  And I
could raise the temperature of that chamber to a 700 degrees F.  The
pressure would be 3,090 psi, and there would be NO, repeat NO steam inside
the vessel if I had not allowed room for it to form.  Yes that is correct,
really hot water, really pressurized water, and no steam.

Now, if I opened a vent, the water would flash vaporize and then you would
have steam.  But due to expansion, the water vapor would be accelerated, and
that is work, and so the temperature would no longer be the same.  The goal
of engineering is to get the most work possible out of that expansion.

>
>
>>
>>The amount of work available is fixed by the input power arriving from the
>>sun.  So the best you can do is to boil the water at ambient temperature, or
>>if you are patient, then you vaporize it at lower temperature using a larger
>>surface area.
>
>
>This is just plain wrong.  Energy can be recovered and reused.  

No it isn't wrong, you are wrong.  Energy can be recovered, but not with
perfect efficiency, and that is the point you continue to miss.  The power
in sets your upper limit for efficiency, and everything you do after that
drops your yield.

If you want the most distilled water, then just shut off the turbine and you
shut off the losses in that loop of the system.  Divert the steam directly
into the condensor, and voila, more distilled water.



>>Either way, if you try to add a generator to either scenario, you must drive
>>the temperature up further,
>
>Flat dead wrong.  It can all work at 100 C, or very close therabouts.

Horace, have you taken chemistry, thermodynamics or any scientific course?
It sounds like you haven't.

OK, have you boiled potatoes in a pressure cooker?  It takes less time,
right?  Well, the reason is because a pressure cooker is at a higher
temperature than an open pot.  Have you ever tried to boil potatoes on top
of a 10,000 foot mountain?  It takes more time, right?  Well, that is
because the pressure is lower, the boiling temperature is lower, and so the
lower temp leads to a longer time for the interior of the potatoe to heat up
to a temperature that gets it soft and cooked.

If you say I am flat dead wrong, then tell me what your qualifications are
that you can say that.  I have  a degree and have studied this in great
detail.  So unless you are telling me that all of the experiments conducted
by Brayton, Stirling, etc. have been a centuries long myth and steam engines
never roamed the planet then why are you on a high horse about something you
obviously don't understand.  You ought to be asking to be taught, and
appreciative of the education.

If your outside ambient pressure is one atmosphere, then the temperature of
the water, and the steam, will be greater than 100 C if you are driving any
kind of device to extract work from the steam.  You cannot extract work from
a saturated vapor without a temperature differential, and ergo a
differential to the pressure at which the vapor condenses.


***************************************************8888


Answer to piston question:  The piston will fall all the way down to the
water surface, condensing ALL of the vapor.  

This is the first cut approximation to the answer.  Technically, a tiny
amount of work is performed on the molecules as the piston is falling, due
to the gravitational interaction.  So technically speaking, the temperature
of the system will rise, slightly, and ergo the piston would come to a stop
infinitesimally above the surface of the water.  But FAPP, it falls all the
way down, and you could as well have added a pea instead of a substantial
amount of weight.

Saturated vapors behave in strange ways at times, ie counter to expectations
from working with normal gases.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 16:00:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA12744;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:52:19 -0700
Message-Id: <199806202252.PAA05560 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: Galactic Aether Stagnation Radius images;
Resent-Message-ID: <"fbHLd1.0.173.fs3Zr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19867
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See;

http://oposite.stsci.edu/pubinfo/pr/1998/21/

for images of stars formed at the aether stagnation radius of a galaxy. 

If fusion leads to mass reduction, mass corrsponds to "amount of aether",
then exothermy, ie stars, lead to aether emission.  Check out recent Science
News and Sci Am articles on cosmology and spacetime foam.

If black holes are aether sinks, and stars are aether emission sources, then
at some radius in a galaxy, there is no net flow of aether toward or away
from the galactic center.  At that radius, gases should accumulate, being
emitted from inside and outside of that radius, and thus given time stars
should form.  

Galaxy mergers, with two black holes, should lead to bars, but I won't go
into that.  Just check out the latest Hubble photos with uniform spiral arms
and a bar, along with a smoother than most inner region that has already
settled into it's new condition as a single galaxy.  IMO, this is the result
of a galaxy merger, leading to the twin spiral arms as stars are tidally
lost from the cores as the two BH's merge along with the bulk of the stars
of their respective galaxies.  But after that, the next stage of spiral
galactic evolution begins, the smoothing out of that mess.  The first stage
of this is to ignite the gases emitted and which accumulate at the aether
stagnation radius.

This is clearly observed in the following brand new link.

http://oposite.stsci.edu/pubinfo/pr/1998/21/

Ross Tessien





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 16:03:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA30001;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 16:00:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 16:00:15 -0700
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:31:46 -0700
Message-Id: <199806202231.PAA03640 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: 2nd try, Re; Solar Energy Question
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q8bc43.0.RK7.zx3Zr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19868
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



>>First, if the steam is above 100 C, then it is because you placed a
>>restriction between the steam chamber and the outside ambient.  If it is at
>>ambient pressure, then it boils at 100 C.
>
>
>Not true.  The water stays at 100 C, but the steam is at or above 100 C. It
>depends on the intensity of the boiler.  When the steam bubbles form on the
>boiler surface, they can be further heated, and they provide insulation
>from the water as well.  The staem can be above 100 C.

Boiling, is a constant temperature constant pressure process whereby you add
energy to the substance, ie water, and it changes state, not temperature.
The temperature of the steam produced is identical to the temperature of the
liquid water from which it boiled.  It is possible to add heat to the steam,
above the liquid, via heating that independently of the liquid, but by
definition the boiler (solar) was adding the heat to the liquid in order
that it boil.  

Also, in some of your comments you state that it is possible to use a low
temperature sink in order to force the condensation of the vapor, and that
is correct.  In so doing, you can drop the pressure at one end of a system
as compared to the other end.  Heat pipes work this way, and this is how
they keep the Tundra from thawing up along the Alaskan Pipeline.  These are
passive devices.

but when you talk about the efficiency of a system with or without a
generator, where that means with or without pistons or a turbine to drive
some electric generator, then it is tacitly assumed that you are going to
sink the low pressure side of the system to the same ambient conditions in
both the device with the generator, and the device without the generator, to
see which is more efficient.  YOu can't change horaces, I mean horses in mid
stream ;-)  You can't tell me that the system with the generator is going to
be able to sink to freezing cold Alaskan temps, while the system without the
generator is going to sink the exhaust side to balmy tropical humid conditions.

So, assuming that you use a consistent situation, I don't care which
conditions you choose, the comments I have made are correct and the ones you
are making are wrong.  What you don't understand is the vaporization
process, which as I said is a constant pressure process.  You will see how
important this is with the next quiz question below.

Steam, in a system with saturated vapor, is at the same temperature as it's
surroundings.  If the water were at 100C and you injected steam at 150C,
then the steam would condense on the surface of the water, ergo, no more
steam.  The liquid and vapor are by definition in equilibrium.

Horace, you are simply incorrect on this.   I spent years working problems
on this.  


*******************************************************************
OK Horace, here is a question for you that you will get wrong if you use the
logic you have displayed so far:

Begin with a cylinder with a piston inside (assume it is frictionless for
simplicity).  Now frictionless means that the elevation of the piston will
be rigourously controlled by the amount of energy in the steam, so this is a
good thermodynamics problem to show you where you are going wrong.

You put heat (energy) into the system to raise the system to 100 degrees C,
and you cause some of the water to boil into steam so that the piston is
lifted 3 feet.  The entire system is in equilibrium, and there is no heat
going into or out of the system (ie, frictionless piston AND "perfect"
insulation)

The piston weighs 1 pound.  I now add a weight to the piston that is 0.5
pounds.  How far down does the piston fall?

Answer at end of email.

*******************************************************

>
>
>>
>>Second, the thermodynamic losses are in proportion to the temperature
>>differential.  So if you have pressurized the system, and raised the
>>temperature at which the water boils, then you have increased your
>>conductive, convective and other temperature related losses due to the
>>thermal transfer to the outside environment.
>
>
>I didn't say anything about pressurization, except to refer to the lack the
>necessity for it.  Pressurization makes for heavy unsafe stuff.

"Driving a turbine" implies , ie, requires, presurization.  So know it or
not, you did state that the system was pressurized.


>
>The steam engines to which I refer pumped water from mines.

OK, that sort of steam engine could have used a vacuum side since they had
plenty of cold water to force condensation.  

>
>
>>But the vacuum is definitely not what drove the
>>pistons.  I am not aware, though haven't studied them closely, so it may
>>well be that they used condensers as that is logical, and they may have
>>connected the vacuum to the back side of the pistons, but I doubt it.
>


>>
>>And they absolutely did not use the steam at ambient pressure, that is wrong.
>
>
>I am sure that ambient pressure (or at least very low pressure) steam was
>used in some engines.  Maybe I can dig up a reference next time I go to
>Anchorage.  One nice thing about ambient pressure engines is people don't
>get killed from failing pressure relief valves, etc.  Another is they
>rarely break down. The down side is efficiency and engine size.

No, the down side is that without pressure, they perform no work!  Of course
the up side is that if they perform no work, they don't ever wear out!



>[snip]
>> In the above
>>scenario it is exactly the opposite.  You are missing that to drive a
>>turbine
>
>Turbine?  What turbine?

Turbine, piston, fan, whatever.  They all work via pressure drop to extract
mechanical work.

>
>>you must increase the temperature of the entire system, and thus the
>>thermal heat losses go up.  Ergo, amount of steam produced goes down,
>>contrary to your original comments.
>
>
>If you divert the power (that ordinarily goes to the resistor) to other
>uses then, yes, the amount of water boiled is diminished.  Never to less
>than the amount boiled by the solar input, however.

Not correct.  You WILL dimish it to less than the original solar input
because you changed the conditions, pressurized the system to drive the
generator of whatever kind, and in so doing, raised the temperature of the
water, steam, and all of the mechanical components due to conduction etc.
So, your heat losses are greater, and ergo the amount of steam is reduced.
Heck, the volumetric flow rate of the steam is reduced right off the bat if
you raise the pressure.

It is like in electricity, VA is watts.  Volts is like pressure in the
steam, and amps is like the mass flow rate.  So the mass flow rate and the
temperature define how much work is coming out, and the temperature defines
the efficiency.  Raise the temperature, increase the efficiency of the
energy conversion, but, decrease the efficiency of the heat losses

So, adding the generator is changing the volume of water boiled, which was
the original goal.

>
>The intital steam is produced by the sun.  It is already steam.  It has
>potential energy.  That energy can be used to either generate power or to
>add heating capacity to the incoming water.  Simple isn't it?

Adding heat and producing steam are two different things.  I could use a
chamber filled all the way with water, no room for steam at all.  And I
could raise the temperature of that chamber to a 700 degrees F.  The
pressure would be 3,090 psi, and there would be NO, repeat NO steam inside
the vessel if I had not allowed room for it to form.  Yes that is correct,
really hot water, really pressurized water, and no steam.

Now, if I opened a vent, the water would flash vaporize and then you would
have steam.  But due to expansion, the water vapor would be accelerated, and
that is work, and so the temperature would no longer be the same.  The goal
of engineering is to get the most work possible out of that expansion.

>
>
>>
>>The amount of work available is fixed by the input power arriving from the
>>sun.  So the best you can do is to boil the water at ambient temperature, or
>>if you are patient, then you vaporize it at lower temperature using a larger
>>surface area.
>
>
>This is just plain wrong.  Energy can be recovered and reused.  

No it isn't wrong, you are wrong.  Energy can be recovered, but not with
perfect efficiency, and that is the point you continue to miss.  The power
in sets your upper limit for efficiency, and everything you do after that
drops your yield.

If you want the most distilled water, then just shut off the turbine and you
shut off the losses in that loop of the system.  Divert the steam directly
into the condensor, and voila, more distilled water.



>>Either way, if you try to add a generator to either scenario, you must drive
>>the temperature up further,
>
>Flat dead wrong.  It can all work at 100 C, or very close therabouts.

Horace, have you taken chemistry, thermodynamics or any scientific course?
It sounds like you haven't.

OK, have you boiled potatoes in a pressure cooker?  It takes less time,
right?  Well, the reason is because a pressure cooker is at a higher
temperature than an open pot.  Have you ever tried to boil potatoes on top
of a 10,000 foot mountain?  It takes more time, right?  Well, that is
because the pressure is lower, the boiling temperature is lower, and so the
lower temp leads to a longer time for the interior of the potatoe to heat up
to a temperature that gets it soft and cooked.

If you say I am flat dead wrong, then tell me what your qualifications are
that you can say that.  I have  a degree and have studied this in great
detail.  So unless you are telling me that all of the experiments conducted
by Brayton, Stirling, etc. have been a centuries long myth and steam engines
never roamed the planet then why are you on a high horse about something you
obviously don't understand.  You ought to be asking to be taught, and
appreciative of the education.

If your outside ambient pressure is one atmosphere, then the temperature of
the water, and the steam, will be greater than 100 C if you are driving any
kind of device to extract work from the steam.  You cannot extract work from
a saturated vapor without a temperature differential, and ergo a
differential to the pressure at which the vapor condenses.


***************************************************8888


Answer to piston question:  The piston will fall all the way down to the
water surface, condensing ALL of the vapor.  

This is the first cut approximation to the answer.  Technically, a tiny
amount of work is performed on the molecules as the piston is falling, due
to the gravitational interaction.  So technically speaking, the temperature
of the system will rise, slightly, and ergo the piston would come to a stop
infinitesimally above the surface of the water.  But FAPP, it falls all the
way down, and you could as well have added a pea instead of a substantial
amount of weight.

Saturated vapors behave in strange ways at times, ie counter to expectations
from working with normal gases.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 20 19:42:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA28902;
	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 19:37:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 19:37:13 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:38:24 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: NEW Solar calcs...., Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"U6MSa3.0.W37.O77Zr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19869
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ross,

It appears that you do not understand how an atmospheric pressure steam
engine runs.  Here is an experiment to help.  Take a can, epecially a 1
gallon can if you have one, with a tight sealing lid, and put about 1" of
water in the bottom.  Place on a burner, with the cap off, to boil the
water, and thus fill the can with steam.  Let it go for a while so the air
is displaced.  Remove from the burner and put the cap on tightly.  Now the
steam and water inside the can are at about 100 C, the steam may be
slightly higer in temperature, due to additional heating the steam gets on
the boiler surface after a bubble forms.  The ambient conditions are less
than 100 C, otherwise it makes no difference if the machine works or not as
the operators are dead!  If you want to simulate a desert, then place the
can into an oven at 120 F.  The can will still be crushed.  The energy to
crush the can was extracted from the steam.

If the can were a cylinder of a steam engine, then the energy extracted
could be used to drive a generator, which can be used to make more steam,
or to pump water to the boiler from a well, etc.   The pressure on the
cylinder comes from the atmospheric pressure steam entering the cylinder on
the expansion phase.  The (partial) vacuum on the low pressure side of the
cylinder comes from the condensation of the steam.  The steam condensation
can occur in the cylinder itself, or a type of engine can be used where the
condensation occurs in a condenser, which supplies a vacuum to one side of
the cylinder in each cycle.

I think it is abundantly obvious that (1) a solar water boiler can be used
for cogeneration purposes even with steam at atmospheric pressure and (2)
the output of such a steam engine can be used to advantage to boil/purify
even more water per watt of solar input when the engine is not used for
generation purposes.  What is not clear are other issues requirements for
the unit, cost, and other parameters.

I am done with public discussion of this topic for now, as it seems to be
going nowhere productive, especially in terms of helping John Schnurer.  I
have various ideas for improving the cost/performance, maintainability and
weight of such a system so it might be adapted for use in appropriate
technology situations.  If John Schnurer wants to carry on further
discussion I invite him to do so privately.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 07:07:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA20326;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 07:05:03 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 07:05:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <358D03CC.7D88 earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 07:59:56 -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: Carr: Murray: Miley SIMS data 4.20.98
Content-Type: message/news
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"fyXbO2.0.Wz4.DCHZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19870
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!news.maxwell.syr.edu!firehose.mindspring.net!gatech!128.186.6.106.MISMATCH!news.fsu.edu!ibms48.scri.fsu.edu!jac
From: jac ibms48.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Murray: Miley SIMS data 4.8.98
Date: 20 Jun 1998 17:00:48 GMT
Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute
Message-ID: <6mgps0$lgm$1 news.fsu.edu>
References: <357E97C3.44F4 earthlink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ibms48.scri.fsu.edu
Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.physics.fusion:22238

rmforall earthlink.net writes:
>
>Here is a summary of some of the interesting isotopic shift SIMS data
>for Run #3,  800 A Ni film on plastic beads in Li2SO4, found by Little
>with chemical analysis to contain about [General Engineering] Fe 14 mcg,
>Zn 147 mcg, and Pb 43 mcg, which could well have plated onto the beads,
>while the fresh beads by XRF were found to have 130+-9 mcg Fe.

 I note, once again, that it is extremely bad science to fail to 
 provide any estimate of the experimental uncertainties in the 
 data and propagate them to derived quantities like isotope shifts. 

 I will, again, annotate a few cases. 

>Standard data from CRC tables contains the uncertainty of the last
>digits in parenthesis.

 Which means that whoever made up the table did not know what they 
 were doing.  Specifically, the first case quotes 7.5(2), which 
 means 7.5% +/- 0.2%.  Now, this is a 3% _relative_ error in 7.5%, 
 but it is not a 3% error.  It is an 0.2% uncertainty.  Similarly, 
 92.5(2) means 92.5% +/- 0.2%, which is an 0.2% _relative_ error.  

>Element  CRC    CRC error  Run #3  SIMS   Production Rate
>         %      +-%          %       counts atoms/sec-cc film, rounded
>
>Li-6     7.5(2) 3.         -1.     184     7E12
>
>Li-7    92.5(2) 2.          1.    2724     1E14

 Lithium is problematical as regards "natural abundance".  Samples 
 of lithium can vary widely in their isotopic makeup because of the 
 use of Li-6 in nuclear weapons manufacture.  That means that the 
 experimenter should measure the Li isotopes in the electrolyte 
 before making any use of these numbers. 

>So the SIMS data is two to three times more accurate than CRC tables,
>proving no isotopic shifts in the Li, which of course comes from the 
>electrolyte.

 This is incorrect.  The 1% shift should be compared to the 0.2% 
 accuracy of the isotopic composition.  However, that is not the 
 problem.  Simple counting statistics mean that "184" probably has 
 a statistical error of +/- 14, a 7% uncertainty. Thus the Li-6 
 percentage is more properly quoted as (6.3 +/- 0.5)% and the 
 isotopic shift is (1.2 +/- 0.7)% -- not likely to be significant. 


>Ti-46   8.0(1)  1.      .03   1695   7E14
>Ti-47   7.3(1)  1.      .26   1606   7E14
>Ti-48  73.8(1)   .1   -2.    15264   6E15
>Ti-49   5.5(1)  2.     2.     1595   6E14
>Ti-50   5.4(1)  2.     -.03   1131   5E14
>
>Again, the SIMS shifts are as accurate or far more accurate than CRC
>data, except for Ti-48.  The -2% shift for Ti-48 must be an analysis
>artifact from the computer program used, since a 2% shift in Ti-49,
>which is present at 5.5%, does not logically compel ascribing a -2%
>shift in Ti-48, present at 73.8%.

 Most of the uncertainty here is in the numbers for the denominator, 
 which make the result for Ti-48 something like (71.7 +/- 0.9)% and 
 the shift about (2.1 +/- 1.0)%.  Again, on the border of significance
 given that only statistical errors are being included.  

>Cr-50   4.345(13)    .3    -.04   28   1E13
>Cr-52  83.789(18)    .02   -.8   532   2E14
>Cr-53   9.501(17)    .2    -.8    56   2E13
>Cr-54   2.365(7)     .3    1.6    26   1E13
>
>Again, the computer program gives puzzling outcomes:
>For Cr-50 [4%], 28 counts gives -.04% shift.
>For Cr-54 [2%], 26 counts gives 1.6% shift.  

 These are all noise.  There are 10 to 20% uncertainties in those 
 values.  Quoting something like -0.04 is just nonsense without 
 taking uncertainties into account.  The actual value is more 
 like (4.4 +/- 0.8)% -- more if the denominator uncertainty is 
 also included -- for Cr-50.   For Cr-53 I get (8.7 +/- 1.1)%. 

 These results are noise masquerading as data. 

>Fe-54   5.8(1)   2.    .2    72   7E14
>Fe-56  91.72(30)  .3  -.2  1136   1E16
>Fe-57   2.1(1)   5.   -.04   54   3E14
>Fe-58    .28(1)  4.   -.01    4   4E13
>
>Again, we find obvious problems in the computer program.  

 The problem is not the program, it is the user. 

 As above, these are noise masquerading as data.  I'll leave this 
 one as an exercise for the reader. 

>Cu-63   69.17(3)   .04   -17.  149   3E14
>Cu-65   30.83(3)   .1    +17.  135   3E14
>
>Here is, on the face of it, strong evidence for a large isotopic shift. 

 The significance cannot be estimated until you include statistical 
 errors.  135 +/- 12 compared to 149 +/- 12 gives a ratio of just 
 0.91 +/- 0.12 rather than 0.445, which is almost 4 std deviations. 
 Of course, there are also systematic errors to be considered: 

>But Ni-64 has a count of 216, while Zn-64 has a count of 467, so their
>hydrides could easily have inflated the smaller count expected for
>Cu-65.  More tests of this element are warrented.  

 Or a better method. 

>Zn-64   48.6(3)   .6   1.    467     5E14
>Zn-66   27.9(2)   .7   -.3    72     3E14
>Zn_67    4.1(1)  2.    -.1    24     4E13
>Zn_68   18.8(4)  2.    2.      9     9E11
>Zn-70     .6(1) 17.    -.04    1     6E12
>
>Here are more absurd results.  

 Noise as data.  There is a 30% uncertainty in that "9" value. 

 All of the data suffer from the failure to even begin the analysis 
 with any consideration of counting statistics, which would allow 
 one to focus attention on those few cases where anything might be 
 anomalous.  Then I would expect a discussion of other experimental 
 uncertainties, but generic to all runs or specific to particular 
 ones.  I suggest Rich look at the uncertainties. 

 <... much more snipped ...> 

-- 
 James A. Carr        | Commercial e-mail is _NOT_ 
    http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/       | desired to this or any address 
 Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst.  | that resolves to my account 
 Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306    | for any reason at any time. 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 12:08:28 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA21422;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:05:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:05:27 -0700
Message-ID: <001a01bd9d47$27370d00$668f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: NUCLEAR NOTES (http://www.nirs.org/mononline/NUCLEARNOTES797.html)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:02:17 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_01BD9D14.DC937540"
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: <"RY0oy1.0.eE5.tbLZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19871
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_0017_01BD9D14.DC937540
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.nirs.org/mononline/NUCLEARNOTES797.html

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01BD9D14.DC937540
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="NUCLEAR NOTES.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="NUCLEAR NOTES.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.nirs.org/mononline/NUCLEARNOTES797.html
Modified=20FB07F3469DBD01B6

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01BD9D14.DC937540--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 12:30:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22734;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:26:22 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:26:22 -0700
Message-ID: <005c01bd9d4a$1496a680$668f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Fw: teeth and radiation page
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:23:12 -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_0051_01BD9D17.BD8BB420"
Resent-Message-ID: <"r1WMX3.0.3Z5.TvLZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19872
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_0051_01BD9D17.BD8BB420
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0052_01BD9D17.BD8BB420"


------=_NextPart_001_0052_01BD9D17.BD8BB420
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


-----Original Message-----



http://www.citysearchslc.com/E/E/SLCUT/0000/89/24/
and this:

Teeth studied for link to radiation exposure=20

03/21/98

Associated Press=20

MIAMI - Researcher Jay M. Gould is gathering children's baby teeth, but
he's not leaving cash
under their pillows.=20

Gould is gathering 5,000 baby teeth as part of The Tooth Fairy Project.
His goal is to determine
whether people who live near nuclear power plants are being exposed to
more radiation than
others.=20

This week he took teeth that fell out of the mouths of 35 South Florida
children. They are
catalogued with information such as the mother's age when the child was
born, the age of the
child when the tooth came out and where the mother lived while pregnant. =


The teeth will be crushed and analyzed for traces of the radioactive
material strontium-90. That
will give researchers an idea of the amount of radiation which the women
were exposed to while
pregnant.=20

The project is looking for a link between radiation exposure and the
proximity to nuclear power
plants. South Florida has two nuclear power plants - the Turkey Point
plant in south Miami-Dade
County and the St. Lucie plant.=20

"We don't know the answer, but we think it's scandalous that the
government is not trying to
find out," said Gould, director of the New York-based Radiation and
Public Health project.=20

Gould's previous studies have shown substantially higher rates of breast
cancer among women
living near nuclear power plants. Those studies have been challenged.=20

The state Department of Health now monitors the air, soil and water near
the plants and has not
found evidence that nuclear plants cause an increase in radiation.=20

Harlan Keaton, the environmental administrator for the state Bureau of
Radiation Control, is
skeptical about Gould's study.=20

"It's going to be a difficult process," Keaton said. "And what it's
going to tell them, I don't
know."=20

The study also hopes to determine whether people in the United States
were exposed to
radioactive fallout after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, Gould
said.


------=_NextPart_001_0052_01BD9D17.BD8BB420
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable










 


-----Original=20
Message-----


http://www.ci=
tysearchslc.com/E/E/SLCUT/0000/89/24/
and=20
this:

Teeth studied for link to radiation exposure=20


03/21/98

Associated Press 

MIAMI - Researcher Jay =
M. Gould=20
is gathering children's baby teeth, but
he's not leaving =
cash
under their=20
pillows. 

Gould is gathering 5,000 baby teeth as part of The =
Tooth Fairy=20
Project.
His goal is to determine
whether people who live near =
nuclear=20
power plants are being exposed to
more radiation than
others. =


This=20
week he took teeth that fell out of the mouths of 35 South =
Florida
children.=20
They are
catalogued with information such as the mother's age when =
the child=20
was
born, the age of the
child when the tooth came out and where =
the=20
mother lived while pregnant. 

The teeth will be crushed and =
analyzed for=20
traces of the radioactive
material strontium-90. That
will give=20
researchers an idea of the amount of radiation which the women
were =
exposed=20
to while
pregnant. 

The project is looking for a link between=20
radiation exposure and the
proximity to nuclear power
plants. =
South=20
Florida has two nuclear power plants - the Turkey Point
plant in =
south=20
Miami-Dade
County and the St. Lucie plant. 

"We don't =
know the=20
answer, but we think it's scandalous that the
government is not =
trying=20
to
find out," said Gould, director of the New York-based =
Radiation=20
and
Public Health project. 

Gould's previous studies have =
shown=20
substantially higher rates of breast
cancer among women
living =
near=20
nuclear power plants. Those studies have been challenged. 

The =
state=20
Department of Health now monitors the air, soil and water near
the =
plants and=20
has not
found evidence that nuclear plants cause an increase in =
radiation.=20


Harlan Keaton, the environmental administrator for the state =
Bureau=20
of
Radiation Control, is
skeptical about Gould's study. =


"It's=20
going to be a difficult process," Keaton said. "And what =
it's
going=20
to tell them, I don't
know." 

The study also hopes to =
determine=20
whether people in the United States
were exposed to
radioactive =
fallout=20
after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, =
Gould
said.


------=_NextPart_001_0052_01BD9D17.BD8BB420--

------=_NextPart_000_0051_01BD9D17.BD8BB420
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: attachment
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Base: "http://www.citysearchslc.com/E/E/SLCUT/0000/89/24/"
















	=

			=

		=

		=

		=

			=

			=

				=

			=

			=

			=

			=

		=

			=


	=


	=













	=









  =


  =

  =

  =

  =

  =


  =


  =


  =



  =


  =


  =


  =


  =


  =


  =


  =


  =


  =

  =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

  =


 =



 =



 =



 =


	=



 =



 =



 =


  =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =

 =


  =

    =

  =

  =


 =

	=

	=

		=

		=


			=

		=

			=

					=

	=

    =

    =







 =



  =

    =


   =

	   =

	 =

    =

      =

      =

      =

      =

      =

        =

        =

        =

      =

    =

    =

    =

    =

        =

			S.T.A.R. Tooth Fairy Project -  , CitySearch
        =

    =

  =

	=




  =


 =




















 =

 =



 =




   =

   =

   =


  =






  =

  =



  =

  =



  =

  =



  =

  =



  =

  =

  =

  =


   =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =

  =


  








  










   =

   =

  =







  =

  =

  =

  =

         =

  =

  =

  =




  =

  =

  =

  =

                   =

  =

  =

  =




  =

  =

  =

                         =

  =

  =

  =




  =

  =

  =

                                 =

  =

  =

  =


  =




 =





    
    =

      

      

        3D"CitySearch:
        3D"Main
3D"Ar=		3D"2News

    








    	=



 =

 =

 	=


		=

	
	=

		
	=

	=


		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

	=



  =


		

		
		3D"the
		

	
	

	

  =


 


    =










	




	=











		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=


	=

		=

		=

		 	=

		=

		=

		=


		=

		=

		=

		=

		=


			=

		=

			=


	=

	=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=


		=

		=

			=

			=

		=

				=

		=

		=

		=

        		=

		=

		=

        =



		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

			=

		=

	=

		=

3D""

3D""
 =

 
 
 

  
    =

     
 
    

     3D"Editorial
     
=3D"Editorial		
    

    

     3D""
S.T.A.R. Toot=
h Fairy Project
     		
    

   

  		
 

  
   
 
    

     
       =




  =



	=

  =

    =

    
     =

    	=

    =

  =


  =





      =


    =

      =

      =


	=

 =

		=

     

       

        3D""
        3D""
        
        

     LOCATION:
     
     Utah                                                                =
                                          
    
















 HOURS:
 
 
<=
font size=3D2> 1998      Daily   24 hours =









































     

      WEBSITE:
      
       Click here.
     

     		
     
      3D""

      

       

        3D""
        
        =

       =

	
        

        

         
         
         =

        =

        =

        
       

      
 
     		
    

   
 
  		
 

 

  
 3D""

   
    =

    

    

     
	 =

     		 
Each year, nearly 1,4=
00,000 Americans are diagnosed with cancer. Each year, 560,000 of them di=
e from it. Cancer is America's deadliest killer, taking 1,500 lives a day=
=2E
What's the biggest secret behind America's cancer epidemic? STAR, NIRS, and the Rad=
iation and Public Health Project believe it is nuclear radiation.
S=
TAR, NIRS, and the RPHP are conducting the Baby Teeth Study, or Tooth Fai=
ry Project, collecting baby teeth throughout the U.S., in order to measur=
e the level of strontium-90 in the bodies of the American people. The Too=
th Fairy Project asks you to donate your children's baby teeth for a nati=
onal scientific study of how much radioactivity is entering our bones (th=
e chemical structure of Sr-90 is so similar to calcium, the body is foole=
d into depositing it into teeth and bones) in order to determine whether =
low-level manmade nuclear radiation in the environment is affecting our h=
ealth and contributing to the national cancer epidemic. 
From 1945 to 1=
963, these radioactive elements were released into the atmosphere, mainly=
 by U.S./USSR above-ground bomb testing that amounted to the equivalent o=
f exploding 40,000 Hiroshima bombs. Currently, nuclear power plants and f=
ederal labs emit fission products through accidental releases and through=
 regular "allowable" emissions that the government classifies as "harmles=
s" and "below regulatory concern."
The goal of the study is to collect =
teeth from "nuclear" and "non-nuclear" counties around the country. The t=
eeth will be analyzed at an independent laboratory for levels of radioact=
ive strontium and plutonium in order to ascertain if there is a link betw=
een radiation contamination and our national cancer epidemic. A similar U=
=2ES. study, conducted from 1957 to 1961, tested about 60,000 teeth from =
children born in the peak bomb test years, and found a twenty-fold increa=
se in the level of strontium 90. That study was instrumental in the banni=
ng of above-ground nuclear-weapons testing by the U.S. and USSR in 1963. =
For temporal comparisons of Sr-90 in baby teeth, RPHP needs teeth from al=
l areas of the country, at least 100 teeth for each birth year. Primarily=
 of interest are teeth that have fallen out or have been extracted by den=
tists, from 1980 to the present. However, RPHP will also test baby teeth =
from children born as far back as 1970, when the U.S. government stopped =
publishing Sr-90 levels in humans. If the Baby Teeth Study provides compe=
lling clinical evidence of manmade nuclear radiation/cancer connection, i=
t will help create a national dialogue on radiation and public health and=
 support measures to prevent the recycling of atomic waste of the nuclear=
 age into our food supply as fertilizer, and into our industry as metals =
and place economic liability for our cancer epidemic on the nuclear indus=
try.

Here's how to participate:
  •  You =

can fill out a question=
aire online, then mail (one tooth per envelope, wrapped in tissue pap=
er) to:
    Radiation and Public Health Project
    PO Box 60
    Unionville=
, NY 10988
  • To order envelopes with the printed form right on the back,=
 email RPHP, or give them a call at =
(800) 582-3716.
Additonal resources:
RPHP's Radiation FAQ
The NIRS Toolbox



    	 =

     	=

     
last updated: Sunday June =
21, 1998
     =

     

    

     3D""
    

   
 
  		
 

 

 





 




 






















 =



 =

 =






  =

  =








  =

  =

    =

    =

                                               =

    =

    =

    =

  =

  =



 =












 =


3D"Main


	
   =

     =

	
     =

     =

	

	
help
	



   =


   =

   =





        =

	







This is an editorial profile of an Event.   It represents the point of vi=
ew of CitySearch editors.  If there is a CitySearch Infosite for this eve=
nt or location, there will be a button on the left side of the screen bel=
ow the map button. To see what your friends have said about this event,an=
d to post your own opinion, click on "Buzz".  =





 =

        =





	

	=

	

    
	=

 =











------=_NextPart_000_0051_01BD9D17.BD8BB420--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 13:22:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA28116;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <008d01bd9d51$572b28c0$668f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: COLD WAR FALLOUT by Blanche Wiesen Cook (http://www.lightparty.com/Light/ColdWa
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:15:12 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008A_01BD9D1F.0C90B8C0"
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: <"Es5l9.0.Dt6.8iMZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19873
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_008A_01BD9D1F.0C90B8C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.lightparty.com/Light/ColdWarFallout.html

------=_NextPart_000_008A_01BD9D1F.0C90B8C0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="COLD WAR FALLOUT by Blanche Wiesen Cook.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="COLD WAR FALLOUT by Blanche Wiesen Cook.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.lightparty.com/Light/ColdWarFallout.html
Modified=C0FE161D519DBD019D

------=_NextPart_000_008A_01BD9D1F.0C90B8C0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 13:36:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA01483;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:35:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <00b801bd9d53$631c7e20$668f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: The Light Party - Home Page (http://www.lightparty.com/index.html)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:30:03 -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_00B5_01BD9D21.18820E20"
Resent-Message-ID: <"WS7GW.0.yM.uvMZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19874
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_00B5_01BD9D21.18820E20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The Cold Fusion Party, so it implies.

http://www.lightparty.com/index.html


------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BD9D21.18820E20
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="The Light Party - Home Page.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="The Light Party - Home Page.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.lightparty.com/index.html
Modified=E0854612539DBD016B

------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BD9D21.18820E20--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 13:48:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA30600;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:44:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:44:44 -0700
Message-ID: <358D6328.5279 earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:46:48 -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: Beaty: electric air threads 6.15.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"RqO3P3.0.2U7.y2NZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19875
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

While playing with dry ice during tonight's (6/98) Seattle Weird Science 
meeting, I stumbled across a VERY strange electrostatic effect.

If several chips of dry ice are placed in a dark-bottomed tray with 1cm
of
hot water, a layer of moving white mist covers the water. This is
fascinating to watch, especially if several dry ice chips are scattered
around the pan.  Complicated radial gas flows!  They act like comets or
like solar wind bow-shocks between neighboring stars.  This isn't the
interesting part though.

On a whim I grabbed a high voltage DC supply (about 10KV), clamped a
needle on the negative lead, and was directing ion wind at the mist and
blowing it around.  Here's the weird part.  The thick high-voltage wire
swung across the tray for a moment, and there appeared in the mist layer
a
collection of parallel lines, as if the wire had been spewing a number
of
narrow "rays" which swept across the mist and cut furrows in it.  I
found
that I could wiggle the wire around and draw an array of identical
looping
patterns as the tips of some sort of invisible "rays" all made identical
motions across the mist layer.  I pulled the wire back several inches,
and
still the furrows would appear.  These are Yost's "coherent threadlike
streams", I finally found an easy way to create and observe them!

Brief experimentation showed that the entire wire was sending out these
"rays" in all directions, maybe one or two of them per cm of wire.  They
reach out about 10cm to 15cm and terminate abruptly, and seem to be less
than 1mm across.  If my wire was a high-pressure hydralic hose, then any
tiny oil leaks would behave much as do these "rays".

This was the negative lead, the positive lead was grounded to the pan. 
The wire is fairly old test-probe wire, not designed for 10KV and has a
bit of leakage.  No obvious cracks though.  Some of the "air-stream
rays"
appeared to originate at the tips of tiny pieces of lint which were
clinging to the wire. 





UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE

I found a better way to do create "air threads": electrify the dry-ice
water pan, then use grounded objects as air-thread emitters (use your
hand
for example.)  I placed my aluminum cookie sheet upon insulators
(plastic
cups), filled it with about 1cm deep of hot water, placed a piece of
black
paper in the water for contrast, then dropped a couple of pellets of dry
ice into the water in order to create the mist layer.  I expect that an 
ultrasonic humidifier could also provide the mist layer instead of 
dry ice.

I'm using an old negative ion generator as the power supply. It puts out
10uA maximum, and maybe 10KV to 15KV.  Very safe.  If you want to
duplicate these phenomena, an electrostatic generator is best.  Don't
electrocute yourself with a DC high voltage power supply!  For example,
place a tabletop VandeGraaff machine on the table near the cookie tray,
and connect the tray to the generator's sphere by using wire and tape.




RESULTS:

  - polarity doesn't seem to matter.  Both + and - create the "threads."

  - they seem to flow from small object to plate, regardless of
polarity.
    They bore holes into the layer of mist above the water, creating
    little toroid-flows of air where they impact the surface.  No mist
is
    drawn upwards along the "thread", it seems to be blasted outwards
    along the surface of the water at the place it touches down.

  - my hands emit these "threads" when held near the charged plate! 
Only
    certain spots on my hands do this, only some fingertips do it,
    knuckle-hairs do, as do apparently flat areas of skin.  Tiny
    fibers there?  Or a large sweatgland pore?  I can wipe the "thread
    emitters" away.  Rubbing my hands on clothing or rug seems
    to restore the "emitters" but in new spots.  SEEMS TO BE FROM LINT
    FIBERS.  IN DARKNESS, THREAD-EMITTERS HAVE A GLOWING BLUE DOT AT
THEIR
    TIP.

  - Hair emits these threads.  If I hold the bare side of my arm above
the
    mist tray, I'll see just a few black spots where threads touch down.
    If I turn my arm over so the hairy side faces down, a great many
    furrows appear, maybe several hundred.  Occasionally I see a very
    "powerful"  ion-thread, one which can extend itself more than 2ft,
and
    when the emitter is close to the mist, it makes a 10cm circle of
    roiling disruption.  These super-threads come from very thin pieces
of
    lint, far thinner than hair.  Perhaps they are more conductive than
    other fibers?  Or perhaps they are simply sharper.  STEEL-WOOL
    WHISKERS AND CARBON FIBERS ACT AS 'SUPR THREAD" EMITTERS.

  - the small, weaker "air threads" seem to be much narrower than 1mm.
    How can they move so fast without turbulence!

  - if I tap upon the HV wire with a finger, the furrow in the mist
jerks
    after a short delay, maybe .05sec for 13cm, that's five MPH (can't 
    visualize KPH)

  - If I interrupt the path of a "thread" by using a plastic pen, it
    is deflected by the pen depending on pen polarity.  The plastic
    is damp, and I tried touching the tray and switching polarity,
    and found attraction or repulsion.  When the plastic pen is
repelling 
    the thread, and the pen is brought near, the thread is pushed
    farther and farther, then skips to the other side.  If I "push"
    it with the pen tip, it swerves very fast around the tip.  Like
    pushing an electron beam with a charged object!  At 1-Atm!  Cool!

  - threads seem to curve towards the charged plate.  If I rotate my
hand,
    the tracing of furrows in the mist are showing that the threads
    don't extend straight out from my skin.  Perhaps they follow the
lines
    of the electric field.  (So if they could be made visible, they
would
    be like electrostatic iron filings?)  However, they don't seem to
    repel each other very much.  I've seen two threads with 5mm spacing
    between them, yet they were 15cm long.  If they were highly charged,
    they would repel apart.  If they are ions, there must be both
    polarities of ions involved.

  - I've seen pairs of threads come from a fingernail top, extend
    about 10cm and apparantly follow the field lines, all the while
    maintaining a distance from each other of about 1cm!

  - The "fingernail pair" above, when I placed my finger so the emitter-
    points faced upwards, still curved around 180deg and impacted the
mist
    layer below.  But now the separation between them grew to 4cm. 
Though 
    invisible, I can almost "see" them curving and separating while
    spewing upwards from my fingernail, like two streams from an
    invisible fountain.

  - some "threads" are up to 60cm long!  Very strange to wiggle the
    HV cable more than 2 feet away from the mist pool, yet see
    the trace of a thread-tip moving in the mist.  The longer ones seem
    to fan out towards their far end, to maybe 1cm diameter.

  - each stream seems to fall apart at a particular distance.  They
    are weaker near their tips, then they simply end.  However, this
    might be caused by my increasing the distance between the charged
    plate and the sharp hairs.  Increasing the distance might lower the
    e-field at the hair tip and cause the thread to vanish entirely,
even
    though it seems as if I am pulling the thread away so it's tip no
    longer reaches the plate.

  - I can't get a view of the streams by forcing them to flow across
    the mist.  They refuse.  They always curve down to the plate and hit
    it roughly at right angles.

  - I briefly saw a visible air-thread.  A piece of lint was standing on
    end in the water on the charged plate.  When I brought my hand above
    it, a white "needle" appeared above the lint and extended vertically
    to my hand as the air-thread sucked the mist along with it.  Then
the
    lint aparently leaped upwards to my hand, wrecking the effect. 

  - I can see a tiny time-delay when I wiggle a long fingertip-thread,
so
    the speed of the effect might be around 10mph or so, not
instantaneous

  - A sewing needle does not generate an ion-thread, while most types of
    fibers do.  I suspect that the cause of the threads is tiny and
very,
    very sharp objects (or surface defects.) Perhaps the defects are
    atomically sharp, and this is an example of "field emission",
particle
    emission which does not require a hot filament.  Perhaps dull
objects
    such as sewing needles can only generate air-threads when much
higher
    voltages are employed.  From my experiences with VandeGraaff
machines,
    I suspect that sewing needles will cause air-threads of much larger
    diameter.  STEEL WOOL WHISKERS MAKE POWERFUL AIR-THREADS

  - I connected a microamp meter in series with the plate.  It indicated
    zero.  When I let the other HV wire create one furrow in the mist,
    the meter indicated zero UA.  When I brought the cable close, so
    there were maybe 50 to 70 furrows being drawn along the mist, the
    meter indicated 0.5uA.  These ion-streams, if that's what they are,
    are each delivering an electric current in the range of 10
    nanoamperes or less.

  - I can't see any effects from a 3/4" neodymium magnet.  At 10nA,
    the magnetism around each thread must be incredibly small.

  - I searched for scattering in the air threads, viewing them in
darkness
    while backlit by a flashlight and by a laser pointer.  Nothing.  I
    did note that the chips of dry ice are emitting columns of frost
    specks upwards.  Frost builds up on the surface of the dry ice,
stands
    on end because of the surface charge, and fragments occasionally
    detatch and float upwards.

  - When I used a soda straw and blew upon a thread with all my might, 
    the dot in the mist only moved a little.  The 5mm dot was changed to
a
    10mm x 30mm blotch.  The air blast either causes the thread to
spread
    out into a narrow fan, or it causes them to vibrate at high speed so
    that the thread tip traces out an oblong blotch in the mist. These
    threads are robust! Not at all like smoke, they are more like carbon
    fiber spiderwebs under high tension.

  - I guided an air-thread onto the tiny frost-forest on a chip of dry
    ice.  The frost needles jerked, then a patch of them collapsed and
    melted.  Aha, the air-thread is transporting a jet of warm air
    downwards.  If I used a very tiny air-thread, maybe I could melt my
    initials into the frost.  Tiny carbon-dioxide civilizations would
see
    mysterious writing form in their crops, as if by magic. 

  - Fibers from extra-fine steel wool can be used to create air-threads.
    A sewing needle didn't work well, it probably was not sharp
enough.6/9

  - A steel-wool fiber, when held within 3cm of the charged surface,
began
    oscillating at its resonant frequency, and appeared to blur out into
a 
    fan shape.  Possibly the jet of air at the tip of the fiber can
propel
    the fiber sideways, and the direction of the jet is altered by the
    changing e-fields and by motion of the fiber, so it "thrusts" in a
    pattern which causes the steel fiber vibrations to increase. 6/9

  - Without the mist, I observed the water surface by bouncing
fanned-out
    laser light from it at a glancing angle and onto a white screen. 
The
    air-thread from a steel wool fiber caused a dimple in the water
which
    created a bright spot in the patch of light on the screen.  The same
    air-thread caused a 5cm patch of roiling turbulence in the dry-ice
    mist.  Feeble air-threads did not cause observable dimples.  It
seems
    that the mist technique is far more sensitive than direct viewing of
    the dimpled water surface.

  - I attempted to view possible shadows of air-threads by using
    fanned-out laser light.  Nothing.  Yost had success, but he was
using
    a proper Scheliern Photography setup, and his air-threads had
hundreds
    of times higher current (approx 20uA).

  - I noticed a "dotted line" pattern in one furrow in the mist layer.
    One particular thread-emitter seemed to be "sputtering" at a
    continuous pulse rate of a few 10s of Hz.  Could be from one
arm-hair
    discharging to an adjacent one?  I bet that if a carbon-fiber thread
    emitter was grounded through a relay or other HV switch, the
    connection could be pulsed and this would pulse the air-thread.  A
row
    of these, if swept broadside across the mist, could act like an
    "ink-jet printer" and paint any pattern across the mist.  It should
be
    easy to use an oscilloscope and a pulsed air-thread to measure the
air
    velocity within the thread. 6/13

  - By gluing a 1cm carbon fiber to a small floating "island" of Al
foil,
    I was able to make one of the stronger threads visible.  It launched
    itself upwards from the mist layer, and appeard as a 5mm jet of
white
    mist with a very narrow dark core (about .5mm core dia.)  The
    entrained mist-jet was laminar for about 5cm, then turned turbulent
    above this height.  I couldn't see if the dark core also became
    turbulent.  At the tip of the fiber I could see streams of mist
moving
    inwards in 3D from all directions, as if the tip of the fiber was
the
    mouth of a tiny suction hose.  The high-speed vertical jet is very
    narrow, and barely interferes with this contracting sphere of
incoming
    air.  The carbon fiber was covered with water droplets, and the
    air-thread would vanish unless my hand was held about 5cm above its
    tip.  This is different than whan the fiber is supported above the
    water and aimed downwards: when aimed upwards under mist, the tip
    voltage needs to be much larger. The mist must interfere with the
    e-fields at the tip. 6/14/98

  - In the dark with a flashlight, sometimes I see dust motes floating
in
    the air between my hand and the mist.  If I move an air-thread
around
    in the volume with the dust mote, I can eventually score a "hit" and
    the dust mote vanishes, no doubt yanked downwards at several meters
    per second by the core of the air-thread.  6/14

  - I tried to grab a "thread" with a hook cut from paper.  The paper
    simply repels the threads.  However, the mist was raked by a pattern
    of parallel threads, and the result resembles the details of the cut 
    paper!  I found that, sure enough, if I sweep a torn paper edge over
    the mist, it rakes a pattern across the mist which resembles the
    structure of the torn edge.  The torn edge seems to launch a great
    many parallel air-threads downwards.  I bet I could bend the paper
    into a shape, and see the shape appear in the mist.  Or even write
    entire words using edge-on paper, then stamp them into the mist!
6/14

  - with a good strong fingertip-thread I can write my first name
quickly 
    enough in the mist that the first letter hasn't faded before I
    complete the last. :) Feels strange to be writing with an "invisible
    pencil" which extends about 6" off the end of my thumb!





QUESTIONS, MUSINGS, IMPLICATIONS

The big mystery:  if these "rays" are simply "electric wind", charged
air,
why do they form such narrow streams?  Charged wind should self-repel
and
fan out!

Charles Yost in Electric Spacecraft Journal observed something similar a
few years ago.  His "rays" radiated from polished sphere electrodes
connected to a Wimshurst machine.  He discovered them while working with
a
Schelieren photography setup and looking for distortions of air pressure
caused by e-fields.  See ESJ, Issue 16, pp7-19, winter 1995.   I saw
something similar once years ago, see "rules for inventors", under Rule
5.  
Also Wasserfadden Phenomenon.

Are they rows of Ken Shoulders' "EV"  particles?  But positive terminals
emit them too, and "EVs" are supposedly negative.  Perhaps they are what
Nikola Tesla called his "death ray", narrow channels thinner than hair
which can be used to transport thousands of electrical horsepower.  I
need
to let them hit a high-impedance op amp terminal, then look at the
waveform and perhaps listen to it on audio, see if it's pure DC or
noisy. 

They move VERY fast for being made from air.  Anything this narrow
should
make instant turbulence.  Turbulence uses the energy stored in fluid
shear.  The shear in these thin threads must be titanic, so where is the
turbulence?  They seem to be entirely laminar, yet some are 50cm long,
under 1mm wide, and move at 10KPH!  It's normally impossible to create
an
air-jet this long and this narrow.  Something is binding them together
so
the alike-charges don't spread.  Something is affecting their boundary
layer and preventing immediate turbulent disruption.  Something is
preventing them from drawing in more air along their length and so
growing
into moving sausage-shapes of air rather than moving filaments.

What the heck could these be used for?  Graffitti launcher, ink-jet
style? 
Build a giant one, shave your head, don a white lab coat, then go
looking
for superheros to fight with?  A big one could do weird things to the
airflow around a wing, or could act as a silent electrostatic jet
engine. 
Can you say "antigravity squadron?" 

I suspect that the tips of the air threads are causing dimples in the
surface of the water.  If so, then sunlight can be used to see the
spots.
Put the electrified tray in a sunbeam so that the water makes a bright
square patch of light upon the ceiling.  Dimples in the water will
appear
as black dots in the patch of light.

Will the tiny air-jets distort the thickness (colors) of soap films?  If
so, then make a big soap film on a hoop of wire, charge it up
electrically, and direct air-threads to it.  The terminations of the
air-threads might be visible. Or perhaps the air-thread will just pop
the
bubble.  Note: soap films are best viewed with a dark background behind
the film, and an illuminated white panel behind you the observer.  In
looking at the film, you are seeing the reflection of the white panel,
with a dark background for good contrast. 

Suppose that air-threads are spewed outwards by a tiny tuft of
electrical
plasma, of corona discharge.  If the surface of this tiny hemisphere of
conductive plasma acts as an extension of the surface of the emitter
tip,
then the field gradient at the borders of the plasma will be huge, and
ions of the same polarity as the emitter will be repelled outwards.
However, they cannot be emitted in ALL directions simultaneously because
this would lower the air pressure within the plasma.  An analogy: when
particles are spread on water they sift gradually downwards, but the
situation is unstable, and a downwards-racing finger of heavy,
particle-laden water is expected to appear.  As the ions try to leave
the
electrode, I would expect an air jet to develop, where negative wind
follows a narrow path, and neutral air is drawn into the base of the
plasma.  A possibility: this needle-jet of negative air will alter the
local fields at the tip of the plasma.  If the fields are strong enough
to
induce a ring of positive charge imbalance on the surface of the plasma
surrounding the jet, then the jet might surround itself with a sheath of
positive ions.  Without this sheath the jet could never be narrow, since
the negative gas self-repels and expands. Yet the inertia of the
inflowing
neutral gas makes the jet narrow.  A combination of hydrodynamic and
electrical physics could combine to create an annular gas jet, a highly
charged negative core surrounded by an equally charged positive sheath. 
Reverse the polarity of the emitter, and the jet still forms, but with
reversed polarity.  The attraction of opposite gas charges would create
great pressures.  If the geometry led to stability, then these pressures
would be in a direction which creates "structural strength", akin to the
forces which strengthen tempered glass and prestressed concrete. Charged
gas which behaves as a solid filament! 

Are air-threads the same as the "plasma fingers" in plasma globe
displays? 
They are nitrogen, not argon/neon.  And DC, not hi-freq AC.  Glow
discharge in nitrogen is dim violet, in argon it is bright white.  If I
put my whole mist-tray setup in an argon atmosphere, will I see glowing
white air-threads? 

Something just occurred to me.  The late atmosphereic physicist Dr.
Bernard Vonnegut (yes, Kurt's brother), was of the opinion that tornados
are electric motors.  It seems that there are mysteries surrounding
tornados, in particular, exactly where does the driving energy come
from? 
>From what I've seen, Vonnegut's "electric motor" theory is dismissed by
collegues and greeted with hostility in some arenas.  Well, air-threads
provide a miniature model for what could be the engine that drives
tornados.  The big question: are air-threads scale-dependent or not? 
Are
they like clouds, sparks, and watersheds, does the same geometry occur
with a wide variety of sizes?  Or does their physics force them to
always
appear as 1mm threads?  If the current and voltage is cranked up higher,
does the length and more importantly, does the diameter of the
air-threads
increase?  If so, then what would happen if a very large air-thread
formed
during a thunderstorm?  Suppose it was a few meters across, and
transported air laminarly upwards at maybe 100KPH?  Would not a vortex
form, especially at the area on the ground where the "hose mouth" of the
air-thread touched down?  Probably!  And the tornado vortex would NOT
extend upwards for miles.  Instead there would be a gigantic transparent
air-thread up there in the sky above the tornado, acting like a vacuum
cleaner hose and transporting air in a uniform, non-rotating upwards
direction. 

Even if air-threads don't form tornadoes, here's something else they
might
do.  If a giant air-thread was terminated on the ground, it would make a
gentle donut-shaped flow of air at the place where the air stream
touches
down.  I see these in the dry-ice mist.  Suppose this occurred upon
another sensitive recording surface, say a WHEAT FIELD?  Yeaaaah, thats
the ticket!  The air-thread would stamp out a ring-shaped impression in
the wheat.  Ah, but if this was occuring, the marks would not just be
circles in the crops, they would be lines and arcs caused by motion of
the
air-thread across the ground.  Oooo!, what happens during a lightning
strike, when the stormcloud e-field collapses suddenly?  Perhaps a
pressure pulse travels down the giant air-threads.  If these giant
threads
are normally too feeble to affect the crops, then perhaps the electrical
pulse of a lightning discharge could drive the "rubber stamp" force and
make a mysterious mark.

David Wilkinson on sci.physics.computational.fluid-dynamics tells me
that
the Reynolds number for similar flow in tubes is:
    The kinematic viscosity of air being 1.5*10^-5 m^2 s^-1, the
Reynolds
    Number based on diameter for, say, 3 m s^-1 velocity is
        Re = 3 * 0.001 / 1.5*10^-5 = 200 Therefor the air-threads may be
analogous to the laminar jet of smoke above an undisturbed cigarette. 
But
in this case the force is electrostatic, not bouyancy of warm air. 
Since
Re is proportional to diameter, and high Re causes turbulence (right?),
the tiny diameter of an air-thread can preserve laminar flow over
greater
distances or greater speeds than can the larger diameter smoke stream
above a cigarette.  Normal air jets are propelled by orfice pressure,
and
they slow down forever after.  An electrostatic jet wouldn't need a high
orfice velocity, since the e-fields keep if from slowing down from
viscosity along its length. 






IDEAS TO TRY:

If I could generate XY vector scanned e-fields, then I could draw little
figures in my mist layer by using a rapidly scanned air-thread.  Or big
figures in a wheat field?   :)

My electrified plastic pen can push on an air thread.  I wonder if a
tiny
plastic hook could grab and manipulate a thread?  Braid several threads
together!  Or at least grab two and force them to cut through each
other,
see what happens.  Of course if an air-thread is akin to a stream of
smoke, then this won't happen

Pushing on an air thread with an object causes the air thread to move. 
Is
the reverse occuring?  Could a moving air-thread deflect a piece of
hair,
or will it simply break and then re-form after the hair has passed
through
it?  I'm imagining a horizontal air-thread which is threaded through a
tiny loop of very fine hair.  Will the loop of hair dangle in space,
supported by e-fields and by the air-thread, or will it simply fall
through the thread? 

It might be possible to make an electrically-driven tornado.  Suspend a
horizontal charged plate over oppositely-charged water, then arrange a
tiny emitter needle to jut upwards from the water.  If an air-thread
forms
at the needle tip and sends air upwards, mist layer will be entrained
with
the air flow.  Perhaps incoming air will even start to spiral.  TRIED IT
6/15, OBTAINED A VERTICAL JET, NO VORTEX THOUGH. 

Another idea: smoke flow above an undisturbed cigarette is sensitive to
sound or vibration.  So, use a small loudspeaker to pulse the air near
the air-thread emitter, then measure the speed of the pulse as it
travels
down the thread. 

Sharp and conductive fibers?  How about carbon fibers?  I have a Radio
Shack record cleaner brush which has VERY fine carbon fibers as
bristles.
W Shank on sci.electronics.design points out that tungsten wire if
evaporated in a propane flame will form an extremely sharp tip.  If I
can
crank up the current without needing immense voltage, then air flow
should
increase, making electrostatic tornado demonstrations feasible.

The torn edge of paper creates a "sheet" of air-threads.  Try tearing an
interesting pattern in the paper, see if it "stamps" this pattern onto
the
mist layer like a cookie cutter.  Try rolling the torn paper into a
circle
or triangular cylinder, see if this shape is "transmitted" to the mist
layer by the parallel air-threads.  Try building "words" from torn,
edge-on paper, see if they are stamped into the distant mist-tray.  Use
a
much higher voltage, see if I can "transmit" a word across many feet of
space.

If a row of torn-edge papers was arranged to cover a surface, then a
long,
parallel, 2D array of airthreads would perforate the mist layer.  If a
charged object was inserted into the region of air-threads, its
"electrical shadow" would appear in the mist.  A shadow of a positive or
negative wire should "expand" or "contract" the population of parallel
air-threads.  Serrated-edge paper might create orderly rows of
mist-holes,
and e-field distortions in the 'test region' between the mist layer and
the paper edge array would be made directly visible.  Tear the paper to
form a grid, then look for distortions in the grid. 6/15

The sky-voltage during clear weather is supposed to be around
100v/meter. 
If I could create volumes of negatively charged air at a sufficient
rate,
this air would jet slowly upwards like an air-thread.  Given enough
time,
might it punch a hole in the cloud-deck?!  If so, then it should be
possible to build a large array of ion-wind sources, and write on the
stratus clouds, dot-matrix style.  But as the clouds move along, the
image
would be blurred out as it swept along the clouds' surface.  Ah, what if
I
made a row of air-thread genrators perpendicular to the wind direction?
Then by flipping a switch I could sweep a clear swatch across the clouds
(convert mist into rain?) and thereby turn on the sunshine!  Direct and
simple weather modification technique.  Oh, much worse idea:  By turning
the genrators on and off in a pattern, I could WRITE ON THE SKY.  "Drink
Pepsi".  "NIKE"  Heh heh.  6/15

A giant air-thread generator would take the form of a perforated plate
having a single insulated needle pointing out of each perforation, with
the needle tip in the plane of the plate.  Ground the plate, put HV on
the
needles.  If made in the shape of a disk, charged air would move through
the plane of the array and upwards, and perhaps the entrained air from
the
surface of the resulting cylinder of air would force the jet diameter to
contract.  If the array was built in the shape of a bowl or a cone, with
mouth facing upwards, this jet-contraction effect would be assisted.  It
resembles a burning pool of gasoline, with flames from the surface all
rushing inwards to a central rising column.  If slow and laminar, an
"air
thread" should be launched upwards from the device.  Perhaps this is how
ALL air-threads arise, since Yost's micrography reveals that the plasma
at
the tip of an air-thread generator whisker looks like a trumpet mouth,
with the air-thread being launched down the axis of the mouth. 6/15

Ooo!  Ooo!  Idea!  When an air-thread lands on the mist layer, it seems
to
cause mist droplets to adhere to each other and to the water surface. 
If
projected into a mist cloud, it should cause the mist to collapse into
rain.  Possibly.  If so, then I can start a "rainmaker" service just
like
charlatans of old.  But my linear array of gigantic flute-mouth ion
generator needle beds would be no scam, it would actually turn clouds
into
rain! Set up a row of ion generators to create a "wall" of huge
air-threads, and downwind of the wall the clouds would be gone.  (Insert
maniacal mad-scientist laughter here, which goes on for much longer than
is mentally healthy.)  6/15

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 14:16:19 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00432;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:11:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:11:59 -0700
Message-ID: <358D698D.32E1 earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:14:05 -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: Beaty: electric air threads 6.18.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"EnNOv3.0.g6.USNZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19876
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/unusual/airthred.html   June 18, 1998
Bill Beaty: 

When a needle in the mist shoots an air-thread upwards, does the dark
core
extend through the turbulence, or does it become turbulent itself?  A
sweeping laser could make the cross-section visible.  If the dark core
survives the turbulent cloud, it should appear as a stable black dot in
the roiling mist section.

If air-threads are up to 2.5 feet long with only 10KV, how long will
they
be if I use a VDG generator at 500KV? 

If I place a block of dry ice on the sphere of a VDG machine, will it
launch straight streamers of mist which follow the field lines? 

If it's possible to send threads and sheets of ion flow from either
electrode, what will the threads look like when + and - come together
from
opposite directions?  Will two threads, if they arrive tangentially,
tend
to create a vortex disk?  Will sheets of air- threads tend to create a
tiny tornado?  Try using tangentially-aimed paper edges affixed to each
electrode plane, see if a tornado forms in the center.  Or shoot dry-ice
mist upwards and clear air downwards, see if a rotating structure will
form. 6/16

Analogy: if crystals of CuSO4 stick to the surface of water, they launch
tendrils of blue water downwards.  Is this analogous to air-threads, but
with gravity and solute rather than e-fields and ions?  If so, why do
the
ion threads stand up to powerful air-jets? 

A neon lamp will detect tiny sub-microamp flows.  With a capacitor in
parallel, it responds with periodic bright flashes rather than a dim
glow. 
Connect a neon lamp to a small metal sphere as an 'air thread' detector
(use a sphere because the sharp wires from the lamp might themselves
generate air-threads)  An array of metal thumbtacks supported in a
plastic
plate, each connected to a neon lamp, would act as an air-thread
detector
panel.  Pair it with an air-thread emitter panel to view the shadows of
charged objects.  Or maybe use resistors, op-amps, and LEDs as the
detector panel?  This could be horizontal, while the mist-tray detector
cannot.  6/18

An ion stream rising in a vertical e-field is analogous to warm air
rising
through the atmosphere in a gravitational field.  Rising clouds of ions
MIGHT look just like the smoke from a factory chimney.  However, there
is
a difference.  Bouyancy forces affect large populations of molecules,
while electrostatic forces affect individual ions.  At large scales
there
should be no difference, but at the micro-scale there is a great
difference.  Since turbulence grows from 'seeds' at the micro scale,
then
perhaps turbulence behaves differently for hot air than for clouds of
ions.  Perhaps a cloud of ions can form a narrow, fast-moving,
nonturbulent stream, whereas a cloud of hot air would turn into a wide,
slow, turbulent cloud like that appearing over a large fire (or like
thunderstorm clouds.)  If this is so, then a large ion generator could
create a narrow stream which would reach upwards and bore a hole in the
clouds.  A hot air generator such as a fire would generate an expanding
turbulent cloud which would drift away under the control of the weather
motions present. 6/18


Next: make a smoke-box and see if I can see the "threads" directly, or
look for their shadows in the spread-out light from a laser with a lens
on the end.

Created and maintained by Bill Beaty. Mail me at: billb eskimo.com.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 14:24:02 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA01559;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:20:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 14:20:41 -0700
Message-ID: <00d301bd9d5a$11ce6b80$668f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:17:16 -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: <"FbGfq.0.GO.faNZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19877
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Without Hot or Cold Fusion, Old Sol bathes
the Earth with 12,000 QUADS of energy at about
1.2 kilowatts per square meter EVERY DAY.

The WORLD ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USE is about
ONE QUAD per DAY.

So,why not harness the energy from that BENIGN
NUCLEAR REACTOR that is at a SAFE 93,000,000
miles away?

Photovoltaics (solar cells) are now being manufactured to install like
roofing shingles
and can tie the roof of every building in the world to the Power Grid.
Biomass can provide
energy for supporting food production and
"value added" petrochemical substitutes.

Floating "Solar-Wind Islands" can extract CO2 from the atmosphere and
electrolyze water to hydrogen that can be reacted with the CO2 to
produce methane and synthetic fuels.

Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
technological. :-(

Regards,  Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 19:45:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA06643;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:43:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:43:32 -0700
From: mindtech nor.com.au
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980621081017.0068cea8 pophost.nor.com.au>
X-Sender: mindtech pophost.nor.com.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 08:10:17 +1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
In-Reply-To: <199806200005.RAA28606 Au.oro.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"2bgVm.0.ed1.JJSZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19878
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Those interested in solar collectors may be interested to hear of an
article I read many years ago. It effectively claimed that the more times
sunlight was reflected, the more coherent it became ... and hence more
"concentrated". I believe an experiment was done with a hall-of-mirrors
type of arrangement.

Peter Nielsen

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 19:59:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA15080;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <358DC6E5.CA3C3AC6 darknet.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 22:52:21 -0400
From: Steve 
Organization: DarkNet Online/Digital Fusion
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
References: <3.0.1.32.19980621081017.0068cea8 pophost.nor.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"xhKO33.0.Uh3.6VSZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19879
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hmm.. more coherent?

you mean like.. some sort of natural laser could be constructed, using only
mirrors
and sunlight? or did I misunderstand what you meant?

ttyl
-Steve
--
     darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616
   DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net
Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 20:44:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA26159;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:35:00 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980622113823.2e07920e 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: Re: Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"dMAkz3.0.cO6.VATZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19880
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

mindtech nor.com.au posted the following (edited for brevity) at 08:10
1998.06.21 +1000:
>Those interested in solar collectors may be interested to hear of an
>article I read many years ago. It effectively claimed that the more times
>sunlight was reflected, the more coherent it became ... and hence more
>"concentrated". I believe an experiment was done with a hall-of-mirrors
>type of arrangement.
>
>Peter Nielsen

Due to the selective polarization at various angles of incidence, perhaps ?
If so, quite a bit might be lost to absorption by the reflective surfaces.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 21:01:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA29616;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 20:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:51:16 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"6mpRu3.0.gE7.ZOTZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19881
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 3:17 PM 6/21/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>To: Vortex
>
>Without Hot or Cold Fusion, Old Sol bathes
>the Earth with 12,000 QUADS of energy at about
>1.2 kilowatts per square meter EVERY DAY.
>
>The WORLD ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USE is about
>ONE QUAD per DAY.
>
>So,why not harness the energy from that BENIGN
>NUCLEAR REACTOR that is at a SAFE 93,000,000
>miles away?
>
>Photovoltaics (solar cells) are now being manufactured to install like
>roofing shingles
>and can tie the roof of every building in the world to the Power Grid.
>Biomass can provide
>energy for supporting food production and
>"value added" petrochemical substitutes.
>
>Floating "Solar-Wind Islands" can extract CO2 from the atmosphere and
>electrolyze water to hydrogen that can be reacted with the CO2 to
>produce methane and synthetic fuels.
>
>Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
>technological. :-(

This seams so true at this time.  I do wonder if solar power represents a
viable solution, in very long terms, centuries, though.  Massive quantities
of solar cells would decrease the earth's albedo, creating global warming.

I think metropolitan areas could reduce summer temperatures if all
buildings had highly reflective roofs.  Many flat roofed industrial
buildings would benefit from being pointed with white latex roofing
compound.  It reduces the cooling required vs a black tar roof.

I also wonder about the proposed idea of beaming colar power from
satellites via microwaves.  The satellites, unless casting a shadow when
transmitting and accumulating power, would increase the effective earth
surface area, and thus contibute to global warming as well.

Wind power, though possibly the most difficult to tame, seems the most benign.

>From a practical point of view, increasing biomass, wind, and solar power
generation capacity makes a lot of sense for the time being, IMHO.

Agreed, problems like these will probably not be solved in the US until
professional lobbying is ended and campaign contributions are limited to
coming from voters eligible to vote for the candidate.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 21 23:36:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01019;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:33:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:33:09 -0700
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:33:08 -0700
Message-Id: <199806220633.XAA18938 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: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"6Gr7T2.0.mF.bgVZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19882
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>So,why not harness the energy from that BENIGN
>NUCLEAR REACTOR that is at a SAFE 93,000,000
>miles away?

Because we don't want to be a bunch of moles living under solar panels :-)

Have you seen the wind farms in So. Cal?  They are gross.  You may as well
have had a nuclear reactor accident because no one is going to say, hey,
let's live over here under one of these beautiful wind mills.  Not to
mention those things kill lots of Golden Eagles.

Anyway, solar energy is too sparce to be a viable energy source for modern
society.  Not to say it isn't of value, it is.  And there have been a lot of
improvements to the point that using photovoltaics as roofing tiles is now
almost economical from a total cost of devices vs total energy produced, and
accounting for interest expenses on capitol expenditures.  So maybe that
will become an important source of energy in the future.  But I am betting
on safe nuclear generators for individuals.


Ross Tessien

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 00:01:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA03654;
	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:52:38 -0700
Message-Id: <199806220652.XAA20104 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: NEW Solar calcs...., Solar energy question....
Resent-Message-ID: <"LyBAs1.0.0v.e3WZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19883
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace, 

fine, I read your comments.  See below I agree that you can extract energy
here and there as you think.  However, you are still incorrect regarding the
overall efficiency of producing steam, and I try to explain that to you
below too.

If you could produce more steam because you added a generator than if you
did not, then you would have violated thermodynamic law and you would have
in your garage a perpetual motion machine.  You could scale that thing up to
the point that you could simply turn off the sun, and the thing would still
run and produce heat and steam at night when the sun don't
shine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11





Take a can, epecially a 1
>gallon can if you have one, with a tight sealing lid, and put about 1" of
>water in the bottom.  Place on a burner, with the cap off, to boil the
>water, and thus fill the can with steam.  Let it go for a while so the air
>is displaced.  Remove from the burner and put the cap on tightly.  Now the
>steam and water inside the can are at about 100 C, the steam may be
>slightly higer in temperature, due to additional heating the steam gets on
>the boiler surface after a bubble forms.  

If we define the system to be in equilibrium, then both are at the same
temp.  The temp, with ambient external pressure at stp, will be at 100C, and
this goes for both the steam and the water, if the can were perfectly
insulated.  Since it isn't, there will be condensation forming on the inside
of the can as this is essentially a refraction column of sorts.  But lead on
I'll play as heat rising from the exterior around the sides could provide
additional heat due to convection, and so it can get messy to analyze in
detail pretty fast.

The ambient conditions are less
>than 100 C, otherwise it makes no difference if the machine works or not as
>the operators are dead!  If you want to simulate a desert, then place the
>can into an oven at 120 F.  The can will still be crushed.  The energy to
>crush the can was extracted from the steam.

the important point being the atmospheric pressure into which the steam is
being boiled.  That sets the boiling temperature.  You can boil water at 0 C
by the way.  That is the triple point temperature. 

And yes, you can get the can to crush, I agree.  This is not what I was
arguing about, or where you were making your errors.

>
>If the can were a cylinder of a steam engine, then the energy extracted
>could be used to drive a generator, which can be used to make more steam,
>or to pump water to the boiler from a well, etc.   

Correct.  You could drive a generator with that energy, again I agree.
However, if you do, you will suffer a loss in efficiency because you added
more things into the system.  And if your goal was to make distilled water
via boiling it, then the act of adding the generator reduces the overall
efficiency, and you end up with less total steam produced.

The pressure on the
>cylinder comes from the atmospheric pressure steam entering the cylinder on
>the expansion phase.  The (partial) vacuum on the low pressure side of the
>cylinder comes from the condensation of the steam.  The steam condensation
>can occur in the cylinder itself, or a type of engine can be used where the
>condensation occurs in a condenser, which supplies a vacuum to one side of
>the cylinder in each cycle.

Yes you can do this.  I have no problem with it.  But you lose efficiency in
doing so.  If the goal is to run a generator, then you don't care about that
loss because that electricity generation was the point of building the thing
in the first place.  But, the original goal in the original discussion which
led to all of your incorrect comments dealt with producing the most
distilled water possible, not the most electricity possible.  

>
>I think it is abundantly obvious that (1) a solar water boiler can be used
>for cogeneration purposes even with steam at atmospheric pressure and (2)
>the output of such a steam engine can be used to advantage to boil/purify
>even more water per watt of solar input when the engine is not used for
>generation purposes.  What is not clear are other issues requirements for
>the unit, cost, and other parameters.

And once again you go wrong at the same leap of faith.  No, you will not
produce more steam via adding the generator scheme into the system.  You are
still failing to recognize the additional losses you are adding into the
system, and are only focusing on the additional heating you are adding to
the boiler via this new source of heat, the resistor.  but you are
forgetting that the resistor got it's heat from the boiler, and solar energy
in the first place.

No Horace, you are wrong, it won't work like you think and if you fail to
see it still, then you should really go study a thermodynamics book to get
it straight.

Ross Tessien

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 00:12:20 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA04789;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:07:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:07:59 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"nqvN22.0.gA1.EBWZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19884
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote:

> At 3:17 PM 6/21/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> >To: Vortex


> > [snip]

> >
> >Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
> >technological. :-(
> 
> This seams so true at this time.  I do wonder if solar power represents a
> viable solution, in very long terms, centuries, though.  Massive quantities
> of solar cells would decrease the earth's albedo, creating global warming.
> 

???? I thought that there was already "global warming" due to industrial
air contaminants...

Maybe you're just kidding . 


> I think metropolitan areas could reduce summer temperatures if all
> buildings had highly reflective roofs.  Many flat roofed industrial
> buildings would benefit from being pointed with white latex roofing
> compound.  It reduces the cooling required vs a black tar roof.
> 

But this seems so serious and reasonable.


> I also wonder about the proposed idea of beaming colar power from
> satellites via microwaves.  The satellites, unless casting a shadow when
> transmitting and accumulating power, would increase the effective earth
> surface area, and thus contibute to global warming as well.
> 

 How does  THAT happen?

 

> Wind power, though possibly the most difficult to tame, seems the most benign.
>


Wouldn't massive quantities of gigantic fan blades cut down on wind
velocties behind them , reducing wind chill factors in downwind
regions - and thereby contribute to global warming?

 
> >From a practical point of view, increasing biomass, wind, and solar power
> generation capacity makes a lot of sense for the time being, IMHO.
> 
> Agreed, problems like these will probably not be solved in the US until
> professional lobbying is ended and campaign contributions are limited to
> coming from voters eligible to vote for the candidate.
> 


Horace, have you decided to replace your perfectly good mind with a
television set? 



Jim Ostrowski



> 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 00:46:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA07878;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:41:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:41:57 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: Vortex-l 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
In-Reply-To: <00d301bd9d5a$11ce6b80$668f85ce default>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"nOVaU3.0.0x1.5hWZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19885
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Frederick J Sparber wrote:

> To: Vortex
> 
> Without Hot or Cold Fusion, Old Sol bathes
> the Earth with 12,000 QUADS of energy at about
> 1.2 kilowatts per square meter EVERY DAY.
> 
> The WORLD ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USE is about
> ONE QUAD per DAY.

[snip]

> 
> Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
> technological. :-(
> 

Y'know , when you add these comments to the contents of some of those
websites that you suggest we visit , one gets the impression that you are
some kind of malcontent , who might learn something by renouncing your US
citizenship and relocating to one of those Third world countries where
they lop off your head for advocating the idea that there might be
something wrong with the general government .


Touche' ,  Frederic?

Jim O.
 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 01:14:51 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA10772;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 01:09:52 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 01:09:52 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 00:11:10 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"IN9Ua3.0.Ee2.G5XZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19886
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:09 AM 6/22/98, Jim Ostrowski wrote:
>On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>> At 3:17 PM 6/21/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>> >To: Vortex
>
>
>> > [snip]
>
>> >
>> >Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
>> >technological. :-(
>>
>> This seams so true at this time.  I do wonder if solar power represents a
>> viable solution, in very long terms, centuries, though.  Massive quantities
>> of solar cells would decrease the earth's albedo, creating global warming.
>>
>
>???? I thought that there was already "global warming" due to industrial
>air contaminants...
>
>Maybe you're just kidding .

OK, my mistake.  I should have said "add to global warming."  8^)

[snip]
>> I also wonder about the proposed idea of beaming colar power from
>> satellites via microwaves.  The satellites, unless casting a shadow when
>> transmitting and accumulating power, would increase the effective earth
>> surface area, and thus contibute to global warming as well.
>>
>
> How does  THAT happen?


Same way putting a shiney reflector around your faces gives faster tan (burn.)


>
>
>
>> Wind power, though possibly the most difficult to tame, seems the most
>>benign.
>>
>
>
>Wouldn't massive quantities of gigantic fan blades cut down on wind
>velocties behind them , reducing wind chill factors in downwind
>regions - and thereby contribute to global warming?


Wind chill is only a numerical human comfort factor.  Reducing downwind
velocity reduces the kinetic energy of the wind which ultimately would have
ended up as heat.  The same heat is still generated somewhere in the power
grid, so everything balances.



>
>
>> >From a practical point of view, increasing biomass, wind, and solar power
>> generation capacity makes a lot of sense for the time being, IMHO.
>>
>> Agreed, problems like these will probably not be solved in the US until
>> professional lobbying is ended and campaign contributions are limited to
>> coming from voters eligible to vote for the candidate.
>>
>
>
>Horace, have you decided to replace your perfectly good mind with a
>television set?


Hmmmm - I'll take that as a compliment - or possibly an indication you are
a fairly indiscriminate judge what's perfectly good.   8^)

I must confess to a truly bizzare and exciting life of late.  Maybe it is
due to cosmic ray induced brain deterioration.   8^)    I must be nuts to
comment on politics!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 02:46:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA17853;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 02:44:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 02:44:01 -0700
Message-ID: <002801bd9dc1$e9266b20$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 03:40:30 -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: <"p1w251.0.tM4.WTYZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19887
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Tessien 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 12:35 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers


>
>>So,why not harness the energy from that BENIGN
>>NUCLEAR REACTOR that is at a SAFE 93,000,000
>>miles away?
>
>Because we don't want to be a bunch of moles living under solar panels :-)

LOL. This "Mole" already lives under 327 square meters of virtual solar
panel. At 10% conversion efficiency and 6 hrs/day I could produce the 500
kw-hr/month that I'm paying
$50.00 for and sell the excess to the "Grid".
>
>Have you seen the wind farms in So. Cal?  They are gross.

How much are they grossing though? :-)

>You may as well
>have had a nuclear reactor accident because no one is going to say, hey,
>let's live over here under one of these beautiful wind mills.  Not to
>mention those things kill lots of Golden Eagles.

How many Golden Eagles are you planning on
barbecuing when they fly through a gigawatt per square meter microwave beam
coming from
an orbiting solar collector? Just add "11 herbs and spices" to the beam?
>
>Anyway, solar energy is too sparce to be a viable energy source for modern
>society.

Baloney! It got this Planet to where it is for the past few Billion years.

>
>Not to say it isn't of value, it is.  And there have been a lot of
>improvements to the point that using photovoltaics as roofing tiles is now
>almost economical from a total cost of devices vs total energy produced,
and
>accounting for interest expenses on capitol expenditures.  So maybe that
>will become an important source of energy in the future.  But I am betting
>on safe nuclear generators for individuals.

And what if you lose the bet?

Regards,   Frederick
>
>
>Ross Tessien
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 02:59:19 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA19038;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 02:54:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 02:54:49 -0700
Message-ID: <003a01bd9dc3$6bd2c2c0$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 03:51:57 -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: <"YY9A83.0.Jf4.edYZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19888
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 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 1:45 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers


Jim O wrote,

>
>
>On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>
>> To: Vortex
>> 
>> Without Hot or Cold Fusion, Old Sol bathes
>> the Earth with 12,000 QUADS of energy at about
>> 1.2 kilowatts per square meter EVERY DAY.
>> 
>> The WORLD ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USE is about
>> ONE QUAD per DAY.
>
>[snip]
>
>> 
>> Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
>> technological. :-(
>> 
>
>Y'know , when you add these comments to the contents of some of those
>websites that you suggest we visit , one gets the impression that you are
>some kind of malcontent , who might learn something by renouncing your US
>citizenship and relocating to one of those Third world countries where
>they lop off your head for advocating the idea that there might be
>something wrong with the general government .

ROFL! I just read'em and pass them along for
others to form their own opinions. Just Like Dan Rather.    :-)
>
>
>Touche' ,  Frederic?

Olay, Jim?  :-)
>
>Jim O.
> 
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 05:37:30 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA32276;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 05:34:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 05:34:08 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:34:02 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980622203723.2fd72e08 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: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"q8jyg3.0.Du7.0zaZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19889
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jim Ostrowski posted the following (edited for brevity) at 00:43 1998.06.22
-0700:
>
>On Sun, 21 Jun 1998, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>
>> Without Hot or Cold Fusion, Old Sol bathes
>> the Earth with 12,000 QUADS of energy at about
>> 1.2 kilowatts per square meter EVERY DAY.
>> 
>> The WORLD ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USE is about
>> ONE QUAD per DAY.
>[snip]
>> Seems the problems are more POLITICAL than
>> technological. :-(
>> 
>
>Y'know , when you add these comments to the contents of some of those
>websites that you suggest we visit , one gets the impression that you are
>some kind of malcontent , who might learn something by renouncing your US
>citizenship and relocating to one of those Third world countries where
>they lop off your head for advocating the idea that there might be
>something wrong with the general government .
>
>
>Touche' ,  Frederic?
>
>Jim O.
>
 
Looks to me like he's simply flexing
 the very freedom you advocate he abandon.
Perhaps you would feel more at home 
 as a junior bureaucrat in one of the places 
 you would prefer him to be exiled to.

On the other hand,
 he could always come with me,
 - We could have a grand old time
 building a new non-statist anarchy 
  in the Spratly Archipelago.
or somewhere...


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 06:38:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA12681;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 06:35:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 06:35:36 -0700
Message-ID: <001b01bd9dd3$15137960$0a46d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Glib Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:28:52 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Resent-Message-ID: <"rMfJh3.0.363.dsbZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19890
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Easy, guys.

What the hype about photovoltaics leaves out is:

 a) the cost of high efficiency cells (which is coming down, and flexible
cells of reasonable efficiency are appearing),

b) the irregularity of availability, which means that you don't escape the
cost of the power distribution grids to convey energy from where the sun is
shining to where it isn't

c) the fact that the principal cost of your electric bill is not in the fuel
but in the interest on the cost of the generation and distribution
facilities

d) there is no good alternative distribution system, such as stored
hydrogen,

e) if Ross thinks wind farms are ugly, how about square miles of solar
collectors? And, please, specifically how many golden eagles are killed.
Again, please, golden eagles are indigenous to the US and we are discussing
a global problem.

f) the high efficiency solar cells have multiple layers and are costly to
manufacture; therefore you use them with solar concentrators, which add to
the cost

g) are solar shingles uniformly covering houses and buildings what you
really want?

Let's hope that the LENR solutions work out. They match human needs better.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 07:52:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA01624;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:50:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:50:49 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19980622203723.2fd72e08 po.pacific.net.sg>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"Y_ZC81.0.IP.8zcZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19891
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 




On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Mpowers Consultants wrote:

> Jim Ostrowski posted the following (edited for brevity) at 00:43 1998.06.22
> -0700:
> >
> >
> >Y'know , when you add these comments to the contents of some of those
> >websites that you suggest we visit , one gets the impression that you are
> >some kind of malcontent , who might learn something by renouncing your US
> >citizenship and relocating to one of those Third world countries where
> >they lop off your head for advocating the idea that there might be
> >something wrong with the general government .
> >

>  
> Looks to me like he's simply flexing
>  the very freedom you advocate he abandon.

I was just being facetious. Several messages back , Frederick suggested
that  I  proceed in the exact manner as described above when  I posted 
something critical of the gov't. 


> Perhaps you would feel more at home 
>  as a junior bureaucrat in one of the places 
>  you would prefer him to be exiled to.


Actually , if you only knew me , you would realize that bureaucracy in
general and  I have quite a history of antagonism . This includes numerous
courtroom appearances and one shotgun standoff.


> 
> On the other hand,
>  he could always come with me,
>  - We could have a grand old time
>  building a new non-statist anarchy 
>   in the Spratly Archipelago.
> or somewhere...

The Spratly Archipelago?

Jim O.

> 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 08:40:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA13441;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:32:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:32:23 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:32:18 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19980620234040.2fafa92c po.pacific.net.sg>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"CYXq43.0.sH3.7adZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19892
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Sat, 20 Jun 1998, Mpowers Consultants wrote:

> Ok. if the two charges are at rest then there should be
>  utterly none of this "compressive force"
>  If they are in parallel motion then the "compressive force"
>   they experience should be related somehow to their
>   velocity in the reference frame.
>   Which  reference frame ?
>   Who's right and where is the reference frame for this universe ?
> 
> If such a thing exists, someone oughta tell Michelson-Morley about this !
> 

Two electrons repelling each other when viewed from another frame is not a
current.

Two electrons in an external electrical field is. You see then there is no
relativity worry.

This argument about including all charges in the universe should be
phrased most simply with three charges. The third charge provides the
external field.

What I want to know is how the symmetry is broken and the how electrons
end up attracting without invoking 'mysterious' B fields and 'just so'
arguments.

My naivety tells me to regard the moving third charge as generating a B
field which both electrons should act in the same way to by the Lorentz
force. (Yeah, but then the e-s start moving and generate a B field so that
they react with other by Horace's ASCII art.)

There's no way around this, its just so. I think. A quirk of space and
circulation of field lines. The symmetry is that they generate identical
circulation fields which leads to an apparent asymmetry. Better to model
this and not handwave.

Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 08:51:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17087;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:48:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:48:36 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:48:28 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980622235154.3fcf3830 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 
From: Mpowers Consultants 
Subject: Re: Beaty: electric air threads 6.18.98
Resent-Message-ID: <"peHQT.0.tA4.JpdZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19893
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Rich Murray posted the following (edited for brevity) at 15:14 1998.06.21 -0500:
>http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/unusual/airthred.html   June 18, 1998
>Bill Beaty: 
>
>When a needle in the mist shoots an air-thread upwards, does the dark
>core extend through the turbulence, or does it become turbulent itself? 
>


I wish I weren't in the middle of a crisis
I would like to see these threads,
 but I've gotta move soon so I can't
  set up any more experimentals

I have a suggestion for whoever
 makes threads next:

Try spraying (lightly) the threads with something
 like KlearKote, polyurethane paint, or hairspray.
See if you can make a straw.

cheers from the flying armchair...

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 08:55:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA19380;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:52:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:52:43 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:52:39 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"onZdn.0.dk4.AtdZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19894
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, I wrote:

> Two electrons repelling each other when viewed from another frame is not a
> current.
> 
> Two electrons in an external electrical field is. You see then there is no
> relativity worry.
> 

No this is still wrong. One doesn't need a potential difference to have a
current flow.

We're back to two e-s, how is it that they repel in one frame and attract
in the others. Like I said last week, a scaling change between B and E and
force constant via Lorentz eqn. but not a sign change! Shurely shome
mishtake.

This is as confusing as that Similtaneity business.

Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 08:55:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA20153;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:53:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:53:48 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980622115749.0164b650 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:57:49 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <358b1bec.158128214 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
 
 <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"YgOZ01.0.pw4.CudZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19895
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>>   Why does this bother you?  Relativity does come into it, but for "local"
>>phenomena, distance is irrelevant.  Imagine the analogous magnetic circut,

At 02:31 AM 6/20/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>The reason it bothers me is this. I thought you were implying that in
>the frame of the electrons, the positive charge on the rest of the
>universe could be seen as a positive current (as opposed to the
>negative current of the electrons in the lab frame). And this positive
>current would then create a magnetic field which caused the electrons
>to move together. 
>However if this were the case, then I would expect the distance
>between the electrons and this "positive current" to be a determining
>factor in the strength of the magnetic field "felt" by the electrons.
>But somehow my intuition says that the actual attractive force between
>the electrons is dependant on the distance between the electrons, and
>independent of the distance to the positive charges. 
>Thence, the apparent discrepancy.

   As I said, it is easier to think about this with respect to magnetism,
but the symmetry holds.  Think about the magnetic field lines connecting
the north and south poles of a magnet.  When you are not at the poles, the
field strength does depend on distance and geometry.  But at the pole, the
strength of the field is determined by the number of poles, and by nothing
else.  Same thing occurs with electric charge.  When you are measuring
electric field strength at a pole (in this case a charged particle), the
field strength is dependent only on the net charge.  But there must be a
corresponding oppositely charged pole, or set of poles locally for this to
be true.  So two negatively charged electrons alone in the universe would
repel each other, but in the real universe their attraction depends on the
distance between them, and their velocity relative to the cancelling charge.

   Where I ran into this, and it is quite counter intuitive, is that for an
ion beam engine, you want a beam.  However, you have to cancel the charge
for the reasons described.  BUT if you cancel the charge with an electron
beam at the same velocity, the ion beam diffuses.  The solution is either
to put charged screens around the beams as they emerge from the spacecraft,
or (better) to create the ion beam, and neutralize it by passing through an
electron cloud like in modern tokamaks.  This keeps the beam focused until
the electrons reach the ion velocity

                                        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 Jun 22 09:02:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA23035;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:59:33 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 08:59:33 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980622120331.01649e20 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:03:31 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <358c1fd8.159133046 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"0oERE1.0.pd5.azdZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19896
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 03:21 AM 6/20/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>Charge may not be carried by photons, but the information pertaining
>to the change in charge of the black hole should be.

   Wrong. Pass an iron core with a loop of wire on it around the black
hole.  The induced current in the wire will let you calculate the charge on
the black hole, and nothing has to get near the event horizon.

   If you like superstring theory, charge corresponds to knots in the
string.  For most purposes the model that a charge corresponds to a pole
works just fine.  In either case, charge distorts space in a way that is
measurable at a distance.

                                        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 Jun 22 09:09:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA24704;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:06:22 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:06:22 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980622121019.0163f320 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:10:19 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19980620234040.2fafa92c po.pacific.net.sg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"igR-.0.v16.z3eZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19897
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:37 PM 6/20/98 +0800, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>  Who's right and where is the reference frame for this universe ?
>
>If such a thing exists, someone oughta tell Michelson-Morley about this !

   Yup, and they are.  In my mind, the most amazing feature of modern
cosmology is that there is a preferred reference frame, and that it can be
determined.  (Of course, nothing is ever simple.  It seems that the
preferred frame is a local property.  Thus two observers can measure the
preferred frame, and if they are far enough apart those answers will be
different.)

                                        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 Jun 22 09:11:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA25292;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:08:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:08:14 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:08:13 -0700
Message-Id: <199806221608.JAA01240 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: Glib Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"_G_-l2.0.0B6.k5eZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19898
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



>What the hype about photovoltaics leaves out is:
>
> a) the cost of high efficiency cells (which is coming down, and flexible
>cells of reasonable efficiency are appearing),

Correct, which means that if they could manf. them in high quantities, bring
the cost down, and use them for shingles, then they could become viable.  

>
>b) the irregularity of availability, which means that you don't escape the
>cost of the power distribution grids to convey energy from where the sun is
>shining to where it isn't

If you use centralized power production this is true.  But for
photovoltaics, you probably would use them during the day time to charge
batteries, and then use inverters at night.  So photovoltaics are better
suited to distributed power schemes, so they may avoid this cost of
distribution.  Except perhaps in small 3rd world townships that put in
together to power the local refrigerator, etc.

>
>c) the fact that the principal cost of your electric bill is not in the fuel
>but in the interest on the cost of the generation and distribution
>facilities

Yes, and this is the point that is missed by most people.  You have to pay
interest on the money you use to invest in the equipment at the outset.
Many people just say, "Well, then just pay cash".  But the reality of
economics is that money is always invested in something, and if you invest,
then you have to be earning interest.  So even then you are losing the money
you would have been earning if your money had been invested.  On the flip
side, you are saving money from the energy you are producing.

So the question then becomes, how long are the things going to work before
you have to throw them away, and how much income (ie interest), will you
earn on your money if you invest in photovoltaics as opposed to stocks or
other $ tools.



>
>e) if Ross thinks wind farms are ugly, how about square miles of solar
>collectors? 

You may as well have allocated the area to a Chernobyl accident (almost ;-)

The point is, I think that all of these schemes that cover the land with
ugly things are, well, ugly.  I live in the mountains and spend lots of time
in the woods enjoying the beauty of nature and I hope we can keep from
throwing this legacy away.  

And, please, specifically how many golden eagles are killed.
>Again, please, golden eagles are indigenous to the US and we are discussing
>a global problem.

Down by Palm Springs, they hvae some huge wind farms as the wind blows in
from the LA basin (smog with it too, yuck).  The problem is, for the amount
of power you get, you have to cover a lot of ground.  So if you really
thought you were going to power a city like LA with that sort of scheme,
then you would have have to cover a HUGE area with windmills.  It just isn't
feasible.

For 3rd world countries this can, produce an amount of power that is useful.
ie, you go from no power to enough to run the local refrigerator for the
community and power some lights at night, etc.  

As for eagles, that was up on the Altimont pass near San Francisco.  As I
recall, they killed on the order of a hundred, and that caused quite an up
roar. They had to make points on the top of the poles so the birds couldn't
nest or sit up their to hunt prey in the grassy slopes below the wind mills.


>g) are solar shingles uniformly covering houses and buildings what you
>really want?

Well, if they can make the photovoltaic shingles look at least close to
normal shingles then that is IMO the best solution for that energy scheme.
No distribution problems that way, you just gather the energy where you want
to use it.

>
>Let's hope that the LENR solutions work out. They match human needs better.

Agreed.



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 09:12:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA25328;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:08:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:08:18 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:08:15 -0700
Message-Id: <199806221608.JAA01257 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: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"JVOxj.0.gB6.n5eZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19899
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>
>>Anyway, solar energy is too sparce to be a viable energy source for modern
>>society.
>
>Baloney! It got this Planet to where it is for the past few Billion years.

It didn't create modern society though.  Without using fossil fuels and
nuclear and hydro power, our society couldn't function unless really vast
expanses of solar collectors powered working plants by day, and we all slept
by night.

Now that we have advanced to this point, I suppose that we could chop down
the rest of the remaining wild lands, cover them with collectors, and then
we could power everything.  


  But I am betting
>>on safe nuclear generators for individuals.
>
>And what if you lose the bet?


Let's just do our job and not lose.  I for one know of ways to succeed, and
hope to receive funding to do so.  Others in this group and else where also
know other ways to succeed.  But we not only need to produce nuclear
reactions, we need to do so at power levels that are interesting to modern
society.  When we accomplish that, then the world will take note and we will
have accomplished what vortex is all about.

Ross Tessien


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 09:27:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA31523;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:22:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:22:56 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980622122658.01654c60 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:26:58 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Cc: 
In-Reply-To: <002801bd9dc1$e9266b20$778f85ce default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Wpn8U.0.Si7.WJeZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19900
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 03:40 AM 6/22/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>How many Golden Eagles are you planning on
>barbecuing when they fly through a gigawatt per square meter microwave beam
>coming from an orbiting solar collector? Just add "11 herbs and spices" to
the >beam?

  Cute, but very misleading.  The energy density from orbiting power
transmitted to rectennas would be about 50 mw/sq cm.  Higher than is
currently legal in some states for microwave emissions, but below the
federal standard.

                                        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 Jun 22 09:33:00 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14400;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <009101bd9df9$bfcde040$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:20:20 -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: <"_XkIZ3.0.vW3.4ReZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19901
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Figuring 1 kw/capita installed Solar collector generating capacity, which is
what the power
companies use, we're talking 6E9 kilowatts to
provide for the present global population{not counting Mpowers and Jim O,).
:-)

The space application solar panels are about 11% efficient mostly for
practical reasons.

So, we need 6E11 square meters of collector
then triple that for constant global output,equals 5.4E11 meter^2 collector
or 90 square meters/capita (about the roof area you see flying into Chicago
or L.A. :-)

So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.

Regards,    Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 09:42:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA03389;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:37:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:37:23 -0700
Message-ID: <00a701bd9dfb$a79a47a0$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:33:58 -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: <"q-Pvh3.0.oq.2XeZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19902
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert I. Eachus 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Robert I. Eachus wrote,


>At 03:40 AM 6/22/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>>How many Golden Eagles are you planning on
>>barbecuing when they fly through a gigawatt per square meter microwave
beam
>>coming from an orbiting solar collector? Just add "11 herbs and spices" to
>the >beam?
>
>  Cute, but very misleading.  The energy density from orbiting power
>transmitted to rectennas would be about 50 mw/sq cm.

So, Why why go out in space and beam down energy at 50 mw/sq cm when the Sun
is already transmitting it at 120 mw/ sq cm???

Regards,   Frederick

>
>Higher than is
>currently legal in some states for microwave emissions, but below the
>federal standard.
>
>                                        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 Jun 22 10:13:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA19977;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:03:09 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806221703.MAA25582 dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Not so easy energy answer project
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"eAana3.0.2u4.a0fZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19903
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 22, 1998

During the late forties, the War (II) was over, the asia turmoil was 
far and remote, the Korean "Police Action" had not even been hinted as 
starting, Communist movements were consolidating its gains and moving 
ahead, racism was still largely unresolved, and the Popular Science 
issues covered topics bordering on science fiction (for its day) with 
it's revelations of "look what we discovered Hitler's Germany was 
planning to develop" to win the war. It seems there were not much 
startling technical revelations out of asia, Japan. One of these plans 
was the development of a giant manned solar reflecting mirror obiting 
the earth in a stationary orbit. What this mirror was able to do in the 
war effort was to selectivly, literally scorch the enemy away. You 
know, like what was done with a manifying glass in a kid's hand. The 
other, more mundane use was to provide useful, constant solar energy, 
harnessed. This musing disappeared with the development of fission 
power. More realistic. We had not reached the moon yet, much less orbit 
the earth -- before the Russia woke us up and beat us with its twirping 
satellite. It certainly added to the communist threat.

At today's level of technology, as I seem to know it, we can update the 
war inspired ideas of power sources. Maybe that mirror idea is not so 
bad after all. Just don't pass under it. 
Internationally we have reached the moon, have a manned satellite for 
research of sorts, and plans are afoot for expanded use of space aside 
from the debris clutter and misc. satellites we have thrown up there. 

So now a proposal: (probably already brainstormed out somewhere)
  Develop a manned manufacturing station on the moon. Use available 
solar power and native materials to develop solar cells or anything 
better to harness the sunlight always beaming down on the moon in near 
vacuum. Then plaster the surface of the moon with the stuff. (As I 
remember, the moon pretty much always faces the sun in its orbit around 
the earth.) Then beam the energy to distribution satellites which in 
turn beams the power down to earth. Or just work out the final 
distribution system as you go along. There are always young brains to 
work things out. Now the question is: Is there enough solar energy in 
all its spectrum beating down on the moon's surface to make it 
worthwhile when harnessed even at a fraction? 

The moon already contributes to the earth's energy resource with the 
tides. And there is the question of electricity being generated as 
moving wires cuts across the earth's magnetic field. Perhaps these can 
be harnessed as well. I know the tides have been to some extent.

CF is worth looking into for everything science stands for: inquiry and 
understanding. If it can be harnessed practically, better yet. And that 
has been the main motivating force, hasn't it? To have the cake and be 
able to eat---- :) its alright i guess   so attractive

-ak-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 10:16:18 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA16448;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:14:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:14:37 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:15:48 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"abtyi3.0.q04.y3fZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19904
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:20 AM 6/22/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>Figuring 1 kw/capita installed Solar collector generating capacity, which is
>what the power
>companies use, we're talking 6E9 kilowatts to
>provide for the present global population{not counting Mpowers and Jim O,).
>:-)
>
>The space application solar panels are about 11% efficient mostly for
>practical reasons.
>
>So, we need 6E11 square meters of collector
>then triple that for constant global output,equals 5.4E11 meter^2 collector
>or 90 square meters/capita (about the roof area you see flying into Chicago
>or L.A. :-)
>
>So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
>mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
>folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.


That only meets the residential power requirements though, right?  Doesn't
cover the energy cost of transmission either.  Still need a grid to get
reliable continuous service.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 10:29:52 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA19610;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:25:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:25:39 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:26:54 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Not so easy energy answer project
Resent-Message-ID: <"_WSR72.0.Ko4.JEfZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19905
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:03 PM 6/22/98, Akira Kawasaki wrote:
[snip]
>  Develop a manned manufacturing station on the moon.


Asteroids might represent a lower cost way to obtain the silicon.


{snip]
> (As I
>remember, the moon pretty much always faces the sun in its orbit around
>the earth.)
[snip]


Unfortunately, the moon tends to remain pointed at the earth.  The moon has
day and night - just the lunar day is about 28 earth days.


>CF is worth looking into for everything science stands for: inquiry and
>understanding. If it can be harnessed practically, better yet.

Amen.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 10:51:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA25096;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980622134425.01649390 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:44:25 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
In-Reply-To: <00a701bd9dfb$a79a47a0$778f85ce default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"KvCv32.0.286.0ZfZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19906
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:33 AM 6/22/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>So, Why why go out in space and beam down energy at 50 mw/sq cm when the Sun
>is already transmitting it at 120 mw/ sq cm???

  1) Because the 50 mw/sq cm can be converted to electricity with better
than 90% efficiency, as opposed to 10-25% for most solar.

  2) Because the energy is available for base load, 24 hours/day, 7 days/week.

  3) Because the collector is so cheap--and so open--that you can also use
the same land for regular solar energy collection.  (But the real plan is
to grow crops underneath.  The rectenna would block about 1% of the
incoming sunlight.) 

  It definitely is one of those plans that sounds much crazier to begin
with than it does after thorough study.  (Incidently, even though current
plans call for the sunlight to be captured by photovoltaics, they would
operate indirectly, with energy from concentrating mirrors.  That allows
the solar particle damage to be done to the thin film mirrors, rather than
to the PV cells.)

                                        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 Jun 22 10:55:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA25647;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:50:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <00d801bd9e05$98c34100$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:45:45 -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: <"OafJy1.0.eG6.ubfZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19907
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, June 22, 1998 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers


>At 10:20 AM 6/22/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>>Figuring 1 kw/capita installed Solar collector generating capacity, which
is
>>what the power
>>companies use, we're talking 6E9 kilowatts to
>>provide for the present global population{not counting Mpowers and Jim
O,).
>>:-)
>>
>>The space application solar panels are about 11% efficient mostly for
>>practical reasons.
>>
>>So, we need 6E11 square meters of collector
>>then triple that for constant global output,equals 5.4E11 meter^2
collector
>>or 90 square meters/capita (about the roof area you see flying into
Chicago
>>or L.A. :-)
>>
>>So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
>>mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
>>folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.
>
>
>That only meets the residential power requirements though, right?

As I read it it takes into account commercial
also. I doubled the collector area for
that need. There are still several Hydro (Solar
Gravity)plants around the globe to handle things like aluminum
manufacture,etc.

>Doesn't
>cover the energy cost of transmission either.

You are already paying for the transmission loss/costs.

>Still need a grid to get
>reliable continuous service.

Got One. Your drop line and power meter works both ways. It's called
"Wheeling", I can wheel power to you on the existing grid now that the
wheeling laws are in effect, as long as the feed interface is up to specs.

We had 2.5 cent/kw-hr biomass waste generation systems ready to go on-line
in 1980., but the power companies wouldn't let us use the grid because  they
needed to sell all of the power that their overpriced nuclear and new
coal-fired plants were producing.And wait til you start picking up the tab
for decommissioning an
nuke waste handling. As it is right now, renewables and biofuels are
producing as much energy as nuclear.

Regards, Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 10:54:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA25147;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:51:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:51:39 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980622135540.00ceda40 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:55:40 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: Not so easy energy answer project
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <199806221703.MAA25582 dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"bJTfY2.0.m86.gcfZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19908
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:03 PM 6/22/98 -0500, Akira Kawasaki wrote:
>So now a proposal: (probably already brainstormed out somewhere)
>  Develop a manned manufacturing station on the moon. Use available 
>solar power and native materials to develop solar cells or anything 
>better to harness the sunlight always beaming down on the moon in near 
>vacuum. Then plaster the surface of the moon with the stuff. (As I 
>remember, the moon pretty much always faces the sun in its orbit around 
>the earth.) Then beam the energy to distribution satellites which in 
>turn beams the power down to earth. Or just work out the final 
>distribution system as you go along. There are always young brains to 
>work things out. Now the question is: Is there enough solar energy in 
>all its spectrum beating down on the moon's surface to make it 
>worthwhile when harnessed even at a fraction? 

   See my posting on SPS.  The idea turns out to have great merit.  (But
you need to put the sattelites in geosynchronous orbit to get effective 24
hour insolation.  The surface of the moon only gets sunlight 14 days out of
28.)

   Using Lunar materials to build solar power sattelites has been
considered, but the potential cost savings are marginal.  The biggest
savings of course, come from figuring out how to trim another few pounds
per kilowatt from the sattelites.  With the nominal plans for 10 GW
sattelites, one lb/kw = 5000 tons, or about 200 Space Shuttle payloads.
(Of course, the Space Shuttle is totally unsuited to SPS construction, so
part one of any SPS plan is to build a new orbital infrastructure, probably
based around a mass driver on the Altiplano.)

                                        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 Jun 22 10:59:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA26368;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:54:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:54:57 -0700
Message-ID: <00ef01bd9e06$7d3ec520$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:52:09 -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: <"w5YCs1.0.vR6.mffZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19909
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert I. Eachus 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

More like, because it's a "Beltway Bandit's" Dream, where cost and
practicality don't matter.

FJS


>At 10:33 AM 6/22/98 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>>So, Why why go out in space and beam down energy at 50 mw/sq cm when the
Sun
>>is already transmitting it at 120 mw/ sq cm???
>
>  1) Because the 50 mw/sq cm can be converted to electricity with better
>than 90% efficiency, as opposed to 10-25% for most solar.
>
>  2) Because the energy is available for base load, 24 hours/day, 7
days/week.
>
>  3) Because the collector is so cheap--and so open--that you can also use
>the same land for regular solar energy collection.  (But the real plan is
>to grow crops underneath.  The rectenna would block about 1% of the
>incoming sunlight.)
>
>  It definitely is one of those plans that sounds much crazier to begin
>with than it does after thorough study.  (Incidently, even though current
>plans call for the sunlight to be captured by photovoltaics, they would
>operate indirectly, with energy from concentrating mirrors.  That allows
>the solar particle damage to be done to the thin film mirrors, rather than
>to the PV cells.)
>
>                                        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 Jun 22 11:02:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA28061;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <358E993B.2C17 interlaced.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:49:47 -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: Easy Energy Answers
References: <009101bd9df9$bfcde040$778f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"efD2q.0.Ms6.KlfZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19910
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> 
(snip)

> So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
> mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
> folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.
>

Hey, Fred, you have just solved the "entry level job" problem for
high school kids if McD ever goes belly up!

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 11:05:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA30160;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:00:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:00:49 -0700
Message-ID: <358E9BF2.ED8 interlaced.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:01:22 -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: Easy Energy Answers
References: <00a701bd9dfb$a79a47a0$778f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"BCwzJ3.0.AN7.GlfZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19911
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> 
>
> So, Why why go out in space and beam down energy at 50 mw/sq cm when the Sun
> is already transmitting it at 120 mw/ sq cm???

Because, it helps keep NASA busy and out of trouble, silly Frederick!

Frank Stenger (NASA, retired)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 11:09:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA32224;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:06:09 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:06:09 -0700
Message-ID: <358E992A.CEC20C65 darknet.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:49:30 -0400
From: Steve 
Organization: DarkNet Online/Digital Fusion
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" ,
        "KeelyNet-L lists.kz" 
Subject: Sonoluminescence Article.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"j3QMg1.0.Lt7.GqfZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19912
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

"Research Uncovers Possible New Explanation For Sonoluminescence"

Full Story: http://www.sciencedaily.com/story.asp?filename=980622061213

ttyl
-Steve
--
     darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616
   DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net
Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 11:48:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03857;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:45:03 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:45:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <358ECF79.7DFA bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:41:13 -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: Easy Energy Answers
References: <00d801bd9e05$98c34100$778f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"3eqrM.0.By.jOgZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19913
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:



> >Still need a grid to get
> >reliable continuous service.
> 
> Got One. Your drop line and power meter works both ways. It's called
> "Wheeling", I can wheel power to you on the existing grid now that the
> wheeling laws are in effect, as long as the feed interface is up to specs.

Realistically, there are a few problems with residential co-generation. 
The first problem is that, at least here in Georgia, you require two
meters -- one for purchasing power and another for selling power.  The
utility is allowed to sell you power at around $0.10/kWh but must pay
only about $0.03/kWh which is claimed to be the wholesale cost of power
generation.

The second major problem is something called "islanding".  For safety
reasons, the power company wants to ensure that you are not reverse
feeding the grid when they are trying to do maintenance; so, your PV
system must have sensing and disconnecting devices between it and the
outbound meter.

The third problem is energy storage.  The only cost effective solution
to date is lead acid batteries.

It all sounds nice, but when you run all the numbers, it just doesn't
pay.  Unless, you consider that we are killing ourselves with fossil
fueled systems.  But, hey, that's our kid's problem, innit?

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 12:30:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA11170;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:26:31 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:26:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <01BD9DE9.062D1300 209-113-17-90.insync.net>
From: Tractebel Energy Marketing 
To: "vortex-l eskimo.com" 
Subject: RE: Glib Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:17:25 -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 MAA11136
Resent-Message-ID: <"961P03.0.Qk2.X_gZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19914
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Interesting thread you guys.  FYI, though....  Within the next 15 years or so, the primary global energy source will be shifting significantly from fossil fuels to a source better than all those you've mentioned.  It will be completely environment friendl
y and is available night and day around the globe... and, no, it will not be ZPE either.  Anyone want to guess what I am referring to?

-----Original Message-----
From:	Ross Tessien [SMTP:tessien oro.net]
Sent:	Monday, June 22, 1998 11:08 AM
To:	vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject:	Re: Glib Easy Energy Answers

>What the hype about photovoltaics leaves out is:
>
> a) the cost of high efficiency cells (which is coming down, and flexible
>cells of reasonable efficiency are appearing),

Correct, which means that if they could manf. them in high quantities, bring
the cost down, and use them for shingles, then they could become viable.  

>
>b) the irregularity of availability, which means that you don't escape the
>cost of the power distribution grids to convey energy from where the sun is
>shining to where it isn't

If you use centralized power production this is true.  But for
photovoltaics, you probably would use them during the day time to charge
batteries, and then use inverters at night.  So photovoltaics are better
suited to distributed power schemes, so they may avoid this cost of
distribution.  Except perhaps in small 3rd world townships that put in
together to power the local refrigerator, etc.

>
>c) the fact that the principal cost of your electric bill is not in the fuel
>but in the interest on the cost of the generation and distribution
>facilities

Yes, and this is the point that is missed by most people.  You have to pay
interest on the money you use to invest in the equipment at the outset.
Many people just say, "Well, then just pay cash".  But the reality of
economics is that money is always invested in something, and if you invest,
then you have to be earning interest.  So even then you are losing the money
you would have been earning if your money had been invested.  On the flip
side, you are saving money from the energy you are producing.

So the question then becomes, how long are the things going to work before
you have to throw them away, and how much income (ie interest), will you
earn on your money if you invest in photovoltaics as opposed to stocks or
other $ tools.



>
>e) if Ross thinks wind farms are ugly, how about square miles of solar
>collectors? 

You may as well have allocated the area to a Chernobyl accident (almost ;-)

The point is, I think that all of these schemes that cover the land with
ugly things are, well, ugly.  I live in the mountains and spend lots of time
in the woods enjoying the beauty of nature and I hope we can keep from
throwing this legacy away.  

And, please, specifically how many golden eagles are killed.
>Again, please, golden eagles are indigenous to the US and we are discussing
>a global problem.

Down by Palm Springs, they hvae some huge wind farms as the wind blows in
from the LA basin (smog with it too, yuck).  The problem is, for the amount
of power you get, you have to cover a lot of ground.  So if you really
thought you were going to power a city like LA with that sort of scheme,
then you would have have to cover a HUGE area with windmills.  It just isn't
feasible.

For 3rd world countries this can, produce an amount of power that is useful.
ie, you go from no power to enough to run the local refrigerator for the
community and power some lights at night, etc.  

As for eagles, that was up on the Altimont pass near San Francisco.  As I
recall, they killed on the order of a hundred, and that caused quite an up
roar. They had to make points on the top of the poles so the birds couldn't
nest or sit up their to hunt prey in the grassy slopes below the wind mills.


>g) are solar shingles uniformly covering houses and buildings what you
>really want?

Well, if they can make the photovoltaic shingles look at least close to
normal shingles then that is IMO the best solution for that energy scheme.
No distribution problems that way, you just gather the energy where you want
to use it.

>
>Let's hope that the LENR solutions work out. They match human needs better.

Agreed.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 12:42:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA13673;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:40:01 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:40:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <015a01bd9e14$263b58c0$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: , 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:29:51 -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: <"Xcj_N3.0.ZL3.EChZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19915
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Blanton 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Terry Blanton wrote:


>Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>
>
>
>> >Still need a grid to get
>> >reliable continuous service.
>>
>> Got One. Your drop line and power meter works both ways. It's called
>> "Wheeling", I can wheel power to you on the existing grid now that the
>> wheeling laws are in effect, as long as the feed interface is up to
specs.
>
>Realistically, there are a few problems with residential co-generation.
>The first problem is that, at least here in Georgia, you require two
>meters -- one for purchasing power and another for selling power.

Same problems in any large building or plant or on the grid itself as it is
now with wheeling.
A simple logistics problem. The power companies sure know how to make it
seem tough,don't they?

>The
>utility is allowed to sell you power at around $0.10/kWh but must pay
>only about $0.03/kWh which is claimed to be the wholesale cost of power
>generation.

Yep. In 1986, Will Parrish put a $40 Million
20 megawatt manure-burning power plant from cattle feedlots in the Imperial
Valley and sold the power at the "avoided cost" of $0.05/kw-hr. They paid
off the plant in a short time,but finally got squeezed out by the nuclear
lobby.
>
>The second major problem is something called "islanding".  For safety
>reasons, the power company wants to ensure that you are not reverse
>feeding the grid when they are trying to do maintenance; so, your PV
>system must have sensing and disconnecting devices between it and the
>outbound meter.

Easy fail-safe electronics problem.
>
>The third problem is energy storage.  The only cost effective solution
>to date is lead acid batteries.

At 15 watt-hours/lb not very good. You can always divert the grid surplus to
water electrolyis plants (24 kw-hr/lb H2) Then:

3 H2 (6 pounds)+ CO2 (44 pounds) goes to 32 pounds of methanol (CH3OH) = 18
pounds of water. Makes a good fuel for I.C. engines,or
it is easily reversed to 3 H2 + CO2 to run fuel cells with. So at
$0.03/kw-hr you have $1.44 tied up in about 5 gallons of methanol or about
$0.21/gallon.

This is chemistry currently used on an
industrial scale in kilotons/day using natural gas and oxygen to store
methane in a transportable form.

>
>It all sounds nice, but when you run all the numbers, it just doesn't
>pay.

Run your numbers, not theirs and see what you get.  :-) With OPEC oil down
near $10.00/bbl you think you're going to squeeze in?


>Unless, you consider that we are killing ourselves with fossil
>fueled systems.  But, hey, that's our kid's problem, innit?

Go figure. The Earth will survive, but maybe not your "kids".

Regards,   Frederick
>
>Terry
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 12:40:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA28791;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:38:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:38:34 -0700
Message-ID: <358EDC5D.55A4 bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 15:36:13 -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: Glib Easy Energy Answers
References: <01BD9DE9.062D1300 209-113-17-90.insync.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"QynNt2.0.k17.vAhZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19916
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Tractebel Energy Marketing wrote:

>Interesting thread you guys.  FYI, though....  Within the next 15 years or so, the primary
>global energy source will be shifting significantly from fossil fuels to a source better than
>all those you've mentioned.  It will be completely environment friendly and is available night
>and day around the globe... and, no, it will not be ZPE either.  Anyone want to guess what I am
>referring to?

Geothermal.  We just gotta dig a few deep holes.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 13:09:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA17839;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:06:59 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:06:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"AWxDG3.0.fM4.XbhZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19917
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Cornwall RO wrote:

> No this is still wrong. One doesn't need a potential difference to have a
> current flow.
> 
> We're back to two e-s, how is it that they repel in one frame and attract
> in the others. Like I said last week, a scaling change between B and E and
> force constant via Lorentz eqn. but not a sign change! Shurely shome
> mishtake.
> 
> This is as confusing as that Similtaneity business.

I'm confused.  Is this conversation assuming that Relativity is wrong, so
you all are trying to find another option?

If Relativity is used to explain the above, then we must conclude that
electrons which repel in one frame of reference will repel in all frames
of reference, although the repulsion forces might be greater or lesser
depending on motion relative to the observer.

>From what I understand of the simple Relativity explanation of the "pinch
force", there is no problem here.  Relativity says that a stream of bare
electrons, no matter how high their current, cannot be "pinched" into a
narrower stream by their magnetic field.  For bare electron beams, the
"pinch" force is only able to slow their expansion but not reverse it. 

Bare electrons repel each other and fan out.  If they are emitted in a
parallel beam, they won't remain parallel, they will fly outwards in a
cone-shaped pattern.  If their velocity is increased, their repulsion
force seems to become less.  We can explain this in two equivalent ways: 
either there is an attractive magnetic field resisting their repulsive
e-fields, or time is slowing down for the electrons (Lorentz effects.) 
Special Relativity says that magnetic fields are the same as time
contraction.

Two unmoving electrons repel each other.  Two electrons moving parallel to
each other also have an electric current and an attractive b-field, so
they repel each other less strongly.  However, if we run along side the
moving electrons, there is NO electric current, so the b-field must vanish
and with it the attractive force.  By moving ourselves, we have made the
electrons behave differently.  For bare electrons, "electric current"
is relative to we the observers.  If a bare electron is floating in space,
we can "cause" it to have electric current: we ourselves can move.  One
of the main points of Special Relativity is that magnetic fields are the
Lorentz-contracted part of e-fields in relative motion to an observer.
Either say that relative motion adds a mysterious b-field to the
electron's e-field, or say that the e-field appears contracted when viewed
by an observer in relative motion.

The magnetic attraction between moving pairs of electrons cannot be made
larger than the electrostatic repulsion because the electrons must move at
"c" in order to balance b and e forces, and they must move faster than "c"
in order for the magnetic field to pull harder than the electric field
pushes.  To make bare electrons attract, the electric current must be
large enough that they exceed the speed of light (and time is therefor
reversed for them, and maybe they should attract?)

Totally separate topic: if an electron stream is not "bare", if it is
moving along against a row of protons (or if the electrons are unmoving
and the protons are moving the other way), then the pinch force can make
the stream of electrons contract into a smaller diameter flow.  This
happens in wires and plasmas.  When the electrons are moving, their
enormous repulsion force becomes less.  However, their enormous repulsion
force was already being cancelled by the nearby protons.  If the repulsion
force was net zero, and then it becomes less, why, that's an attraction
force.  Therefor, if we send a large current through a wire or a stream of
plasma, we would expect that the wire or the plasma would be crushed by
the "pinch effect".

I have no idea on how to explain this if Special Relativity is declared
out-of-bounds.

Even more separate a topic: electrons move slowly in wires.  If there is a
DC electric current in a coil of wire, and if we rotate the coil
physically backwards against the motions of the electrons, then we can
stop the electrons.  But then the copper protons are in relative motion. 
This rotating electromagnet coil contains a proton current?  My question: 
is there any unusual difference between an electron current and a proton
current?  Do weird things happen when electromagnet coils are spun on
axis?  ANd if we should wind a coil from pipes full of electrolyte, where
positive and negative particles of different charges and different weights
flow in opposite directions, does anything interesting happen?  How about
mercury, where the protons are "liquid" and the electron sea is also
"liquid"?  If we pump liquid mercury and also put a huge electric current
through it, do weird things happen? 

((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 22 13:57:20 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA24617;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:54:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:54:55 -0700
Message-ID: <358EC4BC.726 interlaced.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:55:25 -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: pinch, electrons & reference frames
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"tIe_O1.0.T06.UIiZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19918
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty wrote:
>
(snip)
 
  How about
> mercury, where the protons are "liquid" and the electron sea is also
> "liquid"?  If we pump liquid mercury and also put a huge electric current
> through it, do weird things happen?

Right, Bill!  And isn't a metal ring rotating on its axis the ultimate
bifilar coil (one turn)?  The electrons and protons moving in the same
direction constitute enormous counter-flowing currents around the ring.
Is there a zero-curl A field (vector potential) around the rotating
ring?  If so, is it the "same" as the zero-curl A field outside of an
ideal toroidal winding?  And all your questions again?

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 14:38:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA04038;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:32:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:32:32 -0700
Message-ID: <01BD9DFA.F4B79A20.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'freenrg-l eskimo.com'" 
Cc: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: Something interesting...
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:29:39 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"bINsp1.0.--.lriZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19919
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hello all:

I was reading about Borge Nodland and John Ralston's studies of the 
polarization of synchrotron radiation from distant galaxies, and how they 
may have detected an anisotropy in the cosmological structure of the 
universe and how light propagates through the universe. They found that the 
effect pointed near the direction of the constallation Sextans, or near 
there. I thought nothing of this, just a curiosity.

Today, I was reading about the Silvertooth experiment, and how it 
supposedly detected earth's "absolute motion" in space, and determined it 
to be about 378km/s in the direction of the constellation Leo. I thought 
this was interesting, but did what I usually do: put it aside until later.

Then it hit me: the constellations Leo and Sextans are right next to each 
other! I ran my astronomy program, and made sure I remembered correctly, 
and I did. So we are left with this: 1. A detectible anisotropy in the 
direction of Sextans; 2. A detectible anisotropy in the direction of Leo; 
3. Two anisotropies lying very close to each other.

I think this definately warrants further investigation. Thoughts?

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  Mon Jun 22 16:40:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA07357;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:34:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:34:41 -0700
Message-ID: <358EEAAC.965C2B17 fc.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:37:16 -0500
From: John Fields 
Organization: Austin Instruments, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: "'freenrg-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: Re: Something interesting...
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <01BD9DFA.F4B79A20.stk sunherald.infi.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"2irXq2.0.to1.GekZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19920
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:

> Hello all:
>
> I was reading about Borge Nodland and John Ralston's studies of
> the
> polarization of synchrotron radiation from distant galaxies, and
> how they
> may have detected an anisotropy in the cosmological structure of
> the
> universe and how light propagates through the universe. They found
> that the
> effect pointed near the direction of the constallation Sextans, or
> near
> there. I thought nothing of this, just a curiosity.
>
> Today, I was reading about the Silvertooth experiment, and how it
> supposedly detected earth's "absolute motion" in space, and
> determined it
> to be about 378km/s in the direction of the constellation Leo. I
> thought
> this was interesting, but did what I usually do: put it aside
> until later.
>
> Then it hit me: the constellations Leo and Sextans are right next
> to each
> other! I ran my astronomy program, and made sure I remembered
> correctly,
> and I did. So we are left with this: 1. A detectible anisotropy in
> the
> direction of Sextans; 2. A detectible anisotropy in the direction
> of Leo;
> 3. Two anisotropies lying very close to each other.
>
> I think this definately warrants further investigation. Thoughts?
>
> Kyle R. Mcallister
> Email: stk sunherald.infi.net
> Phone: 228-875-0629
> http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257

--

A thought:
In order to be considered seriously, I suggest that you seriously
reconsider the spelling of "definately"

As for the proximity of the locations of the constellations, I would
like to suggest that perhaps their spatial locations are not
necessarily equivalent to their temporal locations, inasmuch as some
time has gone by since they were first seen by us.



--
John Fields,                   Austin Instruments, Inc.
El Presidente                  Research, Design, and Development
"I speak for the company"      Austin, Republic of Texas


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 16:49:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA23632;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:34:35 -0600 (MDT)
From: Steve Ekwall 
X-Sender: ekwall2 november
To: Vortex-l 
cc: George 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
In-Reply-To: <009101bd9df9$bfcde040$778f85ce default>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"x-lv03.0.9n5.FokZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19921
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
Figuring 1 kw/capita installed Solar collector generating capacity, which is
what the power
 companies use, we're talking 6E9 kilowatts to
provide for the present global population{not counting Mpowers and Jim O,).
:-)

The space application solar panels are about 11% efficient mostly for
practical reasons.

So, we need 6E11 square meters of collector
then triple that for constant global output,equals 5.4E11 meter^2 collector
or 90 square meters/capita (about the roof area you see flying into Chicago
or L.A. :-)

So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.

Regards,    Frederick

--------------------
Hey, 500x500

  That's just a little bigger than the State of Colorado, lucky we're
square for reference :) Living near the center (denver) and if they 
were all tilted appropriately we could be
the Mushroom State :)  Or give a $ per kilowat UNDER the collector and Los
Vegas (24 hours City of Lights) would probably Re-locate to stay in the
dark!  Highways are already in place and side (matrix) maintenance roads
could be easily plowed (as we saw with our DIA project) intersecting at
escape/ access (sweep 'da do-do) hatches.

just a thought. We've sure thought of stupidier ones. especially in
Boulder Colorado! :)

-=se=-
steve (in the dark on this one) ekwall
Does rain count?  Mushrooms need water too! :)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 17:11:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA25421;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:08:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:08:42 -0700
Message-ID: <01BD9E10.D0421920.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Cc: "'freenrg-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: Something interesting...
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:06:07 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"xjfv61.0.eC6.58lZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19922
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



-----Original Message-----
From:	John Fields [SMTP:jfields fc.net]
Sent:	Monday, June 22, 1998 6:37 PM
To:	vortex-l eskimo.com
Cc:	'freenrg-l eskimo.com'
Subject:	Re: Something interesting...

>A thought:
>In order to be considered seriously, I suggest that you seriously
>reconsider the spelling of "definately"

My mistake. When I am thinking about other things, I frequently misspell. 
"Definately=Definitely:-)

>As for the proximity of the locations of the constellations, I would
>like to suggest that perhaps their spatial locations are not
>necessarily equivalent to their temporal locations, inasmuch as some
>time has gone by since they were first seen by us.

Well, it really has nothing to do with the constellations themselves, just 
the direction in which the anisotropies lie is in line with those 
constellations. The constellations themselves probably have nothing to do 
with the effects.


Kyle R. Mcallister

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 17:34:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA05465;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:30:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:30:15 -0700
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:03:59 -0700
Message-Id: <199806230003.RAA30799 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: Something interesting...
Resent-Message-ID: <"b98_92.0.IL1.MSlZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19923
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Greetings;

>Then it hit me: the constellations Leo and Sextans are right next to each 
>other! I ran my astronomy program, and made sure I remembered correctly, 
>and I did. So we are left with this: 1. A detectible anisotropy in the 
>direction of Sextans; 2. A detectible anisotropy in the direction of Leo; 
>3. Two anisotropies lying very close to each other.
>
>I think this definately warrants further investigation. Thoughts?

Yes this is correct.  I noted it when the reports first came out.  Here is
what may be up.

Aether flow is a tricky thing to consider when you study a spacetime that is
a standing wave topology to which solitons couple to, aka particles.  But
the interesting thing is that aether cannot just flow in the normal sense we
are used to in fluids.  Rather, it must sort of inch worm from one spacetime
acoustic node to the next.

Flow of aether into or out of a source results in magnetic fields.  This is
because the flow tends to progress helically through the spacetime topology
from node to node as it advances, and that helicity IS, a magnetic field.

There are other places this occurs, and these are more dramatic.  White
dwarf stars have the most dramatic magnetic fields of any stars.  They also
happen to be the stars that recently re-ignited their internal fusion
engines via He ignition.  The aether flows out through the star, exits the
surface where we observe the light coming from, and then heads out into the
expanding universe.  Our sun has this going on too, but not as dramatically
as a newly ignited stellar core.  Observation there is called the solar
magnetic carpet.

Any way, it seems to me that our galaxies motion through the cosmos leads to
the polarization, and as you note it is observed in the direction of our
motion through the universe due to local group MW proper motions (ie
peculiar velocities as they are called).  

I haven't a clue how to prove that one though without a formal mathematical
model.  But if you study other places where aether has to be flowing, you
will find similar phenomena.  To figure out where those places are, all you
have to do is operate on the assumption that mass is conserved, and that it
is a measure of the amount of aether associated with particles.  

Whether you think I am correct or not is irrelevant.  If you consider the
places that mass to energy conversion is taking place, and just assume that
aether is flowing away from regions of fusion exothermy, then you will
discover that there are magnetic fields around those objects.  However, you
will discover another thing too.

You will find that the accelerations imposed on matter exterior to those
objects are inertial.

Good noticing that phenomena though.

Later, Ross Tessien



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 18:34:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA23936;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:29:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:29:34 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <358EC4BC.726 interlaced.net>
References: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 15:28:25 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"TTuT92.0.pr5.zJmZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19924
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Frank -

   >  Is there a zero-curl A field (vector potential)
   >  around the rotating ring?

Maybe this accounts for that strange 'spin' - energy stuff allegedly
detected and/or theorized by Wallace and others.

And in the same vein I suppose that an oscillating charge on the spinning
thing would amount to switching between protonic and electronic 'currents'
moving in the same direction. Phased to RPM, you could have a half
electronic half protonic spin-current thingus. Of course, someone could
reasonably ask: "so what?"

There was an odd question posted on freenrg a long time ago by someone who
was messing with a spinning coil and asked for help with what they said
were "strange forces" or something like that when it was turned it on its
axis. I guess everybody thought they must have just been ordinary gyro
forces, and there were no responses that I recall.

I always wondered if it matters if the conductor is *not* brushed to the
spun section - IOW, has an on-board spinning current source so there's no
crossing of reference frames between the source and the coil. Arises from
various homopolar musings.

By the way, I think the Republican National Committee has just declared
that homopolar devices are immoral and should no longer be used to
demonstrate electromagnetic principles to students.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 19:02:49 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA29653;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:58:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 18:58:34 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <01BD9E10.D0421920.stk sunherald.infi.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 15:35:06 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: RE: Something interesting...
Resent-Message-ID: <"SGJMv.0.EF7.9lmZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19925
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Kyle -

I definately think it's a good idea, regardless of how it's spelt.

And as to the drift of the stars in those constellations, that doesn't
matter at all as you pointed out. It's just a way of pointing a direction
from "here" in the present time. Nice job of connecting the dots!

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 19:35:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA05841;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:31:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:31:13 -0700
Message-ID: <358F3E37.3BBA bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:33:43 -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: Easy Energy Answers
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"BfF-Y.0.BR1.nDnZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19926
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Fred Sparber wrote:



> 
> So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
> mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
> folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.
> 
> Regards,    Frederick
> 
> --------------------

To wit, Steve Ekwall replied:

> Hey, 500x500
> 
>   That's just a little bigger than the State of Colorado, 



And I say,

Congress has authorized and industry has completed the construction of
over 42,500 miles of interstate highways.  This represents (at 12 ft per
lane x four lanes) approximately 80% of the required surface area of the
solar collector proposed by the honorable Mr. Sparber.

I suggest that we undergo a crash design for an automated paving machine
which will cover these highways with silicon photo cells.  Not only does
it solve the energy problem; but, the problem of distribution of the
power to the load centers (the cities) is rendered academic.

Of course, wet traction might suffer a bit. . .

Terry
(patiently awaiting his Nobel prize)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 19:36:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA06260;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:32:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:32:54 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:31:23 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: <"t3jFM1.0.iX1.LFnZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19927
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

All,

 Yesterday (Sunday 6-21) I was goin to fire up the experiment and run
some low(er) input power testing. The tube had been used twice for
full power runs and had been sealed, under vacuum between runs. 
 The amount of metallic K loaded into the tube before the runs started
would be real close to 1/16 cu. inch.

 Both the first and second full power runs got up into the ~700 deg C range.
 To my surprise, the third run only got to around 400 deg C. no matter
what fill pressure I tried. What is going on here?  Looking closely at
the tube it seemed that there was no K left. It usually is a silvery plating
at the bottom inch of the tube. This area was clear. This was confirmed
when I opened the tube and introduced several drops of water. No sizzle
as the K decomposed.  Where did the K go? I would guess that at the
last shutdown from a high temperature run I pulled full vacuum with
power on. Any K left (there wasn't much to begin with) got sucked out.
 Shutdown in future will be done by filling the tube to ~1psi with H2, 
letting the tube cool and then evacuate. Maybe that will save the K.

I am measuring tube current by the voltage drop across a 1.25 ohm 
100 watt 1% precision resistor. 
I was measuring by connecting the meter directly into the circut, one
side of the meter at ground (-).  Two fried meters later I hooked up
the shunt resistor. I should have listened to the vorts but the shunt was
late and I was stupid. Flames accepted (and deserved!) 

 Anyway, today (Monday 6-22), I used a new tube, new load of K (same
amount) but the electrode gap was slightly longer (by 1/4 inch) at 
2 and 1/4 inches. I found that this makes it really hard to keep the arc
going at a fill of 6.0 in Hg. I had to run it at a 5.0  in Hg fill.
 I ran at full power input of 93.2928 watts for a temperature of 660.0 C
sustained for 1 hour. This works out to 7.0745 C per watt

 I now ruduced input power to 73.304 watts which gave a sustained 
temperature of 604.0 for 1 hour. This works out to 8.1287 C per watt.
 Hmmm....sort of less efficient I'd say.

 Remember I reported in previous posts that initially the temperature
rose rapidly at the start of a run to a high level and then dropped down
between 10 to 20 degrees C.  I almost seems like the reaction wants
to take off big time and then sort of runs out of ....something.

 Anybody out there ever do any drag racing? Like an undercarburated
auto engine, your winding up through the gears but when you get to
a certain RPM, the engine just gasps for air. Solution; a big Holly double
pumper and I was winning races.
 
 Tying this observation in with the much lower efficiency at lower power
inputs, maybe what this effect needs is some hefty power input. 
 Looks like a higher power input gives more C per watt.  I don't know. 
 I wont be able to test that without a new power supply, and I'm fresh out of 
power supplies. 10 kV at an amp would be nice!

 Next runs: resistance heater in the tube with H2 atmosphere and just for
grins, a small lump of K metal (just to keep the field even).
 
 As to the electrode gap, I will keep it between 1 1/4 and 1 3/4 inches.
 That make a big difference in best temperature per fill pressure.
 So many dogone variables but I am slowly getting them figured out.
 
Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 19:37:02 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA06574;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:34:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:34:24 -0700
Message-ID: <358F1449.C89 interlaced.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:34:49 -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: pinch, electrons & reference frames
References:  
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"QxQbR3.0.Yc1.mGnZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19928
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Rick Monteverde wrote:
> 
(snip)
 
> And in the same vein I suppose that an oscillating charge on the spinning
> thing would amount to switching between protonic and electronic 'currents'
> moving in the same direction. Phased to RPM, you could have a half
> electronic half protonic spin-current thingus. 

Horace and I exchanged some posts a while back - speculating as to
a scalar wave coupling between two IDENTICAL tuning forks acoustically
isolated in a vaccum tank to prevent sonic coupling.  IOW, would the
oscillating opposed electronic and protonic currents generate scalar
waves that a second fork could respond to?  The first hurdle I have to
clear is to believe in scalar waves!

I don't know, Rick - this is where I usually just roll my eyes,
click my heels together and chant:
	I really don't understand EM aunt Em
	I really don't understand...

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 19:45:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA10065;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:41:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:41:50 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:41:40 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3594125c.146847433 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220@spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095e0@spectre.mitre.org>  <3.0.1.32.19980616144401.00d095
e0 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980618112009.01628220@spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980619102916.00cdcc30@spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980622115749.0164b650@spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980622115749.0164b650 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"HAcO_3.0.7T2.jNnZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19929
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 11:57:49 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
[snip]
>   Where I ran into this, and it is quite counter intuitive, is that for an
>ion beam engine, you want a beam.  However, you have to cancel the charge
>for the reasons described.  BUT if you cancel the charge with an electron
>beam at the same velocity, the ion beam diffuses.  The solution is either
>to put charged screens around the beams as they emerge from the spacecraft,
>or (better) to create the ion beam, and neutralize it by passing through an
>electron cloud like in modern tokamaks.  This keeps the beam focused until
>the electrons reach the ion velocity
[snip]
Somehow I think Charles Cagle's solution is much simpler and more
intuitive. He says simply that when the distance between two particles
is less than their De Broglie wavelength in the centre of mass frame,
then they attract one another if they have like charges, and repel one
another if they have opposite charges. If the distance is greater,
then the behaviour flips, and we get the behaviour to which we are
accustomed. It would appear the your electron and ion beams neatly
prove his theory, as when your electron beam shared the same reference
frame with the ion beam, the negative electrons repelled the ions,
causing the beam to diverge.
It seems you may have come up with a sensitive quantitative test for
his theory. The behaviour of the ion beam should depend on both
distance and relative velocity of the electron beam, both of which can
be easily controlled.
Now you see why have pursued this thread ;).
PS I personally suspect that Charles may be out by a factor or 2*PI.
My reason for this is that if one applies his theory to the ground
state of the hydrogen atom, with a correction factor of 2*PI, then it
turns out that the ground state is precisely where the electron is
balanced between attraction to the nucleus and repulsion from the
nucleus. IOW it sits in a stable energy minimum.
[Flame shield on] :).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 19:57:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA14477;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:54:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:54:58 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:54:53 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <35951662.147877932 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0@spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980622120331.01649e20@spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980622120331.01649e20 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"l1Fnm3.0.6Y3.1anZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19930
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:03:31 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>At 03:21 AM 6/20/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>Charge may not be carried by photons, but the information pertaining
>>to the change in charge of the black hole should be.
>
>   Wrong. Pass an iron core with a loop of wire on it around the black
>hole.  The induced current in the wire will let you calculate the charge on
>the black hole, and nothing has to get near the event horizon.

This assumes that the black hole has always been charged (see below).
>
>   If you like superstring theory, charge corresponds to knots in the
>string.  For most purposes the model that a charge corresponds to a pole
>works just fine.  In either case, charge distorts space in a way that is
>measurable at a distance.
[snip]
My point was that this space distortion must originate in the black
hole after the charge is "swallowed". In order for it to be detected
outside the hole, the space distortion needs to travel out of the
hole. AFAIK, such distortions are always paired with magnetic field
distortions, and are generally called photons. Because time is
infinitely stretched at the event horizon, the universe will come to
an end before we can detect the photon, or to return to the original
point, before we can detect the *change* in charge of the black hole.
If this is carried further, then it becomes obvious that this is true
of any charge absorbed by the hole at any time in the past as well. In
short we can't detect the charge on a black hole because the universe
will end first.
Or pure changes in electrical fields can propagate independent of
magnetic field changes, and faster than light, in which case I'm
wrong. (And gladly so, because then we have a mechanism for faster
than light communication :).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 20:00:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA15466;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:58:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:58:39 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:58:36 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <35961942.148613647 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980622121019.0163f320 spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980622121019.0163f320 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"A3DCG2.0.Qn3.VdnZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19931
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:10:19 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>At 11:37 PM 6/20/98 +0800, Mpowers Consultants wrote:
>>  Who's right and where is the reference frame for this universe ?
>>
>>If such a thing exists, someone oughta tell Michelson-Morley about this !
>
>   Yup, and they are.  In my mind, the most amazing feature of modern
>cosmology is that there is a preferred reference frame, and that it can be
>determined.  (Of course, nothing is ever simple.  It seems that the
>preferred frame is a local property.  Thus two observers can measure the
>preferred frame, and if they are far enough apart those answers will be
>different.)
Sounds like Ross Tessien is right doesn't it? :) (The aether being the
preferred frame, and movements therein resulting in it being different
for observers separated by large distances).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 20:16:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA20583;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:12:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:12:13 -0700
Message-ID: <01b001bd9e54$559aed20$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: , 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 21:09:16 -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: <"7W2DF3.0.R15.CqnZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19932
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Blanton 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Terry Blanton wrote:


>Fred Sparber wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> So for the WHOLE PLANET you need about a 500
>> mile square of solar collector, and a lot of
>> folks with brooms to sweep off the bird doo-doo.
>>
>> Regards,    Frederick
>>
>> --------------------
>
>To wit, Steve Ekwall replied:
>
>> Hey, 500x500
>>
>>   That's just a little bigger than the State of Colorado,
>
>
>
>And I say,
>
>Congress has authorized and industry has completed the construction of
>over 42,500 miles of interstate highways.  This represents (at 12 ft per
>lane x four lanes) approximately 80% of the required surface area of the
>solar collector proposed by the honorable Mr. Sparber.
>
>I suggest that we undergo a crash design for an automated paving machine
>which will cover these highways with silicon photo cells.  Not only does
>it solve the energy problem; but, the problem of distribution of the
>power to the load centers (the cities) is rendered academic.
>
>Of course, wet traction might suffer a bit. .

Right On,Terry! With 1,000 Big McD's in the US, (about one every 42 miles)
if you can get a solar cell with every "Happymeal" we'll be energy
independent in less than a decade. :-)

Regards,   Frederick

>
>Terry
>(patiently awaiting his Nobel prize)

Only after P&F get one. Don't hold your breath.
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 20:34:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA22995;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:25:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:25:41 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:25:32 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <35982025.150377776 mail-hub>
References: <00d801bd9e05$98c34100$778f85ce default> <358ECF79.7DFA@bellsouth.net>
In-Reply-To: <358ECF79.7DFA bellsouth.net>
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: <"g_cMc2.0.Dd5.q0oZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19933
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:41:13 -0700, Terry Blanton wrote:
[snip]
>The third problem is energy storage.  The only cost effective solution
>to date is lead acid batteries.

I might have an idea for this, which I would like to run past this
forum. Suppose you were to dig a large pit on the spot where you plan
to build your new house. Line the pit with insulation (fire bricks?),
and fill it with rock salt. Make the pit fairly large, say several
cubic meters. Embed a high temperature pipe in the salt, and put an
insulating lid on it, then cover the whole thing with a meter or so of
soil. Build house on top. Hot air fed through the pipe melts the salt,
storing energy in it at about 5 times the energy density of lead acid
batteries, and a tiny fraction of the cost. Minimal maintenance, and
salt doesn't need to be replaced every thousand "charges" the way
batteries do. The high melting point of the salt (600-1000 C depending
on the salt), means that a pretty good Carnot efficiency is achievable
with a stirling engine used for converting the heat back into electric
current. Heat is extracted by passing cold air into the molten salt
where it exits at a constant temperature (the melting point of the
salt), as long as some salt remains molten, and the air feed isn't too
fast. Many turns of the pipe within the salt would assure good heat
contact, especially if the pipe passed through the bottom of the bed,
where the liquid would collect in the cracks between crystals.
The energy storage costs per kWh would decrease with size of the pit.
If plain unpurified rock salt were used, just as it is dug out of the
ground, then I suspect it would be pretty cheap.
>
>It all sounds nice, but when you run all the numbers, it just doesn't
>pay.  Unless, you consider that we are killing ourselves with fossil
>fueled systems.  But, hey, that's our kid's problem, innit?
>
>Terry
Anyone interested in putting some numbers to this idea, or know some
reason why it would be either unworkable, or prohibitively expensive?
PS Some aspects require more work, such as the insulation, and type
and design of pipe required, as well as the above ground equipment.
It may also prove more effective to melt the salt directly with an
electrical resistive heater.
An added bonus is that in cold climates, a good part of the heat
leakage would go to heating the house built over the pit.
(In hot climates, you might want it under the swimming pool, instead
of under the house).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 21:25:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA02028;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 21:15:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 21:15:36 -0700
Message-ID: <01e101bd9e5d$2f3fcf20$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:12:42 -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: <"Igybs2.0.WV.dloZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19934
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Robin van Spaandonk 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Robin wrote:


>On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 14:41:13 -0700, Terry Blanton wrote:
>[snip]
>>The third problem is energy storage.  The only cost effective solution
>>to date is lead acid batteries.

I'll put electrolysis of water and chemical reaction of the hydrogen with
CO2 against
15 watts/pound for lead acid batteries anytime:

1, H2 + CO 2 <---> H-CO-OH  (Formic acid)

2, H2 + H-CO-OH <---> CH2O (Formaldehyde)+ H2O

3, CH2O + H2O ---> CO2 + 2 H2

4, H2 + CH2O <---> CH3OH (Methanol) + H2O an
antifreeze motor fuel.

5, CH3OH + H2O ---> CO2 + 3 H2 a fuel cell hydrogen source.

Your storage goes from 15 watts/pound to over
2 Kilowatt-Hr/pound

Snip construction details.

The high melting point of the salt (600-1000 C depending
>on the salt), means that a pretty good Carnot efficiency is achievable
>with a stirling engine used for converting the heat back into electric
>current.

Sodium Nitrate is used as the phase change salt
in the Solar Concentrator Furnace used near Victorville Ca. Cheap Too.

Pit run gravel although not a phase change material works also as an
inexpensive thermal storage material.

 Heat is extracted by passing cold air into the molten salt
>where it exits at a constant temperature (the melting point of the
>salt), as long as some salt remains molten, and the air feed isn't too
>fast. Many turns of the pipe within the salt would assure good heat
>contact, especially if the pipe passed through the bottom of the bed,
>where the liquid would collect in the cracks between crystals.

Don't need all that with 40% void volume rock pile.Just place the clay or
iron air feed pipes in the bottom of the pit.

>It may also prove more effective to melt the salt directly with an
>electrical resistive heater.

Circulating resistive heated air (it can be very wet too) over the rocks is
workable.

The global energy problem is not with houses and buildings that are to be
built, but the ones that are already built.

It's that 500 Kilowatt-hours/month that I use from a coal-fired power plant
that is pumping a ton of CO2 into global warming that is bothering my
conscience. :-(

Regards,   Frederick

>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk 
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 22 23:25:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA17902;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:18:47 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:18:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Something interesting...
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:11:23 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <358f4680.7219591 mail-hub>
References: <199806230003.RAA30799 Au.oro.net>
In-Reply-To: <199806230003.RAA30799 Au.oro.net>
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: <"cjrbZ3.0.eN4.5ZqZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19935
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:03:59 -0700, Ross Tessien wrote:
[snip]
>Whether you think I am correct or not is irrelevant.  If you consider the
>places that mass to energy conversion is taking place, and just assume that
>aether is flowing away from regions of fusion exothermy, then you will
>discover that there are magnetic fields around those objects.  However, you
>will discover another thing too.
Ross do you have a formula relating the strength of the magnetic field
to the rate of aether release? (And could we use that to determine the
amount of nuclear power being released in the Earth, based on it's
mag. field?


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 00:00:30 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA02788;
	Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:58:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:58:08 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <463ad9a.358f51c7 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:57:10 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: <"ZIO982.0.Uh._7rZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19936
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

All,
Wish list: An easy way to get more power delivered to the reactor tube
                 with the present power supply.

Present configuration: Tube in series with 16 7.5 watt ballast lamps.

Question:    Will switching to sixteen 15 watt lamps get me there?

All comments appreciated.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 02:01:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA18895;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:58:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:58:43 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:00:00 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"nWdcg3.0.9d4.2vsZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19937
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:25 PM 6/22/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
[snip]
>I might have an idea for this, which I would like to run past this
>forum. Suppose you were to dig a large pit on the spot where you plan
>to build your new house. Line the pit with insulation (fire bricks?),
>and fill it with rock salt. Make the pit fairly large, say several
>cubic meters. Embed a high temperature pipe in the salt, and put an
>insulating lid on it, then cover the whole thing with a meter or so of
>soil. Build house on top. Hot air fed through the pipe melts the salt,
>storing energy in it at about 5 times the energy density of lead acid
>batteries, and a tiny fraction of the cost. Minimal maintenance, and
>salt doesn't need to be replaced every thousand "charges" the way
>batteries do. The high melting point of the salt (600-1000 C depending
>on the salt), means that a pretty good Carnot efficiency is achievable
>with a stirling engine used for converting the heat back into electric
>current. Heat is extracted by passing cold air into the molten salt
>where it exits at a constant temperature (the melting point of the
>salt), as long as some salt remains molten, and the air feed isn't too
>fast. Many turns of the pipe within the salt would assure good heat
>contact, especially if the pipe passed through the bottom of the bed,
>where the liquid would collect in the cracks between crystals.
>The energy storage costs per kWh would decrease with size of the pit.
>If plain unpurified rock salt were used, just as it is dug out of the
>ground, then I suspect it would be pretty cheap.
[snip]
>Anyone interested in putting some numbers to this idea, or know some
>reason why it would be either unworkable, or prohibitively expensive?
>PS Some aspects require more work, such as the insulation, and type
>and design of pipe required, as well as the above ground equipment.
>It may also prove more effective to melt the salt directly with an
>electrical resistive heater.
>An added bonus is that in cold climates, a good part of the heat
>leakage would go to heating the house built over the pit.
>(In hot climates, you might want it under the swimming pool, instead
>of under the house).


Robin,

Some calcs below.  Some tag on comments:

This appears to be a great idea!  One problem might be underground water -
which causes havoc with some types of thermal exchange wells.  One solution
used for thermal storage wells is to survey the strata and insulate the
well casing on the inside where water is present on the outside to avoid
the thermal loss, especially when underground aquifers are involved.

It seems like, in most cases, the salt would require a waterproof and
saltproof  casing.  One possibility might be to design a well casing
suitable for hot salt storage.  Then conventional drilling rigs could be
used to install the storage wells next to existing homes.  Could drill on
an angle to get underneath the house or pool.  A comparatively small dia.
hole can go pretty deep and hold a lot of material, and might be less
invasive to install on some lots.

Could also bury shallow tanks where groundwater prohibits deep
installation.  Would require a good insulating cap then.  Could pump excess
heat from the cap area first, to avoid heat loss.

On the very good side is the lack of need of ground water tabel (which the
two well system requires) and the possibility for a totally self contained
energy storage system.  I think some ground energy storage systems might
have a good potential for groundwater polution.

Some calcs:

The heat of fusion of NaCl is 124 cal/g at 804.3 C, density 2.165 g/cm^3.
NaNO3 is only 45.3 Cal/g but melts at only 333 C, has density of about
2.168 g/cm^3.   NaF puts out 186 Cal/g but melts at 992.2 C, density 2.79
g/cm^3.  These look like the best candidates in the CRC.

Looking at NaCl the storage denity is (124 cal/g)(2.165 g/cm^3) = 268
cal/cm^3 = (2.68x10^8 cal/m^3)/(0.239 cal/J) = 1.121x10^9 J/m^3.  A 10 m^3
storage facility could hold (1.121x10^10 J).  1 kwh = (3600 s)(1000 J/s) =
3.6x10^6 J.  The 10 m^3 storage thus can hold (1.121x10^10 J)/(3.6x10^6
J/kwh) = 3113 kwh.  Pretty good.

Looking at NaNO3 the storage denity is (45.3 cal/g)(2.168 g/cm^3) = 98.2
cal/cm^3 = (9.82x10^7 cal/m^3)/(0.239 cal/J) = 4.11x10^8 J/m^3.  A 10 m^3
storage facility could hold (4.11x10^9 J).  The 10 m^3 storage thus can
hold (4.11x10^9 J)/(3.6x10^6 J/kwh) = 1141 kwh. Assuming a good house can
be heated and run with 10 kw, that's about 114 hours of total storage
capacity, or about 11.4 hours per m^3 of storage volume.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 02:02:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA18924;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:58:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:58:46 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 00:59:56 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"18qys.0.Vd4.5vsZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19938
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 12:59 PM 6/22/98, William Beaty wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Cornwall RO wrote:
[snip]
>
>>From what I understand of the simple Relativity explanation of the "pinch
>force", there is no problem here.  Relativity says that a stream of bare
>electrons, no matter how high their current, cannot be "pinched" into a
>narrower stream by their magnetic field.  For bare electron beams, the
>"pinch" force is only able to slow their expansion but not reverse it.


This ignores the dipole nature of the electron.  The dipole force at some
degree of proximity might be able to overcome the coloum force causing the
joining of pairs, making bosons, which can overlap and cluster to any
degree, true?


>
>Bare electrons repel each other and fan out.  If they are emitted in a
>parallel beam, they won't remain parallel, they will fly outwards in a
>cone-shaped pattern.  If their velocity is increased, their repulsion
>force seems to become less.


Might be worthwhile to search "convergent beams", as I have read an article
about such.  Don't remember if a velocity distribution was an important
element, but do remember the method only worked at very near light speed.


>We can explain this in two equivalent ways:
>either there is an attractive magnetic field resisting their repulsive
>e-fields, or time is slowing down for the electrons (Lorentz effects.)
>Special Relativity says that magnetic fields are the same as time
>contraction.
>
>Two unmoving electrons repel each other.  Two electrons moving parallel to
>each other also have an electric current and an attractive b-field, so
>they repel each other less strongly.  However, if we run along side the
>moving electrons, there is NO electric current, so the b-field must vanish
>and with it the attractive force.  By moving ourselves, we have made the
>electrons behave differently.


If you replace the electrons with deuterons on a near collision course this
argument can fall apart.  The attractive force might be enough just enough
to overcome the coulomb narrier and permit fusion.  The fusion event can
not be seen in one frame and not another, unless the universe splits into
two.



> For bare electrons, "electric current"
>is relative to we the observers.  If a bare electron is floating in space,
>we can "cause" it to have electric current: we ourselves can move.  One
>of the main points of Special Relativity is that magnetic fields are the
>Lorentz-contracted part of e-fields in relative motion to an observer.
>Either say that relative motion adds a mysterious b-field to the
>electron's e-field, or say that the e-field appears contracted when viewed
>by an observer in relative motion.


>
>The magnetic attraction between moving pairs of electrons cannot be made
>larger than the electrostatic repulsion because the electrons must move at
>"c" in order to balance b and e forces, and they must move faster than "c"
>in order for the magnetic field to pull harder than the electric field
>pushes.  To make bare electrons attract, the electric current must be
>large enough that they exceed the speed of light (and time is therefor
>reversed for them, and maybe they should attract?)
[snip]


Again,this ignores the dipole nature of the electron.


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 02:47:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA04346;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 10:38:51 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
In-Reply-To: <015a01bd9e14$263b58c0$778f85ce default>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"wzoBZ2.0.q31.VbtZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19939
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Dear Vo,

You see lots of competition. No one solution. Good Science for Science
sake. So many optons means that there never has to be a crisis.

I keep hearing about trouble with antibiotics and superbugs. If the
medical profession stopped over regulating, stopped the old boys network
and just listened, there would be a greater armoury to deal with these
problems.

I have trouble believing homeopathy, there's nothing left I keep thinking!
But apparently it works. That's all that matters - empiricism first,
theories later.

Later,
Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 02:57:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA05620;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 02:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 10:53:44 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"rbmMc1.0.kN1.nktZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19940
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, William Beaty wrote:

Concur with the relativity explan. of e.m. fields, contraction of e field
etc. It seems em was designed with relativity in mind everything (most
things) works out so neatly. Feynman 2 is really good. 

Worth a try.  
> axis?  ANd if we should wind a coil from pipes full of electrolyte, where
> positive and negative particles of different charges and different weights
> flow in opposite directions, does anything interesting happen?  How about
> mercury, where the protons are "liquid" and the electron sea is also
> "liquid"?  If we pump liquid mercury and also put a huge electric current
> through it, do weird things happen? 

It's easy to get blinded by beautiful theories especially when they look
so complete. I hear people seriously saying that Mick.-Morley experiment
is wrong. Christ! What a revolution, and how do you then explain what we
think we know, that old body of knowledge. 

Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 03:10:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA07037;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 11:02:09 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: Something interesting...
In-Reply-To: <01BD9E10.D0421920.stk sunherald.infi.net>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"6AcSs2.0.tj1.NxtZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19941
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:

> >A thought:
> >In order to be considered seriously, I suggest that you seriously
> >reconsider the spelling of "definately"
> 
> My mistake. When I am thinking about other things, I frequently misspell. 
> "Definately=Definitely:-)
> 
I wouldn't worry about it. Bad spellers/Dyslexia stuffers often have a
different world view. It's a bit like the blind piano tuner. It's all that
left brain/right brain business.

I remember at school a dyslexic suffer who was kept in bottom band until
they understood him. He was a damn good programmer, musically gifted and
a loyal friend too.
Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 03:52:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA32177;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:50:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 03:50:19 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 11:50:13 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch [Off Topic]
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"oYDa-3.0.cs7.hXuZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19942
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, Rick Monteverde wrote:

> By the way, I think the Republican National Committee has just declared
> that homopolar devices are immoral and should no longer be used to
> demonstrate electromagnetic principles to students.
> 

Yeah very funny. They (Labour govt) have just lowered the age of consent
for buggery to 16. I'm no bigot, live and let live. Just think of all
those vunerable, isolated, gifted youngsters (our heroes, the brain is
mightier than brawn) that could fall prey to predatory so and so's. 

(Personally if anything like that happened to a relative or son of mine
I'd get a gun but I'm 'biggoted' like that.) I'm sorry, I'll get into
trouble for saying this: it's not a way of life, it's un-natural, a mental
illness (think Objectively.. Scientifically.. Logically..) How would you
like a drug user to peddle drugs to your kids? 

I don't bully sick people, I try to understand them. I find a lot of
liberals don't have the balls to think as such in our times of moral
relativism. I find the two related in liberals: weakness and cynicism.

It's better to teach youngsters to have boundless optimism and respect of
self (as well as empathy and charity). Even if that makes them look stupid
and niave. Europeans love teasing Americans for having precisely this -
'Oh they don't understand irony'. Well they can't spell either. 

Enough emails for today,
Remi.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 05:24:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA07879;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:23:38 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:23:38 -0700
Message-ID: <021301bd9ea1$5c1efd60$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: A Solar-Hydrogen Grid?
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:19:57 -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: <"iS3gN1.0.vw1.9vvZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19944
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To; Vortex

With all of the expertise on electrolysis of water gained on this list, it
follows that a 5 Kw rooftop solar collector on every house in the country
(and Atlanta in particular) could be producing 232 standard cm^3 of H2
molecules each second with 2.5 volts at 2,000 amperes.

The H2 could be fed to a "grid" using armored high pressure tubing about the
size of the coax cable used for tv and sharing your cable provider poles.

In this way whatever solar insolation you get
produces H2 accordingly, and you only need
a meter that keeps track of ampere-seconds.

A central collection point for H2 conversion to methanol (H2-CO2)or other,or
local fuel cells or I.C. engines feeding the power grid would simplify the
distribution logistics.

If you use a Pd cathode in your electrolyzer and get O/U heat, consider it a
bonus.  :-)

Regards,   Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 05:26:21 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA07718;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:22:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:22:41 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980623082026.007decd0 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:20:26 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Cold Fusion Times vol.6, issue 3 update
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"3-WBE.0.Uu1.HuvZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19943
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 
 June 23,'98

 The Cold Fusion Times volume 6 number 3 (Summer '98) will
go out tomorrow; the short delay due to
the color pictures of the ICCF7 meeting.

The cover page is at the COLD FUSION TIMES
web site  http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 06:17:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA15386;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:09:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:09:37 -0700
Message-Id: <358F8125.FB3CD1BB verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:19:17 +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: Something interesting...
References: <01BD9DFA.F4B79A20.stk sunherald.infi.net> <358EEAAC.965C2B17@fc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"XWrhR3.0.Km3.GawZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19945
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

John Fields wrote:
> 
> Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:
> 

[snip duplicated letter of Kyle by quotation]

> >
> > Kyle R. Mcallister
> > Email: stk sunherald.infi.net
> > Phone: 228-875-0629
> > http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/5257
 

[snip the the John's suggestions]

> John Fields,                   Austin Instruments, Inc.
> El Presidente                  Research, Design, and Development
> "I speak for the company"      Austin, Republic of Texas


I suggest you dont quote everyting.(vortex rule)

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 06:50:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA22722;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623084307.00c8a590 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:43:07 -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: <"X3Lnh2.0.yY5.V9xZr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19946
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 22:31 6/22/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:

> I ran at full power input of 93.2928 watts for a temperature of 660.0 C
>sustained for 1 hour. This works out to 7.0745 C per watt

> I now ruduced input power to 73.304 watts which gave a sustained 
>temperature of 604.0 for 1 hour. This works out to 8.1287 C per watt.

> Looks like a higher power input gives more C per watt.  I don't know. 

looks like lower power gives higher C/watt to me....?



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 Jun 23 06:53:08 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA28204;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:50:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 06:50:21 -0700
Message-ID: <01BD9E83.A25621A0.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:48:01 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ho20v3.0.au6.SAxZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19947
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



-----Original Message-----
From:	Cornwall RO [SMTP:R.O.Cornwall city.ac.uk]
Sent:	Tuesday, June 23, 1998 4:54 AM
To:	vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject:	Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames

>It's easy to get blinded by beautiful theories especially when they look
>so complete. I hear people seriously saying that Mick.-Morley experiment
>is wrong. Christ! What a revolution, and how do you then explain what we
>think we know, that old body of knowledge.

It may come as a surprise to many people, but there is the possibility that 
the Michelson-Morley experiment did detect an "ether drift". Although it 
was smaller than expected, it was fairly large. All the other MMX type 
experiments also detected a drift, and when averaged together properly, 
taking into account factors which were commonly ignored, they are 
compatible with one another. See the Adobe Acrobat file:

http://redshift.vif.com/V05N1MUN.pdf

I do not know if SR is correct, or if a different theory is correct. I 
would much rather trust experimental evidence than a theory though. Simply 
because SR fits most facts (it doesn't seem to fit them all) does not mean 
that it is correct. Consider the following:

"If the mill is polluting the river, we would see an increase in fish 
deaths. And fish deaths have increased, so the mill muct be polluting the 
river." (this does not take into account the possibility of fishermen with 
high voltage generators:-)

Kyle R. Mcallister

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 07:37:48 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA12026;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 07:35:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 07:35:42 -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: <358FBD09.E7028D1E css.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:34:49 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A Solar-Hydrogen Grid?
References: <021301bd9ea1$5c1efd60$778f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"z1zZO2.0.ix2.zqxZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19948
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> A central collection point for H2 conversion to methanol (H2-CO2)or other,or
> local fuel cells or I.C. engines feeding the power grid would simplify the
> distribution logistics.

Distribution logistics?  The key to it all it to get AWAY from dependence on a
universal grid system.  Smaller, localized, modular production facilities is
the way to go.  The most promising idea IMO is the residential fuel cell stacks
that are being developed (couple of URL's were tossed around here not too long
ago).  Power and heat.  Team that up with solar production of H2 or biomass
hydrocarbons and you have clean, unlimited energy independence for the masses. 
Why waste any more money on infrastructure?  BTW, having seen what a busted
natural gas line will do, don't go stringing any of those H2 lines by me! 
YOW!  8^)

Also, like the salt storage idea too.  Only problem I see is that the pipes
would need to be able to be serviced.  Locating the pit under a structure would
complicate maintenance.  Drilling out a core is the better way to go, IMO. 
Lets you use large diameter pipe to contain the salt.  Sink several in parallel
to expand capacity as needed  -> 8888.


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 08:03:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA20904;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:01:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:01:13 -0700
Message-ID: <023101bd9eb7$5fe52b20$778f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: A Roof Garden?
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:57:47 -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: <"SSlU4.0.W65.uCyZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19949
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Since enough roof-mounted Solar Cell to generate 5 Kw and produce 30 cubic
feet of
hydrogen/hr about .165 therms at $0.20/therm
is about $0.02/day, it would take a while to
amortize the initial investment.

However, with a small solar-powered circulating pump running water through
cheap tubulated plastic panels covered with a layer of "bubble-wrap" with an
algae filter and aerated to dump O2 while collecting CO2, one could go into
rooftop biomass production.

The algae can be fermented to ethanol or such,
or hydrothermally converted to engine fuel.

Then again with a few goldfish in the system you could harvest your own meat
too. :-)

Hard to beat the economics of biomass,isn't it?

Regards,  Frederick



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 08:39:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA00832;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:34:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:34:50 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 08:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"tXf9U2.0.vC.QiyZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19950
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Cornwall RO wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Jun 1998, William Beaty wrote:
> > axis?  ANd if we should wind a coil from pipes full of electrolyte, where
> > positive and negative particles of different charges and different weights
> > flow in opposite directions, does anything interesting happen?  How about
> > mercury, where the protons are "liquid" and the electron sea is also
> > "liquid"?  If we pump liquid mercury and also put a huge electric current
> > through it, do weird things happen? 
> 
> It's easy to get blinded by beautiful theories especially when they look
> so complete. I hear people seriously saying that Mick.-Morley experiment
> is wrong. Christ! What a revolution, and how do you then explain what we
> think we know, that old body of knowledge. 

Good point!  My feelings are mixed about what attitude we should adopt: 
Special Relativity is no weak opponent, and anyone who sets out to defeat
it is bound to fail.  But if it has hidden flaws, then those who are aware
of its strength will give up in dismay long before they find them, while
those who have no idea of the power of the Relativity theory might blindly
attack it and hit the weak spot.  But those who know Relativity well yet
attack it still, they might be wise enough to ferret out the weak spots
rather than hitting them by luck.  But they also might give up easily,
since they can see that weak spots might not even exist. 

So, what advice should we give to those who attack Relativity?  Know your
opponent and chance giving up, or stay ignorant and chance repeating the
mistakes of all other anti-relativity crackpots?  Maybe the best route is
to embrace Relativity, go through the "Relativity-worship" phase common to
most physics students, but then become wise enough over the decades that
we see more and more real flaws.  Who's the more dangerous enemy, a
stranger or a former friend?  :)


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 23 09:13:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA13561;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:11:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:11:06 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623121450.016b4750 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:14:50 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"-JmEs3.0.pJ3.QEzZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19951
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 12:59 PM 6/22/98 -0700, William Beaty wrote:
>Bare electrons repel each other and fan out.  If they are emitted in a
>parallel beam, they won't remain parallel, they will fly outwards in a
>cone-shaped pattern.  If their velocity is increased, their repulsion
>force seems to become less.  We can explain this in two equivalent ways: 
>either there is an attractive magnetic field resisting their repulsive
>e-fields, or time is slowing down for the electrons (Lorentz effects.) 
>Special Relativity says that magnetic fields are the same as time
>contraction.

   I'll just take this paragraph to shoot down.  Modern chips are made
using electron beams to write a pattern in the resist.  Why use electron
beams?  Because they can be made sharper than a beam of ultraviolet light.
(X-ray beams are also being used, but AFAIK, not in production.)  Now if
Intel and Motorola are producing electron beams that can be used to write
0.1 micron features, take my word for it, the electrons in the beam do not
repel in any frame of reference.  (The actual major concern is that the
resist does not conduct well, so you build up a negative charge at the spot
you are writing.  The solution is to write the entire "image" of the chip
several times, allowing the charges at any one spot time to disappate.)

                                        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 Jun 23 09:20:21 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA15585;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:15:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:15:23 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:15:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
Reply-To: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"s_ltA.0.Lp3.QIzZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19952
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Horace Heffner wrote:

> >>From what I understand of the simple Relativity explanation of the "pinch
> >force", there is no problem here.  Relativity says that a stream of bare
> >electrons, no matter how high their current, cannot be "pinched" into a
> >narrower stream by their magnetic field.  For bare electron beams, the
> >"pinch" force is only able to slow their expansion but not reverse it.
> 
> 
> This ignores the dipole nature of the electron.  The dipole force at some
> degree of proximity might be able to overcome the coloum force causing the
> joining of pairs, making bosons, which can overlap and cluster to any
> degree, true?

Yes, but any dipole force will depend on electron proximity, and why would
this be different in the parallel beam?  Any dipole force will apply to
all electrons everywhere, not just electrons in hi-velocity beams.  The
electrons first have to be near each other before a dipole force would
have an effect.  My point is that the parallel-moving electrons start
flying apart at the moment they leave the hot cathode of the electron gun. 
If a dipole force was important here, then the emitted electrons would
already be collapsed together inside the hot cathode, or they might
collapse together the moment they left it.  Out in the parallel beam,
where electric current and magnetic fields are important, the electrons
cannot be collapsed together by speeding up the beam.  (also, wouldn't any
attractive force be relativisticly reduced by the electron velocity, just
as the e-field force is relativisticly reduced?)  (also, a dipole force
might be important for electron beams focussed to a point, but this is not
the parallel electron beam I'm using to illustrate my point about
Relativity, so it can't really be used as a counterargument regarding
parallel relative motion of charges.) 


To collapse the beam rather than just slowing its expansion, the beam must
have some positive charges which are partly cancelling the beam's charge
without also cancelling the beam's current.  The positive charges must
move differently than the electron beam, they could be unmoving, as in a
wire, or moving backwards, as in a plasma streamer. 

> Might be worthwhile to search "convergent beams", as I have read an article
> about such.  Don't remember if a velocity distribution was an important
> element, but do remember the method only worked at very near light speed.

I know that I've seen stuff about focused beams in vacuum tubes by using
bowl-shaped cathodes.  If you can find something about "self-focussed"
electron beams or ion beams, it might lead towards one of those "black
holes" in physics where Relativity is violated, yet nobody wants to
acknowledge it and so they shy away from studying the effect.  If
electrons in a beam will self-focus, how does Relativity explain it? 
Might be a common anomaly, preserved by the blindness caused by our
adherence to paradigm-think.  On the other hand, self-focussing of
electron beams might involve something simple, like a concave
electron-emitting surface, or like replacing the vacuum with a low
pressure gas in order to provide positive charges in the beam. 

> >Two unmoving electrons repel each other.  Two electrons moving parallel to
> >each other also have an electric current and an attractive b-field, so
> >they repel each other less strongly.  However, if we run along side the
> >moving electrons, there is NO electric current, so the b-field must vanish
> >and with it the attractive force.  By moving ourselves, we have made the
> >electrons behave differently.
> 
> If you replace the electrons with deuterons on a near collision course this
> argument can fall apart.  The attractive force might be enough just enough
> to overcome the coulomb narrier and permit fusion.  The fusion event can
> not be seen in one frame and not another, unless the universe splits into
> two.

But deuterons which approach each other...  are approaching each other!  A
parallel beam of charged deuterons would repel, and Relativity might make
them repel less.  If they were on a collision course, then we simply have
the "colliding trains" paradox, where the collision time can vary
depending on relative motions of the observer.

Let's see...  what if the Deuterons (or even electrons) were not moving
parallel, but were on a collision course.  They would repel, their
trajectories would curve away (as hyperpolae?), and depending on initial
velocity of approach, they might collide before reversing direction and
retreating again.  If they were also moving at right angles to their
velocity towards each other, we should see an attractive magnetic field. 
Would this attractive field accelerate them a bit and allow collision,
where for an observer who moves along with the particles there would be no
attractive field and no collision?  But the particles are also moving
towards each other, not only parallel.  My visual thinking fails here, so
maybe you have a good point.  Can relative velocity and charged particles
change the position of a collision, or even make a collision occur yet not
occur?  Sounds like good material for sci.physics.


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 23 09:21:48 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA16936;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:18:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:18:25 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623122224.016abce0 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:22:24 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: Something interesting...
Cc: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
In-Reply-To: <01BD9DFA.F4B79A20.stk sunherald.infi.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"c_Uvt3.0.V84.FLzZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19953
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 04:29 PM 6/22/98 -0500, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:

>Today, I was reading about the Silvertooth experiment, and how it 
>supposedly detected earth's "absolute motion" in space, and determined it 
>to be about 378km/s in the direction of the constellation Leo. I thought 
>this was interesting, but did what I usually do: put it aside until later.


   Note that part of Earth's absolute motion through space is its orbit
around the sun,  O(66 km/s), and part is due to the sun's rotation around
the center of the galaxy, O(200? km/sec).  Are these directions more
closely aligned when you factor out the rotation around the galactic center?

>Then it hit me: the constellations Leo and Sextans are right next to each 
>other! I ran my astronomy program, and made sure I remembered correctly, 
>and I did. So we are left with this: 1. A detectible anisotropy in the 
>direction of Sextans; 2. A detectible anisotropy in the direction of Leo; 
>3. Two anisotropies lying very close to each other.
>
>I think this definately warrants further investigation. Thoughts?

   This does not render relativity invalid, just makes it clear that it is
a special case of something more general.  But relativity must be wrong in
some 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  Tue Jun 23 09:39:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23951;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:34:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:34:59 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623123853.01698810 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:38:53 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: FUN: high-speed electrostatic air-threads
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <35951662.147877932 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980622120331.01649e20 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980619145249.00cf62c0 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980622120331.01649e20 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"oumXD2.0.2s5.nazZr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19954
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 02:54 AM 6/23/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>This assumes that the black hole has always been charged (see below).

   No, charges falling into a black hole after it is created will take
forever, viewed from outside, to reach the singularity at the center.  But
for the purpose of this experiment we are determining that the charge is in
or near the black hole.  We don't care, and beyond the first few
microseconds, can't tell which case holds.

>My point was that this space distortion must originate in the black
>hole after the charge is "swallowed". In order for it to be detected
>outside the hole, the space distortion needs to travel out of the
>hole.

    Let's consider the case where a black hole is created.  For
specificity, we will give it a positive charge of +1000 joules.  The star
we start with has a diameter of say 100,000 miles.  We put sensitive
detectors all around the star, at a distance of 1 million miles, and
confirm the net charge.

    Now, we wave our magic supernova wand, and in an instant, the star and
the +1000 joules disappear into the black hole.  The dectectors see no
change of course, and can't for about six seconds.  Once the blast front is
past, our superhardened detectors see no change in the distribution of the
charge.  They still contain a space with a net charge of +1000 joules.  But
now we can move the detectors to positions say 1 mile from the black hole.
 They still determine that the charge is inside.

    Let's just suppose though, that when the charge reaches the center of
the black hole, the charge disappears.  THAT information takes forever to
get out of the black hole, so we continue to see a charge of +1000 joules.

                                        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 Jun 23 11:41:46 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04732;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 11:33:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 11:33:59 -0700
Message-ID: <01BD9EAB.3EF9DAC0.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: Relativity: Right or wrong?
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:31:35 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"AmDAL1.0.b91.MK_Zr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19955
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hello all:

Due to the recent talk of whether relativity is correct or not, I thought I 
would post my feelings on the subject:

Up until about a year ago, I supported relativity completely. It made sense 
to me, it explained everything. It had to be correct. Then, I realized it 
cannot explain everything. I began to notice that there were small 
inconsistencies in the way relativity explains physical processes, and even 
the very basis by which it was proven. At first, I condemned everyone that 
brought these errors to my attention, saying that they did not know what 
they were talking about. An absolute reference frame? Preposterous, since 
relativity forbids it. Then I realized that I was the one who was a 
pseudo-scientist: I saw experimental evidence, and condemned it as 
experimental artifact simply because I had an affinity for relativity. I 
now believe that relativity may need a successor, one that includes an 
absolute frame of reference. The reasons for this are as follows:

1. The "ether drift" experiments that were supposed to show an absolute 
motion of the earth were claimed to show NO ether drift at all. This can be 
found in any relativity textbook. What these books fail to mention is that 
each and every one of these experiments showed an anomalous anisotropy in 
the speed of light, one that looks suspiciously like an ether drift. If 
averaged properly, taking into account many different factors, the 
experiments agree with one another. See 
http://redshift.vif.com/V05N1MUN.pdf for more details.

2. Relativity forbids all superluminal processes, as these violate 
causality and would create time travel paradoxes. In quantum physics, there 
are many phenomena that are superluminal in nature, such as the EPR 
phenomena, superluminal quantum tunneling, and quantum entanglement. 
Although it is commonly accepted that there is no reality attached to these 
phenomena, and therefore no possibility of transmitting information, 
matter, or energy at superluminal velocity with these phenomena, they 
complicate the situation with relativity. It seems simpler to explain them 
if we assume the existence of an absolute rest frame.

3. The unification of relativity and quantum mechanics seems impossible, 
because the measurement process cannot be explained in a relativistically 
invariant way.

4. A possible solution to the time problem of quantum gravity and quantum 
mechanics is the introduction of an absolute reference frame.

5. Long range measurements of the universe indicate a measurable anisotropy 
in cosmological structure, possibly also indicating that the speed of light 
might not be a constant, but dependant on direction and polarization. 
Interestingly, the existence of a preferred reference frame seems natural 
from a more cosmological perspective.

I leave you to decide for yourself. I do not know the true answer, but tend 
toward an absolute reference frame. Remember, physical theory is nothing 
compared to experimental evidence. There is evidence pointing either way.

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  Tue Jun 23 12:45:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA26117;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:41:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:41:31 -0700
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: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 09:40:39 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: pinch [Off Topic]
Resent-Message-ID: <"gh0Ag1.0.xN6.fJ0ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19956
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Remi -

   > [..]  predatory so and so's [...]

Well, predatory behavior of whatever bent is a whole 'nother thing.

I'm not gay, but I'm sure I'm 'something' in some political group's
crosshairs. Remember the saying "I wasn't a Jew (Liberal, whatever), so I
didn't speak up..."

Simply being gay isn't immoral any more than being a homopolar device is
immoral. That was my point, and I rest it.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 13:22:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04892;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: "George Holz" 
To: 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:15:50 -0400
Message-ID: <01bd9ee3$b77b2e30$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: <"ABRlH2.0.LC1.br0ar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19957
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vince Cockeram wrote:


> Yesterday (Sunday 6-21) I was goin to fire up the experiment and run
>some low(er) input power testing. The tube had been used twice for
>full power runs and had been sealed, under vacuum between runs. 
> The amount of metallic K loaded into the tube before the runs started
>would be real close to 1/16 cu. inch.
>
> Both the first and second full power runs got up into the ~700 deg C range.
> To my surprise, the third run only got to around 400 deg C. no matter
>what fill pressure I tried. What is going on here?  Looking closely at
>the tube it seemed that there was no K left. It usually is a silvery plating
>at the bottom inch of the tube. This area was clear. This was confirmed
>when I opened the tube and introduced several drops of water. No sizzle
>as the K decomposed.  Where did the K go? I would guess that at the
>last shutdown from a high temperature run I pulled full vacuum with
>power on. Any K left (there wasn't much to begin with) got sucked out.
-
Hi Vince,
First, a question. Did you take any measurements of the tube voltage
and current during the third run that only got to 400C. This could
be interesting as an accidental control run. 
Second, keep in mind that the K doesn't actually get pumped totally
out of the system, it will condense on the first cool surface it
encounters, thus it is probably in your copper vacuum plumbing and the
tube gas feed hose.
-
> Shutdown in future will be done by filling the tube to ~1psi with H2, 
>letting the tube cool and then evacuate. Maybe that will save the K.
-
Why bother changing the fill at the end of a run, just let the tube
cool without any pumping to keep the K in the tube.
  
> I ran at full power input of 93.2928 watts for a temperature of 660.0 C
>sustained for 1 hour. This works out to 7.0745 C per watt
>
> I now ruduced input power to 73.304 watts which gave a sustained 
>temperature of 604.0 for 1 hour. This works out to 8.1287 C per watt.
> Hmmm....sort of less efficient I'd say.
-
As Scott has already pointed out, your conclusion here is not supported
by your measurements. Also, maximum temperature is not necessarily
the point of highest COP.
-
> Remember I reported in previous posts that initially the temperature
>rose rapidly at the start of a run to a high level and then dropped down
>between 10 to 20 degrees C.  I almost seems like the reaction wants
>to take off big time and then sort of runs out of ....something.
-
The vapor pressure of K reaches 100 mm Hg at 590C and 400 mm Hg at 710 C.
At these temperatures the K is extremely mobile and will vaporize
and recondense on the coolest surfaces available. The temperature of
the reaction will drive the K away from the reaction region. One
way of avoiding this is to seal the high temperature reaction region
physically. The anode and cathode could be of larger diameter so
as to nearly fill the tube and slow the diffusion of K out of
the active area. Minimizing the temperature gradient along the tube
would also help to keep the K in the active area.
-
>Present configuration: Tube in series with 16 7.5 watt ballast lamps.
>Question:    Will switching to sixteen 15 watt lamps get me there?
-
Yes,lowering the ballast will increase tube power input. The nonlinear
V/I characteristic of the lamps tends to create a constant current
condition and the change will be smaller than a 1/16 increase in current.
However,I don't think just increasing the power will necessarily increase
the COP. Keeping more K in the discharge region could be much more
important.
-
Very interesting results so far Vince, keep on exploring variations.
-
George Holz      george varisys.com
Varitronics Systems



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 13:22:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04034;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:19:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:19:34 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:20:56 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch [Off Topic]
Resent-Message-ID: <"hBTID3.0.t-.Lt0ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19958
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 11:50 AM 6/23/98, Cornwall RO wrote:
[snip]
>It's better to teach youngsters to have boundless optimism and respect of
>self (as well as empathy and charity). Even if that makes them look stupid
>and niave. Europeans love teasing Americans for having precisely this -
>'Oh they don't understand irony'. Well they can't spell either.

I'll plead guilty to the spelling charge!

I do wonder how much British - American cultural differences are created
based on a misunderstanding of idioms and local definitions though.  For
example:


At 11:02 AM 6/23/98, Cornwall RO wrote:
[snip]
>I remember at school a dyslexic suffer who was kept in bottom band until
>they understood him. He was a damn good programmer, musically gifted and
>a loyal friend too.

You coudn't expect much in the way of musicology from bottoms now, could
you?  So limited in range.  It must have been a diffcult time for the band
leader as well.  Not much of a repetoir for bottoms.  I've ever even heard
of a concerto for bottom and orchestra.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 13:28:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04898;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:21:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:21:13 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980623212209.00b05b44 mail.bahnhof.se>
X-Sender: david mail.bahnhof.se
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 20:22:09 +0100
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: David Jonsson 
Subject: Spinors and twisters
In-Reply-To: <358FBD09.E7028D1E css.mot.com>
References: <021301bd9ea1$5c1efd60$778f85ce default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"jDVBD3.0.3C1.uu0ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19959
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

Can anyone give me a good reference on Spinors and Twisters?

David


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  Tue Jun 23 13:32:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA09997;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:28:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:28:36 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 12:29:54 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Resent-Message-ID: <"qJda3.0.yR2.o_0ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19960
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:43 AM 6/23/98, Scott Little wrote:
>At 22:31 6/22/98 EDT, VCockeram aol.com wrote:
>
>> I ran at full power input of 93.2928 watts for a temperature of 660.0 C
>>sustained for 1 hour. This works out to 7.0745 C per watt
>
>> I now ruduced input power to 73.304 watts which gave a sustained
>>temperature of 604.0 for 1 hour. This works out to 8.1287 C per watt.
>
>> Looks like a higher power input gives more C per watt.  I don't know.
>
>looks like lower power gives higher C/watt to me....?
>


Yes - just what you would expect too.  Less of the energy is radiated away,
so a higher proportion makes it to the thermocouple vicinity by conduction.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 13:33:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11091;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:30:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:30:20 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:25:13 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: <"cEfxL3.0.yi2.R11ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19961
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-23 09:48:05 EDT, you write:

> > I now ruduced input power to 73.304 watts which gave a sustained 
>  >temperature of 604.0 for 1 hour. This works out to 8.1287 C per watt.
>  
>  > Looks like a higher power input gives more C per watt.  I don't know. 
>  
>  looks like lower power gives higher C/watt to me....?
>  
>  
>  
>  Scott Little, EarthTech Int'l, Inc.    http://www.eden.com/~little

Sorry, It was a long day Scott, transposed lower/higher. 

Vince Cockeram

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 13:46:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA19133;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:41:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:41:15 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623164448.00c38dd0 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:44:48 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch [Off Topic]
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"GX8pp.0.Dg4.YB1ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19962
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 12:20 PM 6/23/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>You coudn't expect much in the way of musicology from bottoms now, could
>you?  So limited in range.  It must have been a diffcult time for the band
>leader as well.  Not much of a repetoir for bottoms.  I've ever even heard
>of a concerto for bottom and orchestra.

   But I assume you have heard PDQ Bach's Concerto for Horn and Hardart? ;-)

   (For those unaware, PDQ Bach is the creation of Peer Schikele, who has
more of a reputation as a composer from the musical jokes he wrote as PDQ
Bach than for his own serious work.  Horn and Hardard was a cafeteria
chain.  The first Horn & Hardart was the first automat.  (The easiest way
to describe an automat is a wall sized vending machine with people inside
constantly refilling 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  Tue Jun 23 13:46:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA20978;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:43:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:43:07 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980623121450.016b4750 spectre.mitre.org>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"CzEjI1.0.h75.QD1ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19963
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>    I'll just take this paragraph to shoot down.  Modern chips are made
> using electron beams to write a pattern in the resist.  Why use electron
> beams?  Because they can be made sharper than a beam of ultraviolet light.
> (X-ray beams are also being used, but AFAIK, not in production.)  Now if
> Intel and Motorola are producing electron beams that can be used to write
> 0.1 micron features, take my word for it, the electrons in the beam do not
> repel in any frame of reference.

Are you sure?  I'm talking about a PARALLEL beam defocussing when the
velocity is low, or remaining parallel when the velocity is high.  None of
this means that electrons radiating from a pointsource cannot be focussed
electrostatically or magnetically to nearly a point-image.  I bet that
this defocussing effect is a real problem at hundreds of volts
acceleration potential, but at tens of KV the problem becomes minimal. 

Also, according to Relativity, the attractive b-field grows larger as the
electrons go faster.  As they approach c, the attraction equals the
repulsion and they no longer repel.  I'm not totally sure, but I think
that the electrons used in SEM and IC fab are relativisitic.  I know that
atom-resolving SEMs use much higher voltages (hundres of KV), and I
thought this was done to minimize the electron-repulsion and so improve
the focus. 

I'm not in the business of defending Relativity, but anytime someone finds
a big obvious violation of relativity, I first suspect that Relativity is
not the problem.  It's similar to O/U: if somebody thinks an o/u device is
obvious and easy to build, then they probably have made a mistake.  Big
obvious flaws in Relativity need to be added to the lists of flaws being
discussed in Galilean Electrodynamics, and finding a new flaw really is a
big deal.  Since I'm not very familiar with this stuff, it might be
possible that one current and well-known flaw in Relativity is
"unexplained self-focussing of charged particle beams". 


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 23 14:13:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA31522;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:10:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:10:12 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: PAGD apparatus (fwd)
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"6zxLj3.0.Li7.pc1ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19964
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Anyone interested in the offer below should contact revtec ptd.net
directly

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 16:20:58 -0400
From: jeff fink 
To: billb eskimo.com
Subject: PAGD apparatus

I have dismantled my PAGD experiment to make room for another 
project.  I have over a thousand dollars worth of stuff that 
I am willing to take $300 for.  I'll itemize it if you or a 
friend has any serious interest.  With this equipment I have 
seen all the phenomena the Correas claimed with the exception 
of excess energy.  Bob Flower and I have also seen things they 
did not mention.  This is neat stuff, but perhaps someone more 
intellectual than me can put it to better use.


Jeff Fink

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 14:21:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA02955;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:16:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:16:49 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199806232116.OAA24066 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: pinch [Off Topic]
Resent-Message-ID: <"amFGY1.0.2k.0j1ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19965
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Waaay off topic, this business about pinch and bottoms :-)
But just for the halibut:

Horace wrote:


>I've ever even heard of a concerto for bottom and orchestra.

Actually, Horace: in France, I believe it was the 1890's or thereabouts,
there was this guy Joseph Pujol who did just that... gave concerts for
bottom. That is, he learned at an early age to control his sphincter muscles
quite well, enough so that he could draw in volumes of air and whistle with
them, had quite a good range they say. He was quite the rage, even to the
extent of having problems with copycats (who used mechanical devices to fake
it). 

I read a book about him long ago. A quick search on the Internet got lots of
references, one of which is http://www.infobahn.com/pages/pujol.html

Dan Quickert

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 14:21:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03103;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:32 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:27 -0700
Message-Id: <199806232117.OAA02612 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: Relativity: Right or wrong?
Resent-Message-ID: <"HtUVy3.0.Cm.gj1ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19967
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>Due to the recent talk of whether relativity is correct or not, I thought I 
>would post my feelings on the subject:
>


>1. The "ether drift" experiments that were supposed to show an absolute 
>motion of the earth were claimed to show NO ether drift at all. This can be 
>found in any relativity textbook. What these books fail to mention is that 
>each and every one of these experiments showed an anomalous anisotropy in 
>the speed of light, one that looks suspiciously like an ether drift. If 
>averaged properly, taking into account many different factors, the 
>experiments agree with one another. See 
>http://redshift.vif.com/V05N1MUN.pdf for more details.

Correct.  Several experiments showed aether drift, but not at the rate
expected.  The problem here is that our model of what we should expect was,
and still is, incomplete.

If the ideas I am studying are correct, then the earth IS, a bunch of aether
solitons.  So the Earth itself IS, the aether wind blowing around the solar
system.  Ergo you don't expect the aether of outer space to be blowing past
the surface when you give up the notion of particles and empty space, where
you try to see if empty space is made of aether, but retain the notion that
the earth **and your apparatus** are made of particles.  They were assuming
that one was composed of something different from the other (ie matter and
empty space)

Also, from study of mass to energy conversions in a universe composed of an
ocean of aether and solitons for material particles, you must accept that
there is a flow of aether directed out of the sun.  So, the direction of
"aether drift" would also be wrong.

With that, go take a look at the earth's magnetosphere and see if it doesn't
look like an effect of something streaming out away from the sun.  Of course
there is the solar wind, but then why does the solar wind accelerate as it
continues on out past earth, and past Jupiter?  Answer, the aether is
accelerating away from the sun heading out of the MW toward deep space.



>
>2. Relativity forbids all superluminal processes, as these violate 
>causality and would create time travel paradoxes. In quantum physics, there 
>are many phenomena that are superluminal in nature, such as the EPR 
>phenomena, superluminal quantum tunneling, and quantum entanglement. 
>Although it is commonly accepted that there is no reality attached to these 
>phenomena, and therefore no possibility of transmitting information, 
>matter, or energy at superluminal velocity with these phenomena, they 
>complicate the situation with relativity. It seems simpler to explain them 
>if we assume the existence of an absolute rest frame.

You don't have to be this nit picky.  There are million light year long
radio jets, and we observe radio blobs to move FTL.  These are explained
away via orientation, ie the jets must  be coming toward us, and so it is an
illusion.  But the jets are symmetric, whereas if this were so then they
should appear assymetric in projection on the sky.  So there is something
wrong with the no FTL thing.  

BTW, in the book I will show you how to condense the aether out of the way
of the craft and thus penetrate the c barrier.

>
>3. The unification of relativity and quantum mechanics seems impossible, 
>because the measurement process cannot be explained in a relativistically 
>invariant way.

The reason this fails is because the link between what we think of as
particles, and what we think of as empty space is not made apparent in
either of those theories.  The missing link is in the conservation of mass,
aka aether.  Ergo, you get aether flowing out of stars, and thus empty space
flowing out of stars.  This makes as much sense as telling an ancient that
the oceans on the bottom of the earth don't fall off.  But with thought, it
makes sense finally, and then you look for evidence of this and find it,
*everywhere you look*

>
>4. A possible solution to the time problem of quantum gravity and quantum 
>mechanics is the introduction of an absolute reference frame.

Correct in part.  We need to adopt the absolute reference frame, which is
the CBR.  But we also have to adopt the link between matter, fields, and
empty space, and distinguish between empty space and spacetime.  The former
is an ocean of aether, the latter are waves in that ocean.  

Today, we confuse them and make statements that are equivalent to saying I
have ten pounds of sound, when we mean I have ten pounds mass of air
molecules.  We fail to distinguish between the medium, and the waves in the
medium.  And the failure arises due to a single seemingly benign error.
Mass and energy are not equivalent, as is supposed, and ergo mass does not
disappear.  It is emitted in fusion reactions.  Mass is a measure of how
much aether is associated with a given solitonic waveform, aka a particle.

>
>5. Long range measurements of the universe indicate a measurable anisotropy 
>in cosmological structure, possibly also indicating that the speed of light 
>might not be a constant, but dependant on direction and polarization. 
>Interestingly, the existence of a preferred reference frame seems natural 
>from a more cosmological perspective.

I'm not certain what you are referring to here, perhaps the recent SN
observations dealing with the Hubble parameter not being constant, ie, the
requirement of the cosmological constant.

If you consider that aether is flowing out of stars, then you come to a
natural yet surprising conclusion.  Inflation never ceased!  Stars, are
continuing to boil aether away from being confined in solitons (particles
such as H), so that it becomes more empty space in that huge ocean we call a
universe.

The big bang had to have resulted when a huge black hole breached
confinement.  Black holes have to have a core inside, composed of aether at
extreme density, ie a condensate of aether would be a way of saying this.
But it must remain inertially confined by the aether from the space around
it flowing in and ramming the core.  Otherwise, it will breach and you will
have either the radio jets we observe all over the place, or, a big bang if
an entire core breaches all at once.

Matter then forms as resonances as the core breaks apart into smaller and
smaller droplets that become confined as solitonic resonances in the
acoustic nodes of the boiling aether.

Later, Ross Tessien


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 14:22:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA03043;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:24 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:22 -0700
Message-Id: <199806232117.OAA02579 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: Something interesting...
Resent-Message-ID: <"_q4OB3.0.Tl.aj1ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19966
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>On Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:03:59 -0700, Ross Tessien wrote:
>[snip]
>>Whether you think I am correct or not is irrelevant.  If you consider the
>>places that mass to energy conversion is taking place, and just assume that
>>aether is flowing away from regions of fusion exothermy, then you will
>>discover that there are magnetic fields around those objects.  However, you
>>will discover another thing too.

>Ross do you have a formula relating the strength of the magnetic field
>to the rate of aether release? 

  The mass flow rate is easy to determine.  All you need is the luminosity
of the star.  So I guess if you want magnetic field strength vs aether mass
flow rate what you do is to determine the luminosity of the star, and then
the magnetic field, and then relate one to the other.  

For white dwarfs, you have to consider that they just ignited, so they are
likely not yet in an equilibrium condition.  Also, the use of luminosity
above assumes that the star is in the main sequence and is in thermal and
nuclear equilibrium.  This is not always the case.

For example, for white dwarf stars in planetary nebulae, they have just
recently ignited their He, ie within the past million years or so.  Those
objects are not in equilibrium, so the aether mass flow rate and the
luminosity may not be very well correlated.

Also, the intensity of the magnetic field should be proportional to the
aether velocity, and not the mass flow rate.  So you need to figure out the
density of aether in empty space, something I have not yet pinned down, but
have tried via using the Hubble expansion and cosmological considerations.
I don't get the impression that the flow velocity of the aether is very fast
at all.  ie, maybe a few hundred km/s, comparable to the solar wind
velocities at 400 and 800 km/s

For white dwarfs, they are compact stars and so the surface area that the
aether must flow out through is small, and the velocity will be
commensurately large.  Especially since you just ignited the He and so there
is a sort of runaway reaction going on in the core.

(And could we use that to determine the
>amount of nuclear power being released in the Earth, based on it's
>mag. field?

Aether flow, I am convinced, leads to the formation of magnetic fields.
However, this is not the only way to cause a magnetic field.  If you have
solitons moving around in a circle, ie electrons around a coil, then there
is a precession of the solitonic waveforms, and thus also in their
interference pattern, in 4D around the coil.  The interference pattern
consists of a rotation of the spacetime nodal structure locally, and that,
IS a magnetic field.

In a sense, because the electrons are solitons, and solitons are aether
resonances, and those solitons are moving around in a circle, you do have
aether moving.  But the difference is that there is no **net** flow in the
case of the coil, whereas there is net flow in the case of aether emission
from stars.  

Aether is emitted from all exothermic reactions.  That is the difference.

As for the earth, I am not certain that the magnetic field is due to aether
emission.  And I don't know how to figure it out.  The explanation that
there is a magnetized iron core may hold water because the cummulative
effect of the motion of electrons in individual atoms will obviously lead to
a magnetic field, where there is no net aether flow, ie bar magnets.  And
perhaps the pressure in the core is sufficient to maintain the magnetism
despite the temperature being so high.  

It is interesting though that the ionospheres around Saturn and Jupiter are
so large, because they also have a process going on called helium rain.  And
that process leads to aether emission.  The Great Red Spot on Jupiter, and
the Great Dark Spot on Neptune, and there are similar features on Uranus and
Saturn are, IMO, aether vent tubes.  I think these are related to sun spots
and the solar granulation, as well as to the polar coronal holes (the gas
planets also have abnormally hot polar regions)

But if there are nuclear reactions taking place in the core of the earth,
then yes, that should show up as an increase in the intensity of the
magnetic field.  But the signature would be different from a normal dipole.

See the recent solar observations via SOHO and Ulysees.  The solar magnetic
field straightens out into radial lines directed away from the sun.  Gee, do
you think the aether is a fluid moving out radially away from the source?
Anyway, this surprised the scientists because they expected to find a dipole
like a bar magnet, but that isn't the geometry of the solar magnetic field
we observe.

Thus, if the earth has aether flowing outward, the magnetic field should not
be a true dipole.  It should have two components to it.  A dipole for
magnetized iron or currents internally.  Plus, a field that directed along
radial lines.  Something that is impossible if you consider that the field
is due to currents at some origin location such as inside the earth or
inside the sun.  

It is thus obvious that the solar magnetic field is being created by
processes outside of the interior of the sun, and so the only thing
scientists can blame it on is the solar wind.  But then the solar wind is
accelerating.  So how do you blame an acceleration on the thing that is
accelerating??????????????

Anyway, when you understand that aether flow is involved, it becomes very
comical to see them try to explain why these magnetic fields are there in
the first place.

Later, Ross Tessien




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 14:32:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA12273;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:17:25 -0700
Message-Id: <199806232117.OAA02587 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: Something interesting...
Resent-Message-ID: <"7zrnJ3.0.f_2.Pq1ar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19968
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>At 04:29 PM 6/22/98 -0500, Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:
>
>>Today, I was reading about the Silvertooth experiment, and how it 
>>supposedly detected earth's "absolute motion" in space, and determined it 
>>to be about 378km/s in the direction of the constellation Leo. I thought 
>>this was interesting, but did what I usually do: put it aside until later.
>
>
>   This does not render relativity invalid, just makes it clear that it is
>a special case of something more general.  But relativity must be wrong in
>some way.
>
>                                        Robert I. Eachus

The problem is that the realm of QM is not unified with the realm of GR and
SR.  The error is in the assumption that mass and energy are equivalent, and
thus that mass disappears and is not conserved.  When GR adds conservation
of mass to the ideas, then the notion that aether, and thus indirectly,
spacetime, are flowing out of stars will become apparent.  When we add that
notion, then planetary nebulae, coronal mass ejections etc etc will become
understandable.  Until we adopt the idea that the universe is an ocean, and
that mass is a measure of how much of that ocean is associated with the
localized density build up around a soliton which we call a particle, we
will not understand the inertial nature of what we attribute to magnetic
accelerations exterior to stars.

Magnetic fields have no reason to accelerate ions to uniform velocity
dispersions, but inertial couplings do.  But what is worse, we observe
neutral atoms being accelerated in newborn stellar jets (t-tauri).  And
magnetic fields cannot couple to neutral atoms, so as a consequence these
observations simply remain a mystery.  "Obviously" it would be said, the
atoms were ions when they were accelerated, and then they recombined to
become neutral.  Of course, they had to have recombined behind the gas cloud
since we didn't see any photons coming our way due to that re-combination.

Ross Tessien.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 15:34:00 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA18041;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35901EA4.3686 earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:31:16 -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, finlay@slkc.uswest.net, wdmil@aol.com
Subject: Murray: Two new members of Order of the Tortoise 6.23.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"RtjG02.0.pP4.5p2ar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19969
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 23, 1998

Two new members of The Order of the Tortoise:
http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/tortoise/members.html

Charter: The primary function is to unite conventional scientists who
wish these phenomena were real, but feel proof of current claims is
sorely lacking, and want to see the questions addressed by rigorous
scientific investigation. 

Administrivia: We are a professional society, but with no dues, meetings
or organizational structure of any kind. In fact, the only function
performed by the Society is to promote the idea, through its mere
existence, that its OK for professional scientists and engineers to be
interested in such things. 

Membership is open to any professional scientist or engineer now or
previously engaged in conventional research and development, who agree
with our stated charter. Eligible scientists and engineers who actually
believe Cold Fusion, Free Energy or Alchemy are real are welcome, but it
is understood that members are much more likely to believe the opposite,
in accord with conventional scientific opinion. "Cranks" and "True
Believers" who routinely accept or espouse things well beyond the limits
of scientific knowledge and empirical verification, or are hostile
towards conventional science, are not welcome , as the whole Internet is
their Society. 

18.Dr. Paul Finlayson, Phd, Mechanical Engineering, University of Utah,
Salt Lake City. Staff Scientist, Deskin Research Group, Santa Clara, CA.
(finlay slkc.uswest.net)
 
19.Dr. David Miller; former Assistant Professor of Computer Science,
Oklahoma State University; currently involved in space plasma physics
research (recent work appearing in Geophysical Research Letters, summer
1997).(Wdmil aol.com) 

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 Jun 23 15:55:18 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA02851;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:51:51 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:51:51 -0700
From: mindtech nor.com.au
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623145915.0068a238 pophost.nor.com.au>
X-Sender: mindtech pophost.nor.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:59:15 +1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Solar energy question....
In-Reply-To: <358DC6E5.CA3C3AC6 darknet.net>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980621081017.0068cea8 pophost.nor.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"GFZOs2.0.Si.663ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19970
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Hmm.. more coherent?
>
>you mean like.. some sort of natural laser could be constructed, using only
>mirrors
>and sunlight? or did I misunderstand what you meant?
>
>Steve
>

That was the implication. Front surface mirrors.  

Peter

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 16:30:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA14463;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:25:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:25:49 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980623192947.00be7c30 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:29:47 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
References: <3.0.1.32.19980623121450.016b4750 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"PC2411.0.uX3.yb3ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19971
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 01:43 PM 6/23/98 -0700, William Beaty wrote:

>I'm not in the business of defending Relativity, but anytime someone finds
>a big obvious violation of relativity, I first suspect that Relativity is
>not the problem.  It's similar to O/U: if somebody thinks an o/u device is
>obvious and easy to build, then they probably have made a mistake.  Big
>obvious flaws in Relativity need to be added to the lists of flaws being
>discussed in Galilean Electrodynamics, and finding a new flaw really is a
>big deal.  Since I'm not very familiar with this stuff, it might be
>possible that one current and well-known flaw in Relativity is
>"unexplained self-focussing of charged particle beams". 

   It is not a flaw in relativity.  In the laboratory frame of reference,
you have a beam of electrons compressed by the magnetic field they create.
In the electron's frame of reference, the magnetic field is generated by
the motion of the corresponding positive charges.  Same field different
view.  (You can also choose any view in between.)  If you have negative
charges with no positive charges to balance them, then relativity doesn't
hold.

   So relativity requires that the universe be neutral.  There is another
weird exception that I made the mistake of mentioning.  You can send
charged particles through a wormhole.  This can result in a temporary
imbalance in the charge distribution.  So aim your electron beam through a
wormhole into the past, and it will fall apart.  (Of course there are other
theories that say that you can't succeed, anything that goes through a
wormhole has to be electrically neutral.)

   But otherwise charged particle beams hold themselves together quite well.

   I don't know why this is even a subject for debate.  Go outside tonight,
if thunderstorms are forcast for your area.  You will see two types of
lightning:  lightning bolts (self-focused) and heat lightning (diffuse).
Now watch what happens when a lightning bolt hits a tree.  It explodes,
blowing the bark off of the tree.  Part of the force of that explosion is
because the self focusing field holds the plasma contained long enough for
most of the water under the bark to vaporize. 

                                        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 Jun 23 19:16:00 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA16468;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:13:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:13:26 -0700
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:06:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Humor...Re: Spinors and twisters
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980623212209.00b05b44 mail.bahnhof.se>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"zQd3h2.0.A14.536ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19972
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



	Twisters came from Chubby Checker.  Spinors came from doing the 
Jerk, the Fly.... and jumping back Jack, although some believe alligators 
were also involved.  This work from the 50s and 60s.



On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, David Jonsson wrote:

> Can anyone give me a good reference on Spinors and Twisters?
> 
> David
> 
> 
> 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  Tue Jun 23 19:20:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA17920;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:16:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:16:31 -0700
Message-ID: <000101bd9f15$b63b2160$2f8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Grow Your Own Oil?
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 20:12:52 -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: <"hlRBh.0.wN4.-56ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19973
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

"Today, BOTRYOCCUS (a green algae)produces blooms in Lake Baikal, in
Russia,and produces large amounts of oil. The oil is so abundant on the
surface of the lake that it is collected with a special skimming apparatus.
Several companies have grown oil-producing algae in high-salinity ponds and
have extracted the oil as an alternative to fossil fuels."

Do we rent Frank Stenger's pond, or go for the Great Salt Lake?   :-)

Regards,  Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 20:52:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA08840;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 20:48:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 20:48:08 -0700
Message-ID: <001101bd9f22$82ccb480$2f8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Grow Your Own Oil?
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:45:13 -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: <"B7uQg3.0.z92.uR7ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19974
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The Great Salt Lake which is in the region
where algae similar to BOTRYOCCUS produced the
oil in shale oil of Colorado and Utah (Kerogen)as well as the North Sea oil
has a surface area of 2,000 square miles.

Figuring 4 barrels/acre x 640 x 2,000 = 5.12E6 barrels/year?

Then again a semi-closed plastic "pond" on every rooftop, 1,000 square ft at
$0.25/ft^2 with about 1" thick water-tubes in the plastic
and a solar-powered circulating pump?

Regards,     Frederick



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 21:32:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA18227;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:29:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:29:54 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980623192947.00be7c30 spectre.mitre.org>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"AVXLA2.0.hS4.138ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19975
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>    I don't know why this is even a subject for debate.  Go outside tonight,
> if thunderstorms are forcast for your area.  You will see two types of
> lightning:  lightning bolts (self-focused) and heat lightning (diffuse).

Ah, but the subject of debate was pairs of parallel electrons.  I totally
agree that any plasma, sparks included, can be squashed into a thin
channel by its own magnetic field.

The earlier question was this: if pairs of electrons move fast enough, can
they stop repelling and instead attract?  If so, then this is a paradox,
since an observer who moves along with the electrons will see no magnetic
field and see the electrons fly apart, not together.

Up to now I thought the answer was simple: pairs of electrons stop
repelling when they travel at c, and they would begin to attract if only
their speed could exceed c.  In other words, electrons alone always repel
with greater or lesser force, while attractive "pinch" forces can only
arise when protons are present too.  Lightning is made of plasma, of
electrons and positive nuclei, so it is expected to display "plasma
pinch".


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 23 21:56:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA22682;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:50:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:50:58 -0700
Message-ID: <359085D6.37BC interlaced.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:51:34 -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: Grow Your Own Oil?
References: <000101bd9f15$b63b2160$2f8f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"lXUPZ2.0.HY5.oM8ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19976
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> 
(snip)

> Do we rent Frank Stenger's pond, or go for the Great Salt Lake?   :-)

Now you've done it, Fred!  Now I'll have to tell the story of how I
located my 1.2 acre pond over a dry sand deposit with lots of
sand-filled ducts to water never-never land.  When we first let the pond
fill, the level began falling by about 4" per day.  Near the bottom,
I could see the water draining down dozens of little "bathtub drains"
thru this porus bottom.  Cure? - buy 12,000 pounds of bentonite clay
in bags, fabricate a makeshift boat prop out of two garden spades welded
to pipe fittings, park my 20 HP Farmal Super A tractor by the pond to
drive the prop, dump the bentonite into the prop wake one bag at a time
while the old tractor was rotating the whole 1.2 acres (average depth
about 8 ft.) so you could see a strong current going CCW around the
whole pond.  After this "radiator stop-leak" was mixed into the pond,
I spent a couple of weeks pulling an inclined plane (board) back and
forth thru the pond across the bottom with the same tractor and a long
tow rope.  Picture a sub with the diving planes set for crash dive being
pulled at 15 MPH plowing across the ocean bottom and you get the idea.
The bentonite clay mixed with the native silt from the pond bottom
flowed down the leak vents and plugged up the bottom just fine.
And now, Fred wants me to kill my pet catfish, which I fed with dog food
for many years, by filling my pond with oil-producing BOTRYOCCUS!!!

I vote for covering that 2000 mi^2 Great Salt Lake with solar cells on
little floats to give a whole new meaning to the term "silicon valley".

Don't you hurt my pond, Fred!
Getting towed across a farm pond riding on an old tractor innertube
beats WaterWorld any day!

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 23 22:15:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA28056;
	Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:13:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 22:13:18 -0700
Message-ID: <35908B16.3AEE interlaced.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 01:13:58 -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: pinch, electrons & reference frames
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"3W1wT2.0.Hs6.jh8ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19977
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty wrote:
> 
(snip)

> Up to now I thought the answer was simple: pairs of electrons stop
> repelling when they travel at c, and they would begin to attract if only
> their speed could exceed c.

Yes, I ran such a calc and came up with this result - electric repulsion
matched magnetic attraction at c.  But, also interesting, if we can
get the two electrons near enough to c for their gravitational
attraction to aid the magnetic attraction - still shy  of exact c, are
we seeing a melding of the gravitational force and the electromagnetic
force at these high energies?  And, what if we ourselves could get so
close to c that our mass increase caused us to collapse into  black
holes.  In fact, how near c does a proton need to get before it will
form a black hole?  Is its time slowed so much that it would cross the
universe before the collapse could happen?
Hey, Bill, I'm really getting into this asking bottomless pit questions!
:-) :-)

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 02:53:19 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA27296;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:47:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:47:53 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:47:22 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch [Off Topic]
In-Reply-To: <199806232116.OAA24066 pop4.ucdavis.edu>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"PcQlQ.0.Lg6.8jCar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19978
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Er,

Phrases don't carry across the Atlantic. 'Bottom Band' means the lower
stream, that part of the school for the less academically gifted.

Bottom Band, playing music with your spincter!! LOL!
Have you heard of the concerto for toe-nail clipper and trumpet voluntary?

Hee, hee, hee!
Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 02:57:17 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA02207;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:53:24 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980623121450.016b4750 spectre.mitre.org>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"l8vod2.0.OY.WqCar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19979
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>    I'll just take this paragraph to shoot down.  Modern chips are made
> using electron beams to write a pattern in the resist.  Why use electron
> beams?  Because they can be made sharper than a beam of ultraviolet light.
> (X-ray beams are also being used, but AFAIK, not in production.)  Now if
> Intel and Motorola are producing electron beams that can be used to write
> 0.1 micron features, take my word for it, the electrons in the beam do not
> repel in any frame of reference.  (The actual major concern is that the
> resist does not conduct well, so you build up a negative charge at the spot
> you are writing.  The solution is to write the entire "image" of the chip
> several times, allowing the charges at any one spot time to disappate.)
> 
>                                         Robert I. Eachus

You said you also designed ion engines? You said the beam diverges if you
fire off a compensatory e- beam. How does this hold with the above?
Remi.
> with Standard_Disclaimer;
> use  Standard_Disclaimer;
> function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
Yeah, Don't 'C' 'Pascal'. (I prefer Macs and Linux too for that matter but
Bill is good.)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 09:07:08 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA13592;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:04:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:04:54 -0700
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:00:00 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Order of the Tortoise
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806241203_MC2-4125-8A71 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"3b2102.0.FK3.aEIar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19981
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex; INTERNET:rmforall earthlink.net

Rich Murray writes:

     Charter: The primary function is to unite conventional scientists who
     wish these phenomena were real, but feel proof of current claims is
     sorely lacking, and want to see the questions addressed by rigorous
     scientific investigation.

I would rewrite that as follows:

Charter: The primary function is to unite conformist scientists who wish to
deny these phenomena are real, who would like to think that the proof of
current claims is sorely lacking, and who will never, under any circumstances,
examine, discuss or acknowledge the rigorous, high sigma scientific
investigations which has been conducted over the last nine years by
world-class experts including Pons & Fleischmann, McKubre, Bockris, Conway,
Yeager, Miles, Mizuno, Storms, Srinivasan, Oriani and Claytor, to name a
few . . .

I would call this the Order of the Ostrich, for the head-in-the-sand posture,
wishful thinking and denial of plain facts. Those of us who believe that
experimental data means something, and that it must overrule theory are often
called "true believers" by these Tortoises, but in truth, *they* are the ones
who are deluded, and who cannot see past their own preconceived ideas, and who
cannot face the truth.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 09:07:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA13466;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:04:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:04:31 -0700
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:59:48 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Notes on photovoltaics
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806241203_MC2-4125-8A70 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"nKqDn2.0.JI3.EEIar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19980
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

There has been some interesting discussion here of photovoltaics and other
conventional, alternative energy sources. I happen to be writing an article
about these topics for the next issue of Infinite Energy magazine. I am
reviewing a book about alternative energy sources: C. Flavin, N. Lenssen,
"Power Surge," (Norton, 1994). Let me share some of my notes.


The recent history of photovoltaic cells is puzzling and disturbing. This
alternative energy source that should have worked by now. Mass production
should have lowered prices to the point where photovoltaic electricity is
competitive with conventional fossil fuel electricity. Sales should have taken
off. Years ago, I expected the price would fall and the use would increase
exponentially, because photovoltaic cells seemed to have the perfect
combination of attributes:

An established, lucrative niche market as power supplies for calculators, a 4
MW per year market.

A growing presence in more mainstream energy applications, like roadside
emergency telephones, remote telephone repeaters and so on. On a recent trip I
noticed many roadside solar panels in Virginia and the Carolinas. I am not
sure what they are used for. 50,000 vacation homes in Norway have photovoltaic
electricity, and the number is increasing by around 8,000 per year. (Flavin
and Lenssen, p. 161)

Intense R&D by many different companies, in fierce competition.

Many different potential manufacturing techniques, including radically new
ones like the amorphous photovoltaic cells invented by Ovshinsky, with 10.2%
efficiency (F&L, p. 165).

Rapid decrease in price. From 1975 to 1987 the cost per watt declined from $70
to $5. Unfortunately it has not declined much since then. It fell to around
$4.20 in 1994. (Does anyone know what the price is today?)

Rapid increase in sales. From 1970 to 1979 annual shipments increased slowly
from near zero to ~2 MW, then increased rapidly to 60 MW in 1993. (F&L, p.
157)

Broad applicability; useful at any scale.

The output is thermodynamically high grade energy, which can be used for any
application. Most solar energy devices produce low grade heat suitable for
space or water heating.

There are millions of roofs in the world in places like Los Vegas and Los
Angeles which are exposed to bright sunlight nearly year round. In these
locations, extra power for air conditioners is needed when the sun shines
brightest, so solar-generated electricity is ideal. Photovoltaic panels can be
mounted on roofs easily because unlike solar water heaters they are not heavy
and they do not require plumbing, pumps or large holes in the roof or walls.
The house I lived in in Japan was damaged when a solar water heater tore off
during a hurricane.

Despite these advantages, photovoltaics have not yet succeeded in the broader
energy markets. Other alternative energy sources, like wind power, have fallen
in price faster, and increased in reliability to the point where in some
locations, wind is cheaper than fossil fuel and its use is increasing
exponentially. As of 1990, the bulk power electricity cost of various
alternatives were approximately:

Coal Base Load Power     4.5 cents per kilowatt-hour
Wind                     5 cents per KWH
Biomass                  5 cents per KWH
Solar-thermal            11.5 cents pers KWH
Photovoltaic projected   19 cents per KWH

That's from a graph in C. Weinberg, R. Williams, "Energy from the Sun,"
Scientific American, Sept. 1990, p. 154

That is a projected cost; there are no actual bulk, base line figures for
photovoltaics because nobody would so stupid as to build a power plant that
costs four times more than the competition. You can see that photovoltaics
have a long way to go . . .  Weinberg and Williams projected photovoltaic
costs of about 7 cents per KWH today (1998) and they think photovoltaics will
be cheaper than coal around 2005. That is with a straight line, unchanged cost
of coal base-load power. I think that is unrealistic. I expect coal, oil and
natural gas will be cheaper in 2005 than they were in 1990. If people wake up
and realize that cold fusion is real by that time, coal costs will drop
precipitously. Nothing spurs old technology like dire competition. The golden
age of sailing ships came *after* practical transatlantic steam ship
technology began.

I should look on the web and try to find out what the cost of photovoltaics is
today. It will be interesting to find out how close W&W's projection was.

EPRI spent a great deal of money on wind power research, and made good
progress. I think they deserve the credit for the increased reliability and
improved economics. I think that before photovoltaics take off, they will need
support from EPRI or some other big name, heavily funded corporate research
and development organization. That goes for cold fusion too, needless to say.
I do not think we will ever hundreds of thousands of home-made cold fusion
reactors. I hope we never do! It would be dangerous. Millions of mom-and-pop
brand nuclear reactors would be a nightmare. A few hundred thousand homemade
computers or drag-racing automobiles can hurt no one. A few thousand
home-built airplanes will kill only pilot-owners. But millions of unregulated,
untested nuclear reactors not certified by Underwriter's Laboratories might
cause massive damage to health. It might be as bad as tobacco, and gasoline
powered automobiles. There is no reason to take this kind of risk.

Some of the reasons photovoltaics and other renewable energy sources have not
taken off are political. Taxes and regulations are slanted against renewables.
Ironically, oil and gas producers are given tax breaks for "depletion," that
is, because they permanently use up resources, which gives them an unfair
advantage over energy providers who do not use up resources, like
hydroelectric dam owners, and wind power consortiums. Wind was given tax
breaks in the early '80s. The early wind power "farms" were widely criticized,
especially by right-wing free market advocates. I think in retrospect these
tax breaks were justified, because they led EPRI and others to make serious
investments in the technology, which improved it to the point where it now
competes on a level playing field. It competes on a playing field tilted
unfairly because of depletion allowances. I believe in free markets, but I am
a student of history and I know that the U.K. and U.S. governments have been
heavily involved in financing, assisting and promoting technology since 1650.
Government intervention and direct subsidies has contributed enormously to
transportation, agriculture, medicine, navigation, energy, computing and
every other major field.

All in all, I agree with Mike Carrell, who wrote: "Let's hope that the LENR
solutions work out. They match human needs better." LENR (CF) has three
advantages:

1. Like other nuclear processes, it is concentrated. It is energy dense, so it
does not take up much room. "Nuclear energy can provide a trillion times more
energy than mass forces such as wind and water are a million times more energy
than the chemical reactions of the industrial revolution (chiefly combustion
and electrochemistry) . . ." W. Hafele, "Energy from Nuclear Power,"
Scientific American, Sept. 1990, p. 137.

2. It is cheap. Ultimately I expect it will become many orders of magnitude
cheaper than other source of energy, for reasons I spelled out in previous
I.E. articles.

3. If it can be made safe, it can be used for decentralized power generation.
This will eliminate the distribution network, which will save one-third the
cost of electricity. Also, as Arthur Clarke's brother Fred points out, the
distribution network is a blight on the landscape.

If we had invented CF in 1890, today we would never consent to allow these
ugly, fragile and expensive electric wires to be strung everywhere. Mike talks
about the ugliness of "square miles of solar collectors." We have become blind
to the ugly wires, poles and towers that already surround us. In Atlanta, many
neighborhoods are up in arms with the telephone companies that want to build
more ugly cellular telephone towers. They hurt property values. We put up with
ugly electric and telephone poles because we have no choice. Putting cables
underground in old neighborhoods would be prohibitively expensive.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 09:58:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17323;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:47:12 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
In-Reply-To: <199806241203_MC2-4125-8A70 compuserve.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"H9PA01.0.TE4.AzIar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19982
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> 1. Like other nuclear processes, it is concentrated. It is energy dense, so it
> does not take up much room. "Nuclear energy can provide a trillion times more
> energy than mass forces such as wind and water are a million times more energy
> than the chemical reactions of the industrial revolution (chiefly combustion
> and electrochemistry) . . ." W. Hafele, "Energy from Nuclear Power,"
> Scientific American, Sept. 1990, p. 137.
> - Jed

Still low grade heat production and conventional steam-turbine cycle. You
mean that the fuel is low weight and compact - ideal for space
applications - even aircraft? Direct generation of electricity would be
good - hey, hotwire the CF cell! Crank it to start, then watch it go.

Still not sure about regulation, taxation and subsidy/incentives. Mind
you, travelling around London at rush hour could convince me but people
remember the old GLC 'fares fair', the tax bill and those lovely, helpful
London Transport people.  
Remi. 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 10:16:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA05477;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:12:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:12:30 -0700
Message-ID: <35913389.7967 interlaced.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:12:41 -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: Notes on photovoltaics
References: <199806241203_MC2-4125-8A70 compuserve.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"CqGVB1.0.UL1.-DJar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19983
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:
> 
> To: Vortex
> 
> There has been some interesting discussion here of photovoltaics and other
> conventional, alternative energy sources.

(snip Jed's good general discussion)

Jed, I wonder if anyone has good "service life" data available on
photovoltaics?  Here we have a solid-state converter made (in common
form) of silicon with metal contacts made to run as dry as we can
provide.  Perhaps the encapsulation requirements are the weak link?
However, what other energy converter can boast such benign construction?
Long term background radiation (cosmic rays, etc.) and shorter-term
UV and moisture degradation I guess are factors.  However, I wonder if
the economic studies do justice to well designed PV systems on this
service life issue?

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 11:21:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA24277;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:13:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:13:31 -0700
Message-ID: <003d01bd9f9b$64a19420$cc8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Frank Stengers Personal "Waterworld"
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:08:57 -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: <"6713K2.0.7x5.A7Kar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19984
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Be it known that Frank's Engineering Feet using
6 tons of Bentonite to seal his pond and creating a vortex whirlpool in his
1.2 acre pond shut down the Nuclear (Waste Isolation Pilot Project (Wipp)
site near Carlsbad, New Mexico, and dried up the romantic underground river
at Carlsbad Caverns.

I think you're in hot water, Frank.  :-)

Regards,   Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 11:45:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA04021;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980624143326.00c4cc70 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:33:26 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
Cc: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
In-Reply-To: <199806241203_MC2-4125-8A70 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"kd6kb.0.g-.1TKar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19985
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:59 AM 6/24/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>If we had invented CF in 1890, today we would never consent to allow these
>ugly, fragile and expensive electric wires to be strung everywhere. Mike
talks
>about the ugliness of "square miles of solar collectors." We have become
blind
>to the ugly wires, poles and towers that already surround us. In Atlanta,
many
>neighborhoods are up in arms with the telephone companies that want to build
>more ugly cellular telephone towers. They hurt property values. We put up
with
>ugly electric and telephone poles because we have no choice. Putting cables
>underground in old neighborhoods would be prohibitively expensive.

    NOT putting those cables underground is too expensive.  I used to live
in Williamstown, Massachusetts.  A decision was made by the townfolk many
years ago to get rid of the "ugly" power and phone cables.  The town made
an agreement with the local utility companies something like this:

    A surcharge was added to utility bills to start the process.  The money
from this surcharge was used to put the first power and phone lines
underground.  The utilities put all monies saved by having the wires
underground back into the kitty, and every year the town planners would
decide which wires went next.

    When I moved out there were still some houses in remote locations, and
the issue being discussed was whether to subsidize new houses as they went
in to put the original lines underground.

    During the entire time I lived in Williamstown, I can't remember ever
losing power, even in the worst weather.  Where I live now, I average about
six outages a year and an average down time around four hours.

                                        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 Jun 24 11:44:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA05783;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:40:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:40:07 -0700
Message-ID: <004901bd9f9f$1afc4a00$cc8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: WIPP Home Page (http://www.epa.gov/docs/radiation/wipp/)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:36:41 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01BD9F6C.BD6466C0"
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: <"XN6yU2.0.9Q1.6WKar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19986
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_000F_01BD9F6C.BD6466C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

See what you started, Frank?  :-)

http://www.epa.gov/docs/radiation/wipp/

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BD9F6C.BD6466C0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="WIPP Home Page.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="WIPP Home Page.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.epa.gov/docs/radiation/wipp/
Modified=40A204E49E9FBD01C5

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BD9F6C.BD6466C0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 12:00:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA10160;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:54:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:54:17 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
Reply-To: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <35908B16.3AEE interlaced.net>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"bYr5I3.0.fU2.NjKar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19987
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, Francis J. Stenger wrote:

> But, also interesting, if we can
> get the two electrons near enough to c for their gravitational
> attraction to aid the magnetic attraction - still shy  of exact c, are
> we seeing a melding of the gravitational force and the electromagnetic
> force at these high energies?

But this has the same paradox as with b-fields, no?  The moving electrons
themselves might see the rest of the universe get heavy, but they
themselves wouldn't attract each other.  So, do relativistic electrons
attract nearby matter, yet not attract each other?  I've heard of "frame
dragging", where fast objects cause other objects to move.  Maybe some
really energetic electrons will cause nearby matter to move along with
them, rather than just being attracted to them.

>  And, what if we ourselves could get so
> close to c that our mass increase caused us to collapse into  black
> holes.  In fact, how near c does a proton need to get before it will
> form a black hole?  Is its time slowed so much that it would cross the
> universe before the collapse could happen?
> Hey, Bill, I'm really getting into this asking bottomless pit questions!
> :-) :-)

One that I thought up many years ago: if a laser pulse was REALLY bright,
would we feel it pass by us because of its gravity field?  I mean, if we
make a gigantic "light bulb" from a hollow neutronium shell with a small
hole in it, then drop moon-sized chunks of matter and antimatter into its
center, really bright beams of annhilation gammas will come out of the
hole.  If one of these pulses of "bright light" went racing past the
earth, would we feel an enormous "thud" in the ground? 


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 24 12:02:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA11850;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:59:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:59:20 -0700
Message-ID: <005901bd9fa1$cac808a0$cc8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Yucca Mountain Project (http://www.ymp.gov/)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:56:06 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD9F6F.73DEA800"
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: <"Gwm2H3.0.-u2.6oKar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19988
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_01BD9F6F.73DEA800
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.ymp.gov/

------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD9F6F.73DEA800
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Yucca Mountain Project.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Yucca Mountain Project.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.ymp.gov/
Modified=40E7C8A5A19FBD0192

------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BD9F6F.73DEA800--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 12:20:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA18088;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:11:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:11:29 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:15:27 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
References: <3.0.1.32.19980623192947.00be7c30 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"jfXGI.0.VQ4.WzKar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19989
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 09:29 PM 6/23/98 -0700, William Beaty wrote:

>The earlier question was this: if pairs of electrons move fast enough, can
>they stop repelling and instead attract?  If so, then this is a paradox,
>since an observer who moves along with the electrons will see no magnetic
>field and see the electrons fly apart, not together.

   This is the blindness I keep trying to fight.  Under ordinary
cirumstances, and we don't yet know how to create extraordinary
cirumstances, every electron has a proton or some other positively charged
particle nearby to cancel out the charge.  If you view things in the frame
of the electrons, the balancing charges are moving just as fast, and,
surprise, when you figure everything out,  the same fields get generated.

   The distance to the balancing charges is irrelevant--those terms cancel
out.  The relative speeds matter a lot, and makes electric spacecraft
propulsion a lot more difficult than it initially looks.

   Let me try once more with the magnetic analog.  I fire a bar magnet
(from a railgun of course) through a coil of superconducting wire, and
record the pulses as the north and south poles pass through.  I then turn
around and fire the coil around a stationary bar magnet.  Repeat the
experiment many times, and you will find that the relative speeds matter,
but which is moving has no effect.

   Now make the coil twice as large, or ten times as large.  As long as the
magnet is long relative to the coil size, since we don't know how to
produce monopoles, the size of the coil affects nothing.

   Convert the coil to a transformer coil and replace the bar magnet with a
charged slug, or an electron beam.  Now the magnetic pulse in the core
depends only on the amount of charge moving through the core, not its
distance from the core, or the size of the core.  (Relative velocity
matters, but is best thought of in conjunction with a short pulse rather
than a continous beam.)

   Finally, put a neutral particle beam through the core, and of course you
detect nothing.

   Now translate to the real universe.  A charge moving WITH RESPECT TO the
matching charge generates a self compressing force.  This force increases
linearly with the amount of charge, and the relative velocity.  Due to the
charge cancelling effects of conductors, the effective velocity of the
matching charge may depend on the motions of matter in the vicinity.

                                        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 Jun 24 12:23:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA20624;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:16:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:16:34 -0700
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:15:51 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806241915.OAA14372 dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Keith Johnson of MIT & Cold Fusion Movie
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"1gG0r.0.j15.E2Lar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19990
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998

Vortex,

Does anyone recall a movie called "Breaking Symmetry" supposedly being 
produced by Keith Johnson of MIT that Eugene Mallove mentioned some 
time ago? 
Wonder what became of it. Is it still being readied for release or is 
everything on the cutting room floor? Subject came up in a 
conversation. Did "The Saint" have any effect on it's production or 
release?

-ak-


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 12:51:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA31082;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:44:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:44:56 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Jap. Lang. F/E
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"KQFTh1.0.Zb7.tSLar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19991
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


A new stats service gives referring websites on Sci. Hob. hits.  A bunch
of hits are coming from a Japanese Language F/E page.  For anyone with
interest: 

 http://www2.gol.com/users/akihiko/free/index.html
 "force site" http://telestar.or.jp/~yokoyas/index.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  Wed Jun 24 13:17:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15820;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <008c01bd9fab$2991ffe0$cc8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: A Solar-Hydrogen Grid?
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:02:42 -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: <"XAnmV3.0.fs3.vtLar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19992
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

John Steck wrote:
>
>Distribution logistics? The key to it all is to get AWAY >from dependence
on a universal grid system.

>Smaller, localized, modular production facilities is
>the way to go.

To this I say, Bull Feathers, John.

The grid ties you to the energy intensive FOOD SUPPLY that
is basic for your survival, be it power for crop irrigation
or interbasin transfer of water, running farm machinery.

For instance, a 250,000 head feedlot can produce a thousand tons of
manure/day. The energy gotten from combustion or
methane production of this material can be put on the power
(or gas) distribution grid and "Wheeled" to the grain belt
to supply the required agro energy that is feeding these
cattle and supplying you with "Big Macs" as opposed to letting it "rot"
which is increasing the atmospheric CO2-Methane burden without any energy
payback or offset of fossil fuel CO2 (about 4 pounds/kw-hr.

If Suburbia can put thousands of square miles of rooftop Solar collector
power on the grid also, then you will have a sustained food supply.

In Short, we need the grid for system efficiency in this
age. If you are an aging "Hippie" you might see things from a different
viewpoint.   :-)

Regards,   Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 13:28:52 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA14187;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:20:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:20:05 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:20:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"IiADt.0.aT3.qzLar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19993
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

> At 09:29 PM 6/23/98 -0700, William Beaty wrote:
> 
> >The earlier question was this: if pairs of electrons move fast enough, can
> >they stop repelling and instead attract?  If so, then this is a paradox,
> >since an observer who moves along with the electrons will see no magnetic
> >field and see the electrons fly apart, not together.
> 
>    This is the blindness I keep trying to fight.  Under ordinary
> cirumstances, and we don't yet know how to create extraordinary
> cirumstances, every electron has a proton or some other positively charged
> particle nearby to cancel out the charge.  If you view things in the frame
> of the electrons, the balancing charges are moving just as fast, and,
> surprise, when you figure everything out,  the same fields get generated.

Ah, I think I see now.  You mean that the two electrons in question are
responding to the corresponding pattern of positive charges, AND THESE
POSITIVE CHARGES CANNOT BE "REMOVED" BY INCREASING THEIR DISTANCE.

>    The distance to the balancing charges is irrelevant--those terms cancel
> out.

Really?  Then I have no grasp of this at all.  You mean that the electrons
see the same intensity of relatively moving proton-field, independant of
the distance to those protons, and independant of any asymmetrical
arrangement of those protons?  Move those protons several feet away, and
cluster them in a nucleus, and the electrons respond the same as if the
protons were very nearby and arranged in a symmmetrical cylinder?  Too
weird!  If the protons are at a significant distance from the electrons,
then their e-field is very weak.  Yet when in relative motion, the b-field
is still strong?  I cannot visualize this at all. 

>    Let me try once more with the magnetic analog.  I fire a bar magnet
> (from a railgun of course) through a coil of superconducting wire, and
> record the pulses as the north and south poles pass through.  I then turn
> around and fire the coil around a stationary bar magnet.  Repeat the
> experiment many times, and you will find that the relative speeds matter,
> but which is moving has no effect.
> 
>    Now make the coil twice as large, or ten times as large.  As long as the
> magnet is long relative to the coil size, since we don't know how to
> produce monopoles, the size of the coil affects nothing.

Ummm, changing the size of a coil is somewhat like changing the size of a
hollow, massive sphere: there is no attraction inside a hollow massive
sphere regardless of its size and similarly, the size of a coil does not
matter.  However, this does not apply at all to a point-mass.  The g-field
of a point mass does not resemble the g-field inside a hollow massive
sphere. In a similar way, the e-field and b-field of a proton is not at
all like those of a ring of metal. 

If a cluster of moving electrons is directed through a ring of
closely-spaced protons, that is very different than if the moving
electrons should pass by a tiny group of protons clustered many
centimeters away.  The coil-like physics does not hold, and I think the
cluster of electrons then DO see a much smaller E-field and B-field
created by the protons.  It's not distance-independant like it was with
the coil, and so the protons can be "removed" after all.  No?  If I'm
wrong, then can you illustrate the problem by using a couple of protons,
and not a coil? 

>    Now translate to the real universe.  A charge moving WITH RESPECT TO the
> matching charge generates a self compressing force.  This force increases
> linearly with the amount of charge, and the relative velocity.  Due to the
> charge cancelling effects of conductors, the effective velocity of the
> matching charge may depend on the motions of matter in the vicinity.

I'm still confused.  If a cluster of electrons moves down the axis of a
long, positively-charged metal tube, the electrons see no e-field from the
protons (the metal tube acts as a faraday cage, and the e-field from it's
positive charge is outside of the tube.)  Since the electrons see no
e-field from the protons, won't they also see no b-field from the
relatively moving protons?  Doesn't the faraday-cage effect take the
protons entirely out of the picture, so the electron cluster acts like it
is all alone?


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 24 13:46:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA21392;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:39:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:39:43 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980624163752.007c3d00 post.queensu.ca>
X-Sender: simonb post.queensu.ca (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:37:52 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Bart Simon 
Subject: review of CF literature?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"OLru_3.0.5E5.EGMar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19994
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi all,

Another request for help...  I am nearing the deadline for handing in my
doctoral thesis (finally!!).  Lately I have been working on re-summarizing
the varieties of experimental systems and effects associated with CF
post-1990, and it occurred to me that I might put a review paper in my
appendix.

So my question is - short of a mega-review like Storms (1995) - does
anybody know of a short CF literature review (preferably with lots of
tables and refs) that does the task of summing up all there is to say (or
at least something close ;-)?   Was there anything like this presented in
Vancouver?  Or perhaps I can appeal to the meta-researchers amongst you -
Mitch, Jed, Peter G., Gene - do you have anything written up I could use
(all with due credit of course)?  Does anybody know if Ed Storms has
something new in this vein, or perhaps Hal Fox?

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  Wed Jun 24 13:51:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA23289;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:46:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:46:07 -0700
Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5CFD9CAF xch-cpc-02>
From: "Scudder, Henry J" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: Notes on photovoltaics
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:45:29 -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: <"BpuHt.0.nh5.EMMar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19995
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed
	A URL of interest is http://www.mrsolar.com 

After Clinton's speech last year advocating a solar panel program for
homeowners, I looked a little and couldn't find any actual program.
Living in LA, with a 75' by 64' roof area, I would love to be on solar
power, but the last cost I got was about $300K, which is a bit much to
cover a $50000 home on a rented lot. I would need a government discount
or something to actually do it. I would love to power my electric car
this way.

Hank
> ----------
> From: 	Jed Rothwell[SMTP:72240.1256 compuserve.com]
> Reply To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Sent: 	Wednesday, June 24, 1998 8:59 AM
> To: 	Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
> Subject: 	Notes on photovoltaics
> 
> To: Vortex
> 
> There has been some interesting discussion here of photovoltaics and
> other
> conventional, alternative energy sources. I happen to be writing an
> article
> about these topics for the next issue of Infinite Energy magazine. I
> am
> reviewing a book about alternative energy sources: C. Flavin, N.
> Lenssen,
> "Power Surge," (Norton, 1994). Let me share some of my notes.
> 
> 
> The recent history of photovoltaic cells is puzzling and disturbing.
> This
> alternative energy source that should have worked by now. Mass
> production
> should have lowered prices to the point where photovoltaic electricity
> is
> competitive with conventional fossil fuel electricity. Sales should
> have taken
> off. Years ago, I expected the price would fall and the use would
> increase
> exponentially, because photovoltaic cells seemed to have the perfect
> combination of attributes:
> 
> An established, lucrative niche market as power supplies for
> calculators, a 4
> MW per year market.
> 
> A growing presence in more mainstream energy applications, like
> roadside
> emergency telephones, remote telephone repeaters and so on. On a
> recent trip I
> noticed many roadside solar panels in Virginia and the Carolinas. I am
> not
> sure what they are used for. 50,000 vacation homes in Norway have
> photovoltaic
> electricity, and the number is increasing by around 8,000 per year.
> (Flavin
> and Lenssen, p. 161)
> 
> Intense R&D by many different companies, in fierce competition.
> 
> Many different potential manufacturing techniques, including radically
> new
> ones like the amorphous photovoltaic cells invented by Ovshinsky, with
> 10.2%
> efficiency (F&L, p. 165).
> 
> Rapid decrease in price. From 1975 to 1987 the cost per watt declined
> from $70
> to $5. Unfortunately it has not declined much since then. It fell to
> around
> $4.20 in 1994. (Does anyone know what the price is today?)
> 
> Rapid increase in sales. From 1970 to 1979 annual shipments increased
> slowly
> from near zero to ~2 MW, then increased rapidly to 60 MW in 1993.
> (F&L, p.
> 157)
> 
> Broad applicability; useful at any scale.
> 
> The output is thermodynamically high grade energy, which can be used
> for any
> application. Most solar energy devices produce low grade heat suitable
> for
> space or water heating.
> 
> There are millions of roofs in the world in places like Los Vegas and
> Los
> Angeles which are exposed to bright sunlight nearly year round. In
> these
> locations, extra power for air conditioners is needed when the sun
> shines
> brightest, so solar-generated electricity is ideal. Photovoltaic
> panels can be
> mounted on roofs easily because unlike solar water heaters they are
> not heavy
> and they do not require plumbing, pumps or large holes in the roof or
> walls.
> The house I lived in in Japan was damaged when a solar water heater
> tore off
> during a hurricane.
> 
> Despite these advantages, photovoltaics have not yet succeeded in the
> broader
> energy markets. Other alternative energy sources, like wind power,
> have fallen
> in price faster, and increased in reliability to the point where in
> some
> locations, wind is cheaper than fossil fuel and its use is increasing
> exponentially. As of 1990, the bulk power electricity cost of various
> alternatives were approximately:
> 
> Coal Base Load Power     4.5 cents per kilowatt-hour
> Wind                     5 cents per KWH
> Biomass                  5 cents per KWH
> Solar-thermal            11.5 cents pers KWH
> Photovoltaic projected   19 cents per KWH
> 
> That's from a graph in C. Weinberg, R. Williams, "Energy from the
> Sun,"
> Scientific American, Sept. 1990, p. 154
> 
> That is a projected cost; there are no actual bulk, base line figures
> for
> photovoltaics because nobody would so stupid as to build a power plant
> that
> costs four times more than the competition. You can see that
> photovoltaics
> have a long way to go . . .  Weinberg and Williams projected
> photovoltaic
> costs of about 7 cents per KWH today (1998) and they think
> photovoltaics will
> be cheaper than coal around 2005. That is with a straight line,
> unchanged cost
> of coal base-load power. I think that is unrealistic. I expect coal,
> oil and
> natural gas will be cheaper in 2005 than they were in 1990. If people
> wake up
> and realize that cold fusion is real by that time, coal costs will
> drop
> precipitously. Nothing spurs old technology like dire competition. The
> golden
> age of sailing ships came *after* practical transatlantic steam ship
> technology began.
> 
> I should look on the web and try to find out what the cost of
> photovoltaics is
> today. It will be interesting to find out how close W&W's projection
> was.
> 
> EPRI spent a great deal of money on wind power research, and made good
> progress. I think they deserve the credit for the increased
> reliability and
> improved economics. I think that before photovoltaics take off, they
> will need
> support from EPRI or some other big name, heavily funded corporate
> research
> and development organization. That goes for cold fusion too, needless
> to say.
> I do not think we will ever hundreds of thousands of home-made cold
> fusion
> reactors. I hope we never do! It would be dangerous. Millions of
> mom-and-pop
> brand nuclear reactors would be a nightmare. A few hundred thousand
> homemade
> computers or drag-racing automobiles can hurt no one. A few thousand
> home-built airplanes will kill only pilot-owners. But millions of
> unregulated,
> untested nuclear reactors not certified by Underwriter's Laboratories
> might
> cause massive damage to health. It might be as bad as tobacco, and
> gasoline
> powered automobiles. There is no reason to take this kind of risk.
> 
> Some of the reasons photovoltaics and other renewable energy sources
> have not
> taken off are political. Taxes and regulations are slanted against
> renewables.
> Ironically, oil and gas producers are given tax breaks for
> "depletion," that
> is, because they permanently use up resources, which gives them an
> unfair
> advantage over energy providers who do not use up resources, like
> hydroelectric dam owners, and wind power consortiums. Wind was given
> tax
> breaks in the early '80s. The early wind power "farms" were widely
> criticized,
> especially by right-wing free market advocates. I think in retrospect
> these
> tax breaks were justified, because they led EPRI and others to make
> serious
> investments in the technology, which improved it to the point where it
> now
> competes on a level playing field. It competes on a playing field
> tilted
> unfairly because of depletion allowances. I believe in free markets,
> but I am
> a student of history and I know that the U.K. and U.S. governments
> have been
> heavily involved in financing, assisting and promoting technology
> since 1650.
> Government intervention and direct subsidies has contributed
> enormously to
> transportation, agriculture, medicine, navigation, energy, computing
> and
> every other major field.
> 
> All in all, I agree with Mike Carrell, who wrote: "Let's hope that the
> LENR
> solutions work out. They match human needs better." LENR (CF) has
> three
> advantages:
> 
> 1. Like other nuclear processes, it is concentrated. It is energy
> dense, so it
> does not take up much room. "Nuclear energy can provide a trillion
> times more
> energy than mass forces such as wind and water are a million times
> more energy
> than the chemical reactions of the industrial revolution (chiefly
> combustion
> and electrochemistry) . . ." W. Hafele, "Energy from Nuclear Power,"
> Scientific American, Sept. 1990, p. 137.
> 
> 2. It is cheap. Ultimately I expect it will become many orders of
> magnitude
> cheaper than other source of energy, for reasons I spelled out in
> previous
> I.E. articles.
> 
> 3. If it can be made safe, it can be used for decentralized power
> generation.
> This will eliminate the distribution network, which will save
> one-third the
> cost of electricity. Also, as Arthur Clarke's brother Fred points out,
> the
> distribution network is a blight on the landscape.
> 
> If we had invented CF in 1890, today we would never consent to allow
> these
> ugly, fragile and expensive electric wires to be strung everywhere.
> Mike talks
> about the ugliness of "square miles of solar collectors." We have
> become blind
> to the ugly wires, poles and towers that already surround us. In
> Atlanta, many
> neighborhoods are up in arms with the telephone companies that want to
> build
> more ugly cellular telephone towers. They hurt property values. We put
> up with
> ugly electric and telephone poles because we have no choice. Putting
> cables
> underground in old neighborhoods would be prohibitively expensive.
> 
> - Jed
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 14:35:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA05738;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:32:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:32:07 -0700
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:28:32 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Notes on photovoltaics
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806241731_MC2-513A-7B56 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"nU59j.0.WP1.L1Nar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19996
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Frank Stenger writes:

     Jed, I wonder if anyone has good "service life" data available on
     photovoltaics?

I think conversion efficiency falls rapidly at first, and then levels out for
10 or 20 years. It falls because materials degrade and because the collector
surface gets dirty. Dirty surfaces were the most expensive maintenance
headaches at the Luz solar-power installations, as I recall. The American
Solar Energy Society says:

     Siemens Solar produces single crystalline PV modules in the 14-15%
     efficiency range.

     United Solar holds the record for thin-film amorphous-silicon module
     efficiency at 11.8%. After some early degradation, large panels (4 to 8
     square feet) stabilize at 9% efficiency.


     However, what other energy converter can boast such benign construction?

Actually, it isn't so benign. Compared to fossil fuel or nuclear, a
photovoltaic (PV) based energy economy would consume fantastic amounts of
materials for the construction of the cells, including arsenic, gallium, and
cadmium, according to the DoE. Recycling or dumping worn out materials would a
monumental, continent-wide problem. Any variation of solar energy
(solar-electric, PV, with hydrogen gas or electric distribution) would require
a larger distribution network than we now have, because intense sunlight
occurs in areas distant from population centers, and there are, at present, no
pipeline or wires connecting remote desert areas to the national power grid.
The mass of materials needed to build the machines and the distribution
infrastructure would be thousands of times greater than conventional gas
turbine or nuclear fission plants. Any kind of solar economy would take up
prodigious amount of land. Even if we squeeze some of the infrastructure onto
roofs and over parking lots, I think that a large chunk of fragile desert
wilderness would also have to be sacrificed to roads, erosion, abandoned
equipment and other environmental blights. Robert Bradley, a somewhat
right-wing analyst at the Cato institute, says that a Black and Veach
engineering analysis that central station solar installations require 5 to 16
acres per MW, compared to gas fired plants which occupy 0.04 acres per MW.

I predict that cold fusion will ultimately occupy 0.00000 acres per MW. That
is, no space at all. The battery and motor in your tape recorder and your
washing machine will come out, and some sort of miniature CF gadget will go
in, and the machines will take up as much space as they always did -- or maybe
a little less without those bulky batteries. No central distribution, no local
power distribution, no transformers, no grid, no wires in your house, no
nothing except energy generated where and when it is needed -- that is the
ideal.

Small PV installations in urban areas already served by the distribution
network, on suburban roofs, would be economic insanity at today's prices. Even
if the PVs themselves cost nothing this would never pay, because the energy
density is so low and the invertors and other peripheral equipment is so
expensive and unwieldy. You cannot generate enough energy on your roof at home
to make it worthwhile. The parking lot and roof of an isolated shopping mall
in Nevada might be a different story, but in the east coast U.S. solar energy
is a losing proposition, and I think it always will be. There is an excellent
short essay about this at:

http://www.windsun.com/Small_Systems/solar_econ.htm

This is written by a company that sells PV and wind power equipment. They want
to discourage urban customers. They consider a typical installation and
demonstrate that: "By spending $37,500 on solar panels, you have managed to
increase your total payment per month from $200 to $302." Actually, they say
the final cost would probably be more like $313 per month. I think there is no
way low energy density solar power will be of use in urban industrial
societies. Tying it to the grid is like adding bicycle power to augment a Mack
truck engine. Solar is marvelous for some applications. As the people at
WindSun conclude:

     Off grid (remote power) has a totally different set of economics because
     you then have to consider that power lines can cost up to $75,000 a mile
     to run, and using a diesel or gas powered generator can get pretty
     expensive in the long term.

WindSun talks about the need to make unglamourous changes to your lifestyle if
you insist on "green" power. They say you will have to start by tossing out
the air conditioner. The U.S. lifestyle makes solar more difficult to
implement that other countries. For example, in Japan many houses have
roof-top solar water heaters. They are dirt cheap and completely reliable.
They require no special plumbing, no pumps, circulators, or storage tanks. It
works out perfectly there, but it would not work in the U.S. Japan has a hot,
sunny climate Japanese people use a ton of hot water once a day, at 6:00 or
7:00 in the evening. Housewives dump the water out of the collectors into the
bathtub, which is larger and more comfortable and inviting than an American
tub. The water in the collectors reaches 60 deg C on a hot day. It is mixed
with cold water in the tub, to make it 38 to 45 deg C. The tub is covered with
an insulating pad to keep the water hot. After supper, people shower outside
the tub and soak (simmer) inside it. They relax . . . some drink a cup of
sake. In the U.S. people dump the water after bath and they bathe at odd hours
-- often in the morning -- in a cold, uninviting, antiseptic ritual. No wonder
our kids don't like baths.


     However, I wonder if the economic studies do justice to well designed PV
     systems on this service life issue?

I am sure that Siemens and other leading vendors of remote PV power supplies
have looked into this issue. Their customers worry about reliability.
Customers include the Army, which wants remote powered navigation aids, and
the telephone companies, which send information worth a million dollars per
minute through repeaters. Here are some other major applications, listed by
The Texas Photovoltaic Coalition. You can see that reliability is critical:

* Transmission tower beacons
* Sectionalizing switches
* Plant warning sirens
* Electric gate openers
* Cathodic protection for tanks and pipelines
* Remote metering systems
* Security lighting
* Street lighting

After a little research on the web I have learned that Weinberg & Williams in
Sci. Am. were wildly over-optimistic about PV bulk base load electricity
costs. They predicted PV costs of 12 cents per KWH in 1995. The American Solar
Energy Society quote NREL, a DoE lab:

     An NREL study, "The True Cost of Renewables" indicates that the cost of
     electricity generated by utility-scale photovoltaic systems was
     approximately $0.218 per kilowatt-hour in 1995. The report also
     forecasts that costs will drop to $0.164 in the year 2000, to $0.131 in
     2005, and to $0.087 in 2010. 

W&W predicted the $0.218 cost in 1987, three years before they published the
article. In fairness, they were projecting PV electric base load costs, not
measuring them, as they made clear in the graph. It is gratifying to learn
that CF advocates and Tokamak Tortoises are not the only ones who make
embarrassing predictions. The American Solar Energy Society describes a few of
the prosaic reasons why PV costs remain high:

     The supply and price of silicon . . . Often silicon is not pure enough
     or unnecessarily pure and expensive -- as it must be for semiconductors.
     Manufacturers are being forced to be more creative with the type of
     material and sizes they can use. Several PV manufacturers are working
     towards a unified silicon purchase agreement that would enable a company
     to supply silicon for PV's exclusively.

     Manufacturing techniques are another cost cutting avenue. Wire saws that
     cut silicon crystal columns into individual wafers can reduce kerf
     losses (sawdust from wafer slicing) over circular saw methods . . .

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 14:37:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA06955;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:34:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:34:03 -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: <359170B5.47224A0 css.mot.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:33:42 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A Solar-Hydrogen Grid?
References: <008c01bd9fab$2991ffe0$cc8f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"398Za2.0.Zi1.A3Nar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19997
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:

> For instance, a 250,000 head feedlot can produce a thousand tons of
> manure/day. The energy gotten from combustion or
> methane production of this material can be put on the power
> (or gas) distribution grid and "Wheeled" to the grain belt
> to supply the required agro energy that is feeding these
> cattle and supplying you with "Big Macs" as opposed to letting it "rot"
> which is increasing the atmospheric CO2-Methane burden without any energy
> payback or offset of fossil fuel CO2 (about 4 pounds/kw-hr.

If you intend to use the grid as a transportation or storage system, I agree
with your position.  Our current grid systems are useful for the above example,
BUT 100% relliance on them is a mistake.  Natural gas, there is not much
choice, power, I think there is.  IMO, too many lines and resistance bleed off
for basic utility at any great distance from the big ugly plant.  Now,
modularize your production close to where you actually need it and connect it
to a grid for redundancy and sloshing around surpluses/shortages and you
eliminate the transportation losses and the extra capacity needed to compensate
for them.

> In Short, we need the grid for system efficiency in this
> age. 

Don't see your point.  Bigger isn't better.  Distance is the enemy.

> If you are an aging "Hippie" you might see things from a different
> viewpoint.   :-)

Not an aging hippie trying to give it to 'the man', just forward thinking and
pragmatic.  In an era of malcontents committing terrorist attacks on vulnerable
backbones and critical systems to advance their causes, redundancy is a
paramount defense strategy.  Take the internet for example.  The whole reason
it exists is because the US military wanted a decentralized information system
that was the sum of it's parts, not the other way around.  It's a clever system
that survives as long as there are at least two connected computers left to
trade packets.  Build a power grid like that, and regional outages and big ugly
production facilities would be a thing of the past.  The key is small clean
sources like fuel cells, solar, and CF.  We don't have the technology to
economically do it just yet, but it's coming.  The future belongs to modular
systems.

Just my perspective until I am persuaded to see another!  8^)


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 15:11:49 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22927;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:08:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:08:14 -0700
Message-ID: <359179B6.3FE9 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:12:06 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki 
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320  (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Free Energy  websites (in Japanese) was: Jap.Lang. F/E
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jgjnG2.0.1c5.DZNar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19998
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998

William Beaty wrote: 

>  http://www2.gol.com/users/akihiko/free/index.html

Something close to what Bill furnishes on his web-site. But less so.
Provides links to 'free energy' and over-unity discussion and links.

>  "force site" http://telestar.or.jp/~yokoyas/index.html

More toward UFO related subject matter and links. Moved into the
Internet and website after being active in conferences held on the
subjects.

For me, text is saved as plain text (ascii), converted to Japanese using
a simple language converter (no translation). Then read. 
The sites feels like the websites are designed and organized by the
younger generation. The older "dinosaurs" are left out except by
invitation. The youths are getting their minds expanded in the
cyberspace adventure. I almost said their feet wet. 

As time goes, you'll be seeing a whole lot more of this in ALL languages
and countries. Internationally, English is king. Later we may all have
to have a simultaneous universal translator handy (updated constantly)
in the computer to really communicate in the future. And to think we
already have cacaphony! True people's internet of "thoughts" and
opinions. Is there to be a standard eventually like we have now,
defacto?

-ak-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 15:27:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA31138;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:24:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:24:36 -0700
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:23:56 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806242223.RAA06324 dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"Typ3m2.0.Qc7.YoNar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/19999
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998

Vortex,

How spectrum specific are the photovoltaics? Maybe a very-wide spectrum 
photovoltaic cell can boost efficiency.
 
For that matter, a true black chloraphyll can be (maybe) bioengineered 
for plants that grow like crazy with increased efficiency utilizing all 
of the solar energy. :) Fantastic biomass growth!

-ak- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 15:59:46 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10100;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:55:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:55:13 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980624185245.007cbea0 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 18:52:45 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
In-Reply-To: <199806241731_MC2-513A-7B56 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"F4-BL1.0.jT2.GFOar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20000
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



At 05:28 PM 6/24/98 -0400, Jed wrote:
>To: Vortex
>
>Frank Stenger writes:
>
>     Jed, I wonder if anyone has good "service life" data available on
>     photovoltaics?
>
>I think conversion efficiency falls rapidly at first, and then levels out for
>10 or 20 years. It falls because materials degrade and because the collector
>surface gets dirty. Dirty surfaces were the most expensive maintenance
>headaches at the Luz solar-power installations, as I recall. 

   Please cite a reference for this assertion.

    Mitchell Swartz

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 16:47:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA24391;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:42:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:42:16 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:40:39 +1000 (EST)
From: Martin Sevior 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
In-Reply-To: <199806241731_MC2-513A-7B56 compuserve.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"d-Y2K.0.ty5.OxOar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20001
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> 
>      Siemens Solar produces single crystalline PV modules in the 14-15%
>      efficiency range.
> 

BP-solar using licensed technology from the University of New South Wales
produced single crystal Silicon PV's in excess of 20%.

The same technology gives the current world record at 24%.

>      United Solar holds the record for thin-film amorphous-silicon module
>      efficiency at 11.8%. After some early degradation, large panels (4 to 8
>      square feet) stabilize at 9% efficiency.
> 

U NSW has demonstrated 19% efficiency for thin (single crystal) cells. 
They have also demonstrated non-imaging concentrator systems (they don't 
need to track the sun) that provide an effective factor-of-4 increase of 
silicon to surface area.

> 
>      However, what other energy converter can boast such benign construction?
> 
> Actually, it isn't so benign. Compared to fossil fuel or nuclear, a
> photovoltaic (PV) based energy economy would consume fantastic amounts of
> materials for the construction of the cells, including arsenic, gallium, and
> cadmium, according to the DoE.

This is classic FUD (fear uncertainty and doubt). Gallium-Arsenide and 
Cadmium semiconductors have inherent Physics advantages over silicon for 
efficiencies. However the vast majority of research in PV's is for Silicon.

This is the second most abundant element on Earth. We will never run out 
of the basic feedstock.

> Recycling or dumping worn out materials would a
> monumental, continent-wide problem.

I see it as easier than turning over housing stock, which has a similar 
life cycle in the US. The amount of materials is much less than your 
average house.

Never-the-less I think PV's will be a supplement to convential power 
sources for some time to come. Already here in oz, the utilities 
encourage consumers to put PV's on their roofs and sell the electricity 
back to the grid via inverters. This is a great idea. They get 
individuals to finance the electricity production and make money selling 
the electricity to other consumers. It puts the production right where it 
is needed and it gives individuals the ability to "make a difference" by 
buying expensive energy for "green" reasons. O course once the price of PV's
drop sufficiently putting a high quality PV array on your home will 
increase it's resale value. The new owners would get cheap electricity.

Cheers

Martin

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 17:34:49 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA20881;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:32:58 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:32:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:20:34 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <35919592.158556844 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980623192947.00be7c30 spectre.mitre.org> <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100@spectre.mitre.org>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
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: <"R8Qa71.0.565.ugPar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20002
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:15:27 -0400, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
[snip]
>   Now translate to the real universe.  A charge moving WITH RESPECT TO the
>matching charge generates a self compressing force.  This force increases
>linearly with the amount of charge, and the relative velocity.  

Yes, but we were originally looking at the compressive force *between
two electrons* making up part of the beam. Here above you appear to
contend that this compressive force is only dependant on the external
charge and relative velocity, and not on the distance between the two
electrons in question. Is that you intention?
If so, how do you correlate this to the fact that in the lab frame,
the compressive force between the electrons is calculated as a
magnetic field based on the electron current, and the distance between
the two currents? (Or isn't it, and am I completely "up the spout" in
this regard?)
>Due to the
>charge cancelling effects of conductors, the effective velocity of the
>matching charge may depend on the motions of matter in the vicinity.
[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 21:19:00 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA02983;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:11:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:11:55 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: <1207c359.3591cb5a aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:00:25 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: <"EJfs33.0.Qk.AuSar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20003
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 All,
 Trying various fill pressures, electrode gap and power input over the 
past couple of days have yielded some interesting results.
 Here is all the raw data:
 Electrode gap:  1 inch   Tc=Degrees C +/- 0.1 C,  Tv=Volts DC across
the reactor tube, Ta=amps DC to the tube, Tw=Tv x Ta, c/w=Tv / Tw.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Run 1
Fill: 1.0 in Hg.
Tc 477.0 C
Tv 850 vdc
Ta .06
Tw 51.0
c/w 9.35
-----------------------------------
Run 2
Fill: 1.0 in Hg
Tc 428.9
Tv 930.0----------Unstable glow,flickering
Ta .04552
Tw 42.33
c/w 10.13
-------------------------------------
Run 3--------New tube/ K fill electrode gap same; 1 inch
Fill:   1.0 in Hg
Tc 299.0
Tv 270.0
Ta .05816
Tw 15.70
c/w 19.04
--------------------------------------
Run 4
Fill:  1.0 in Hg
Tc 305.7
Tv 270.0
Ta .06272
Tw 16.93
c/w 18.05
----------------------------------------
Run 5
Fill: 1.0 in Hg
Tc 311.6
Tv 260
Ta .0652
Tw 16.95
c/w 18.38
-------------------------------------------
Run 6
Fill: 1.0 in Hg
Tc 318.0
Tv 260
Ta .06808
Tw 17.70
c/w 17.96
------------------------------------------
Run 7
Fill: 1.0 in Hg
Tc 323.5
Tv 260
Ta .07104
Tw 18.47
c/w 17.51
-------------------------------------------
Run 8
Fill: 1.0 in Hg
Tc 321.0
Tv 270
Ta .0724
Tw 19.54
c/w 16.42
-----------------------------------------------
Now try a fill of 2.0 in Hg
-----------------------------------------------
Run 9
Fill: 2.0 in Hg
Tc 328.1
Tv 270
Ta .07232
Tw 19.52
c/w 16.80
------------------------------------------------
Run 10
Fill 2.0 in Hg
Tc 327.1
Tv 300
Ta .06912
Tw 20.73
c/w 15.77
------------------------------------------------
Run 11
Fill: 2.0 in Hg
Tc 324.0
Tv 301
Ta .06584
Tw 19.81
c/w 16.35
-------------------------------------------------
Run 12
Fill: 2.0 in Hg
Tc 459.3
Tv 560
Ta .04704
Tw 26.3424
c/w 17.43
 Note: the glow (arc) would not sustain below a current of .04 amp.
 So I think, lets try a smaller electrode gap. One half inch. Take tube
apart, clean it good, load up with K, seal, pump vacuum....good, no
leaks. 
 Now comes the strange stuff. I observed that the glow would sustain
at atmospheric pressure, so hmm, lets see what kind of c per watt 
that gives.....
 Electrode gap is 1/2 inch
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Run 13
Fill: 1 atm H2
Tc 539.9
Tv 200
Ta .12128
Tw 24.25
c\w 22.05  ----> best deg c per watt seen.
-----------------increased power  in----------------
Run 14
Fill 1 atm
Tc 710.8
Tv 470      
Ta .08976        
Tw 42.18
c/w 16.84
------------------reducing power in-----------------
Run 15
Fill 1 atm
Tc 689.0
Tv 510 <-------wonder why voltage increase when I reduce power in?
Ta .07664
Tw 39.08
c/w 17.62
--------------------reducing power in--------------------
Run 16
Fill 1 atm
Tc 652.0
Tv 610
Ta .05664
Tw 34.55
c/w 18.86
-------------------reducing power in-------------------------
Run 17
Fill 1 atm
Tc 537.0
Tv 730
Ta .0352
Tw 25.69
c/w 20.89
---------------------------END-------------------------------
  I went to a smaller electrode gap because I wanted to try running at
as low a power input as I could, and the arc would not sustain at the
one inch gap. It seemed that the lower power input
produces a higher temp C per watt. 
 Unexpected was the fact that the glow could be sustained at
atmospheric pressure. 
 This now opens up another door; What about running _above_ 1 atm?
  With a smaller electrode gap yet?  What? 1/4 inch?  
 It seems every test with this device opens up more questions.
 
Striving for answers,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas Nevada.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 21:49:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA21817;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:42:56 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:42:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3591C60A.314B earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 22:37:47 -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
Subject: Murray: Simon: review of CF literature? 6.24.98
References: <3.0.3.32.19980624163752.007c3d00 post.queensu.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"lHamL2.0.lK5.CLTar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20004
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998

Hi Bart Simon,  Ask Dieter Britz, who has maintained a very large CF
bibliogaphy on the Net.

http://kemi.aau.dk/~db/fusion/

Rich Murray

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Jun 24 21:50:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA14633;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:46:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:46:31 -0700
Message-ID: <3591C89F.4E53 earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 22:48:47 -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
Subject: Murray: Britz: Mengoli boiling D2O/Pd CF 6.24.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"i9f5v2.0.Za3.cOTar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20005
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998  From Dieter Britz's bibliography:

http://kemi.aau.dk/~db/fusion/Recent_Additions

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  Wed Jun 24 22:27:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA20961;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 22:23:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 22:23:34 -0700
Message-ID: <3591D14E.6899 earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:25:50 -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: Vortex-L eskimo.com
Subject: Murray: Rothwell: creepy tortoises 6.24.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"FGmeb3.0.Q75.MxTar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20006
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998

Hello all,  Jed Rothwell has briskly satirized the Order of the
Tortoise:

Charter: The primary function is to unite conformist scientists who wish
to deny these phenomena are real, who would like to think that the proof
of current claims is sorely lacking, and who will never, under any
circumstances, examine, discuss or acknowledge the rigorous, high sigma
scientific investigations which has been conducted over the last nine
years by world-class experts including Pons & Fleischmann, McKubre,
Bockris, Conway, Yeager, Miles, Mizuno, Storms, Srinivasan, Oriani and
Claytor, to name a few . . .[end of satire]

http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry/tortoise/members.html

Rothwell needs to sharpen his rapier, as he is slashing rather widely.
Merriman, Burchard, and Little have run CF experiments.  Scott Chubb and
Puthoff are articulate and front-line, if not borderline, theorists in
cold fusion and new energy.  Sparber and Heffner are the rum and soda,
so to speak, of Vortex-L discussions. Horst has sympathetically attended
CF conferences.  As for Murray, the truth is he is, has always been,
will inevitably be, and can be no other than an absolute nonentity.

It is time to finish him off for once and for all: let's publish in
Infinite Energy his ridiculously simple Little Lily Theory of the
Ohmori-Mizuno-Enyo volcanic foam microcraters on Au after electrolysis
in H2O, along with a stinging, detailed rebuttal, if not by the
world-class Mizuno, at least by Mike Carrell.

As one,
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 Jun 24 23:16:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01164;
	Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:12:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:12:39 -0700
Message-ID: <3591DCBF.42F earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:14:40 -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: details Ohmori little lily volcanos on Au 6.24.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ztgia.0.6I.MfUar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20007
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 24, 1998 Little Lily Theory [this version a little improved]

Hello all,  The report in May, 1998 Fusion Technology by Ohmori, Mizuno,
and Enyo describes 7 to 30 day runs at 1 to 3 A on 2.5 to 5 cm2 Au
electrodes in 0.5 M Na2CO3 and Na2SO4 H2O electrolyte, from a Pt anode.
producing after a few days up to ~1 mg mostly Au precipitates, and
leaving myriad little lily volcano-like or ear-like foam structures on
scraped (rough) sites on the Au, as large as 20 microns wide and 30
deep, with detected Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and other elements, with
claimed isotopic ratio anomalies.  In another post I have discussed the
sensible interpretation that Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and other elements,
are impurities in the system, electrochemically concentrated at the
cathode at rough microspots, where the current density is much higher.

I am disputing their claim that the precipitates and spots are evidence
of low energy nuclear transmutations, and suggesting a chemical reaction
theory, namely that the most abundant and obvious and reactive chemicals
present, naturally enough, H2 and O2, are recombined at the cathode.

I don't know how much the Au will load with H2.  However, Pt, Pd, Ni,
Os, and Ti will naturally be electrodeposited as concentrations at any
tiny rough spots, and then will both load with H and catalyze the swift
reaction of that H with any tiny positively charged O2 bubbles that are
also attracted and conveyed by the turbulent bubbling from the anode 1
cm away to attach to the rough spot.  The bubble and the spot will heat
up quickly, so quickly that there is little time for heat loss by
radiation, conduction, or convection at the Au-H2O interface.  As the Au
heats and softens, the contained H will build up pressure and expand it
like popcorn, creating a popped blister of frozen foam, expelling some
of the metal, and leaving the impressively ugly little lily vocanos. 
The process would tend to reoccur at the thus even rougher spot,
building up a cluster of lilies of various sizes, as is shown in
Ohmori's dramatic images.

I will calculate the details for a 0.1 cm3 amount of O2.

Au melts at 1063 degrees C, 1336 degrees K. 
The molar specific heat Cm = 26.9 J/mol degC.

For Au, 197 g/mol   5.08X10E-3 mol/g   19.32 g/cm3   9.81X10E-2 mol/cm3

10.2 cm3/mol      To heat from 27 to 1063 deg C, a delta of 1036 deg C,

takes heat (1036 deg C)(26.9 J/mol) = 2.79X10E4 J/mol, and to melt takes

1.27X10E4 J/mol, known as the molar heat of fusion.  These conveniently 

add up to 4.06X10E4 J/mol, or 40.6 KJ/mol to heat and melt the Au.  That 

certainly sounds like a lot!

Now, we get the moles of O2 in the 0.1 cm3 O2:

n = PV/RT = (1 atm X 10-4 L)/(8.2X10E-2 atm L/degK mol)X(300 deg K) =

4.065X10E-6  mol O2.  That's not very much.

We know that one mole O2 reacts with 2 moles H2, and may as well assume
with 50% loading that the H2 is held within 4 moles of Au.

The reaction is 2 H2 (g) + O2 (g) ->  2H2O (g), and the enthalpy is

2 X 241.8 KJ/mol = 483.6 KJ/mol, for each mole of O2.

So the enthalpy released is

Ec = (4.065X10E-6 mol)X(483.6 KJ/mol) = 1.97X10E-3 KJ = 1.97 J.

Now, 2 J is the energy from 1 A at 1 V for 2 sec.  Note: this is the 

range that heats perhaps a milligram of W to incandescence in a

flashlight.

The moles of Au heated and melted by this heat are

Nm = (1.97X10E-3 KJ)/(40.6 KJ/mol) = 4.85X10E-5 mol

and the volume of Au melted is

Vm = (4.85X10E-5 mol)X(10.2 cm3/mol) = 4.95X10E-4 cm3, which, assuming
 
for convenience a cube, has a width .791 mm, and 

mass Mm = (4.85X10E-5 mol)X(197 g/mol) = 9.56 mg, or ten times the

maximum precipitates found by Ohmori after 30 days of electrolysis at up

to 3 A and a few volts, an input energy for 2.592X10E6 sec, if at 5 V

and 3 A, of 38,880,000 J.  So the 2 J to create 10 mg of melted Au is a

most minute fraction of the available input energy.

Now, the results are the same if we have one 0.1 cm3 O2 bubble, or a 
million bubbles of size 10E-7 cm3, spread out randomly over the 30 day 
run, about 1 event every 2-3 seconds,  creating the same total of 10 mg
melted Au.  These million bubbles would as little cubes have widths
.004641 cm = 46.4 micron, about the right size for our little lilies. 
Each of these events would then have an average energy of 2X10E-6 J.

It should be possible to detect IR, visible, and UV radiation, and
acoustic signals, about 1 event per 2 to 3 seconds.  Another test would
be to use an anode which does not contribute Pt, Pd, Ni, Os, and Ti, and
in contrast, to use an anode enriched in these metals.  Also, a barrier
could be used to prevent O2 bubbles from reaching the cathode from the
anode, and in contrast, positioning the anode to maximize O2 bubble
transfer.

If the word, "POOF!" is microplated onto the Au as a layer of Pt 10 to
100 microns thick, then the resulting lily volcanos should spell,
"POOF!" 

Rich Murray
Room For All
1943 Otowi Drive
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505-986-9103
rmforall earthlink.net

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 01:06:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA17735;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:03:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:03:11 -0700
Message-Id: <35920280.4593DC78 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:55:44 +0300
From: Hamdi Ucar 
Organization: Orchestra
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: vortex 
Subject: What can we do on gravity with antihydrogens? (eprint:gr-qc/9806092)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"a2hBc2.0.yK4._GWar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20008
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9806092

General Relativity and Quantum
Cosmology, abstract
gr-qc/9806092

From: Yasunori Fujii 
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 05:01:48 GMT   (7kb)

What can we do on gravity with antihydrogens?

Authors: Yasunori Fujii
Comments: LaTex, 5 pages, no figures
Report-no: NFU-98-12

 We discuss the implications of the proposed gravitational redshift experiment
 on antihydrogens. We show that the result should be the same as on
 hydrogens in spite of different free-fall accelerations (WEP violation) which
 may occur if there is a vector fifth-force field. We emphasize the experiment
 is unique in the sense that it tests the Equivalence Principle expressed in its
 ultimate form, proposed to be called UEP, directly without being disturbed by
 the effect of possible presence of a scalar fifth-force field. 


Interesting paper.

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 01:28:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA21960;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:26:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:26:53 -0700
Message-Id: <359204C0.C15072AB verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:05:20 +0300
From: Hamdi Ucar 
Organization: Orchestra
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: vortex 
Subject: Casimir Energy of a Spherical Shell (eprint:hep-th/9806193)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jQsY43.0.zM5.CdWar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20010
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/9806193


High Energy Physics - Theory, abstract
hep-th/9806193

From: HAGEN urhep.pas.rochester.edu
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:34:55 GMT   (10kb)

Casimir Energy of a Spherical Shell

Authors: M.E. Bowers, C.R. Hagen
Comments: LaTeX, 14 pages, 1 figure
Report-no: UR1533

 The Casimir energy for a conducting spherical shell of radius $a$ is computed
 using a direct mode summation approach. An essential ingredient is the
 implementation of a recently proposed method based on Cauchy's theorem for
 an evaluation of the eigenfrequencies of the system. It is shown, however, that
 this earlier calculation uses an improper set of modes to describe the waves
 exterior to the sphere. Upon making the necessary corrections and taking care
 to ensure that no mathematically ill-defined expressions occur, the technique is
 shown to leave numerical results unaltered while avoiding a longstanding
 criticism raised against earlier calculations of the Casimir energy.


This work could be useful for vortexians.

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 01:30:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA21923;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:26:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:26:48 -0700
Message-Id: <359200B0.2FFCF6E2 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:48:00 +0300
From: Hamdi Ucar 
Organization: Orchestra
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: vortex 
Subject: A New Redshift Interpretation (eprint:astro-ph/9806280)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"E9iHc1.0.QM5.7dWar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20009
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/9806280

Astrophysics, abstract
astro-ph/9806280

From: "Robert V. Gentry" 
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:47:45 GMT   (8kb)

A New Redshift Interpretation

Author: Robert V. Gentry
Comments: 9 pages LaTeX, no figures; Mod. Phys. Lett. A 12 (1997) 2919

     A nonhomogeneous universe with vacuum energy, but without spacetime
     expansion, is utilized together with gravitational and Doppler redshifts as the
     basis for proposing a new interpretation of the Hubble relation and the 2.7K
     Cosmic Blackbody Radiation. 

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 04:25:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA12657;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 04:22:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 04:22:54 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:22:59 -0600 (MDT)
From: Steve Ekwall 
X-Sender: ekwall2 november
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
cc: freenrg-l eskimo.com
Subject: What TIME is it?
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"k2LAC3.0.g53.DCZar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20011
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi all, (6.25.98) china+

 Like an old television commerical (reference "YOUR" children),
"It's Almost Ten O'clock, do you know WHERE your children are?"
Quote:
"It's almost July 4th, DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR PRESIDENT IS?" 
Strange men already/have been here.. (irs?? - maybe - def/gov'mt!)

p.s. 'HE' WON'T be BACK in Time (our b-day 7.4.1776)

-------------------------
I promise I'll not cross-post, add spam, or drop drawers here again, 
It's just very, very, very, Very strange to me.

-=se=- (little nobody)
steve (d*mn the torpedoes- full speed ahead) ekwall
~weird~   -  anybody else getting ~visit's?~
Time to unsubscribe?  happy 4th!  ~weird~science??

sent 6.25.98   5:24 MST   20lines ascii

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 04:34:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA15384;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 04:32:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 04:32:35 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:32:35 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames  
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"2oRnf2.0.Dm3.ILZar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20012
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vo,

I finding this stuff handwavy. Anybody chance modelling just what your
saying. Maybe you could could just scan some notebook jottings in a dump
the jpeg. I having trouble believing about the distance to the cancelling
charges is irrelevant. Humbly, learning more em and rel.
Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 05:38:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA01813;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:36:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:29:31 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Enquiring minds
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"N1dNG.0.FS.aHaar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20013
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vo,

Look, I'm sorry, some people may be embarrassed to talk about these
matters but in the spirit of Science, I want answers. Sorry if this seems
scatological or irrelevant, but I mean well and sincerely believe that
*all* problems can be engineered. Sorry, but it's what young men talk
about. I don't consider this irrelevant, I consider this tragic and a sign
of the times. 

I was talking to my friends, and we reckon that in modern Western cities
about 10% are homosexuals - the tragedy is that most are highly
intelligent and its getting worse.

If you believe that this is okay, well, I don't know where you get your
values from, but they stink. I have to say its amazing to see the
creatures on this list crawl out from behind rocks and jump in with their
witicisms. If you have any respect of humanity you'd realise it is a
tragedy, especially that it should happen to such young gifted people.

Why does this happen?
. Vunerable, gifted youngsters often away from home from the first time in
  big cities.
. Moral climate.
. Feminism (I think that's how it spelt - but who cares?) alienating
  relationships between men and women.
. Dumbing down of society and peer group pressure. A well presented young
  man has to dumb down and join in the group (think of the talent wasted)
  or stand apart and be destroyed by them.

Who's doing all this? Now the conspiracy theories: People who are
anti-science, anarchists, anti-man, evil bastards. Look at the media
(think, all those hippies are now in senior management), look at shows
like 'Tool time', or films where the villian is well educated, articulate. 

I'm telling you as a member of an ethnic minority (I really get in trouble
now!!) that it destroys its finest. In seeking to keep a hold on its
talent, it loses sight of the fact that it needs to be free to work - it
cannot have its mind controlled by lessers. The minute it displays any
independence, the mob step in to break it. Fact: 3rd World Countries are
the most collective societies.

Thank you bloody extreme liberalism and your inverted racism. We know
how it works - boost your self image by championing wretches - 'we gave
you the vote, your rights, vote for us'. It's pure bloody evil.

I'll get in trouble for this. Character assasinated, ridiculed. Believe
me, I mean well. Young man's talk, I get away with this for a few years
more.

Angry words. No more soapboxing. Very sorry.
A nation is created by the young, and they must be healthy.
If I'm cautioned, I'll go.
Remi.
(Oh shit, I shouldn't have written this)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 06:00:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA03572;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <003a01bda037$824ef520$a6b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames  
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:45:56 -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: <"xGgjh3.0.ft.qbaar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20014
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Cornwall RO 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 5:34 AM
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames


>Vo,
>
>I finding this stuff handwavy. Anybody chance modelling just what your
>saying. Maybe you could  just scan some notebook jottings in a dump
>the jpeg. I having trouble believing about the distance to the canceling
>charges is irrelevant. Humbly, learning more em and rel.
>Remi.
>
Relativistic Electrodynamics, (By The Book)

In the reference system moving in the z direction with velocity v, in which
the
particles are at rest, the magnetic field
vanishes and the electric field of one at the
location of the other is:
 Ey' = q/y'^2 where y' is the separation of the
charges. In the rest system the fields can be
shown to transform to Ey = Ey'/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2
Bx = -v/c^2 * Ey'/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2  y'= y

so that the force between the charges is:

Fy = q(Ey+vBz)= qEy(1-v^2/c^2)=qEy'(1-v^2/c^2)

The force is thus reduced by a factor
1-(v^2/c^2)compared with the electric force
alone,and by a factor [1-(v^2/c^2)]^1/2 compared with the electric force
when the
charges are at rest.  Don't you get it, Remi? :-)

This is why like charges "quarks" can stack up
(and bind)in a nucleus, because of the very
near c spin velocity, or why very near c particle beams contract rather than
diverge.

Taking any nucleus with 5A - 2Z "quarks:

2A "up" or +
2A - Z "down" or -
A - Z neutrinos

For U238:
5A - 2Z = 5*238 - 2*92 = 1190 - 184 = 1,006

2A "up" = 2*238 = 476
2A - Z "down" = 476 - 92 = 384
A - Z neutrinos = 238 - 92 = 146
Total quarks = 1,006, but there are 476 - 384 =
92 excess positive charges or string circle "hoops" that have to stack up
side-by-side in the nucleus, and this very,very near c spin or charge
velocity and the above equations explain why this has to happen, especially
with relativistic gammas [1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2] of 1.0E18 or more.

Regards,   Frederick






From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 06:15:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA30587;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:12:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:12:59 -0700
Message-ID: <000001bda03a$c9448460$ac41d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:14:19 -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: <"_pCx13.0.qT7.Qpaar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20015
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Akira Kawasaki wrote:

>Vortex,
>
>How spectrum specific are the photovoltaics? Maybe a very-wide spectrum
>photovoltaic cell can boost efficiency.


They tend to be broad band absorbers, but reflect some light, which is why
the cells commonly look blue. Very high effciency phtovoltaics have been
made -- 25%+ -- by creating several layers, each absorbing some wavelengths
while transmitting others to lower layers. These are -- guess what? --
expensive. A substantial part of the cost of photovoltaic systems is the
supporting structure, wiring, surface protection, guarding against shorts
caused by damage to cells, etc. The high efficiency cells work with solar
concentrators with up to 10 sols capacity. But here are tradeoffs against
the structures necessary, with some of the most interesting being a kind of
light funnel of specific shape (which doesn't work when full of water, snow,
or dirt).

What is truly remarkable is pushing polycrystalline materials, or Ovonics
materials above the 10% efficiency level, and having something flexible
enough to shingle a house. Still lots of problems.

>For that matter, a true black chloraphyll can be (maybe) bioengineered
>for plants that grow like crazy with increased efficiency utilizing all
>of the solar energy. :) Fantastic biomass growth!

Details, details. The chlorophyll molecule has strong absorbtion bands in
the red and blue, so it looks green. You'd have to do some massive
bioengineering to find another chemical system that would fit all the
requirements. Do that and you could accept applications for God of some
new-formed planet ;-).

Mike Carrell




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 06:16:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA31158;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:13:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 06:13:17 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:13:18 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames 
In-Reply-To: <003a01bda037$824ef520$a6b4bfa8 default>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"zenYa3.0.hc7.ipaar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20016
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Thank you Frederick. 

I need a program of study and revision and fit that around full-time work.
Bang goes the telly. 

Do you get it? - Most of the stuff on Vo.
You're alright,
Remi.
(Geez! He's broken golden rule #1, appear knowledgable at all times, don't
conceed to the enemy, rule #2: watch your spelling! .. rule #n: have
some kit that works.)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 07:49:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA18823;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 07:46:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 07:46:49 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 15:46:47 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: joke
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"CqNtD3.0.1c4.NBcar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20017
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Er, Vo,

(I'll get in trouble for this. One my Dad told me)

A farmer decided that his hens weren't laying enough and thought that his
cock was getting a little old. He'd bring a younger cock in to assist the
old one.

Anyway, the young cock was put into the pen and started laughing at the
old cock, (who looked rather knackered). To this the old cock challenged
the upstart to a race. 'Yeah', said the whippersnapper, 'I'll give you a
headstart!' 'Oh, you will, that's nice' said the oldtimer.

They started racing and the old cock made as much noise as he could, to
which the farmer came out with his gun, and shot the young cock. 'BANG!
Fifth one this week!'

:) :)

Oh, come on! That's mild! That's nothing! I've got much better!
I'd better quit before the flames start.

Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 09:11:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA14443;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:09:11 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:09:11 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980625121304.00c0cd60 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:13:04 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: 
References: <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"yg8xM2.0.VX3.cOdar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20018
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 01:20 PM 6/24/98 -0700, William Beaty wrote:
>Ah, I think I see now.  You mean that the two electrons in question are
>responding to the corresponding pattern of positive charges, AND THESE
>POSITIVE CHARGES CANNOT BE "REMOVED" BY INCREASING THEIR DISTANCE.
  
   Yep.

 >Really?  Then I have no grasp of this at all.  You mean that the electrons
>see the same intensity of relatively moving proton-field, independant of
>the distance to those protons, and independant of any asymmetrical
>arrangement of those protons?  Move those protons several feet away, and
>cluster them in a nucleus, and the electrons respond the same as if the
>protons were very nearby and arranged in a symmmetrical cylinder?  Too
>weird!  If the protons are at a significant distance from the electrons,
>then their e-field is very weak.  Yet when in relative motion, the b-field
>is still strong?  I cannot visualize this at all. 

   Yes, you can:

>Ummm, changing the size of a coil is somewhat like changing the size of a
>hollow, massive sphere: there is no attraction inside a hollow massive
>sphere regardless of its size and similarly, the size of a coil does not
>matter.  However, this does not apply at all to a point-mass.  The g-field
>of a point mass does not resemble the g-field inside a hollow massive
>sphere. In a similar way, the e-field and b-field of a proton is not at
>all like those of a ring of metal. 

   Your are close.  Create a sphere around our moving electrons.  The total
charge integrated over the sphere--assuming we haven't picked up some stray
ions--is a constant independent of the location of the charges within the
sphere.  The (average) charge at the surface of the sphere drops as the
inverse square, but the surface increases as the square of the radius.  It
cancels out.  Intuitively, the double integral of the charge must be a
constant, and equal to the charge of the unmatched electrons inside.  It is
one of those fundamental conservation rules.  Size and shape of the surface
doesn't matter, only the contained charge.

   Now go on the inside looking out.  EXACTLY the same thing.  The
electrons see a positive charge that is not dependent on distance.

   If you have a diffuse cloud of particles, then the size of the smallest
sphere that encloses them determines the maximum intensity of the field.
But it doesn't depend on the distance to the cancelling charges.

   Now back to the original problem.  The smaller the sphere (or in this
case cylinder) that we can draw about the beam, the stronger the field.
The velocity of interest is that of the negative charges relative to the
positive charges, and the strength of the force on the electrons depends on
the compactness of the electrons, the strength of the force on the
protons/ions depends on the compactness of those balancing charges.  This
seems very counterintuitive until you go to your gravity analog above.  The
total force on both is constant and equal.  But the maximum strength
depends on the size of the volume that contains all the positive or
negative charges.

>If a cluster of moving electrons is directed through a ring of
>closely-spaced protons, that is very different than if the moving
>electrons should pass by a tiny group of protons clustered many
>centimeters away.

   Nope.

   Let's make one more try, but the easiest way is to do the math, and if
necessary do the experiments.  (And I have done some of the experiments
when it was easier than doing accurate calculations back in the slide rule
days.)  You probably have a TV in your house that recieves NTSC signals.
It has a "shadow mask" about a 1/4" from the phosphers on the face of the
tube, and three electron guns that create three (modulated) electron beams
and sweep them over the mask.  The phosphor dots are arranged so that the
beam from the green gun lands only on green phosphor dots, same for cyan
and magenta.  If those beams diffuse, you get muddy colors.

   So the NTSC specifications go into long detail about the minimum (10%)
and maximum (75%? It has been awhile) saturation for each color in a
broadcast quality signal.  This is so that the TV sets can be designed so
that the beam stays (self) focused at those intensities.  The lower limit
is the key one here.  If there aren't enough electrons in the beam, given
the kinetic energies (temperature) of the electrons, the beam will diverge
(fall apart).  The upper limit is so that the accumulated charge on the
screen will not cause beam deflection--at TV scanning rates, the
capacitance of the screen wrt the shadow mask is more important than the
resistance of the glass.

>I'm still confused.  If a cluster of electrons moves down the axis of a
>long, positively-charged metal tube, the electrons see no e-field from the
>protons (the metal tube acts as a faraday cage, and the e-field from it's
>positive charge is outside of the tube.)

   No, what happens is that the point charge causes "imaging" in the
conductor.  Make it a superconductor and the effect is very clear.  Charges
migrate within the superconductor to completely cancel the electric (or for
that matter magnetic) field at the surface of the superconductor.  If there
is an unbalanced charge inside the superconducting cage, there will be
mirroring on both the inner and outer surface of the cage, but no field
inside the superconductor itself.

>  Since the electrons see no
>e-field from the protons, won't they also see no b-field from the
>relatively moving protons?  Doesn't the faraday-cage effect take the
>protons entirely out of the picture, so the electron cluster acts like it
>is all alone?
 
   No the faraday-cage effect is all about cancelling out fields and charges.

   Can we drop this now?  TVs, superconducting supercolliders, ebeam chip
etching machines and faraday cages all work and are very well understood.
It is just one of those "freshman mistakes" to think that you can get other
than nonsence from mathematically studying an unbalanced field.  There are
no such things, in real life, even in van de Graff generators.

                                        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 Jun 25 09:40:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA24943;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:31:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"mH6ve3.0.c56.Eqdar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20020
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


An extremely inappropriate topic, which appalls me in the same way as if
it was about Jewish people or Afro-americans. 

How many gay people are on this list?  I'll understand if you don't stand
up to be counted, since such an act might be dangerous on vortex-L.

Hmmm, Maybe I should declare VORTEX-L to be a radical-tolerance, pro-gay
area, and all who don't like it can leave?  Or maybe we should just do
what we have done in the past, and refuse to bring political or religious
discussions into the science arena.  In this instance, perhaps the former
is the more appropriate response.

   - Bill "one of the amoral pro-gay bugs under the slimy rocks" Beaty


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 25 09:38:43 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA25024;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:34:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:34:08 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980625123800.00c0ec30 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:38:00 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <35919592.158556844 mail-hub>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980623192947.00be7c30 spectre.mitre.org>
 <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"t8RGw3.0.M66.zldar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20019
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 12:20 AM 6/25/98 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>Yes, but we were originally looking at the compressive force *between
>two electrons* making up part of the beam. Here above you appear to
>contend that this compressive force is only dependant on the external
>charge and relative velocity, and not on the distance between the two
>electrons in question. Is that you intention?

    Try this if it helps you to understand.  Draw a line starting at each
electron and ending at some (different) positive charge.  This represents
the electric field.  (Actually you should draw infinite sets of such lines,
but this abstraction works for this purpose.

    The strength of the field is determined by the number of lines passing
through a surface in the same direction.  If you draw a 1 cm radius sphere
around 1000 electrons, you have a field intensity of 1000 lines per 4/3 Pi
square centimeters.  Draw a ten centimeter sphere, and assuming that we are
still surrounding 1000 net charges, the field intensity drops to 10 lines
per 4/3 pi square centimeters.

    The important point here is that the intensity of the field does not
depend on where the matching charges are, as long as they are far enough
away.  But it does depend directly on how compact the charges are.  Now
that was the electirc field.  The magnetic field depends on both the
intensity of the electric field that generates it, and the relative speeds
of the charge carriers.  The more charges, the stronger the compression,
the higher the velocity, the stronger the compression, the tighter the
pinch, the stronger the compression squared.  I've seen pinches where the
final current was measured in kiloamperes per square nanometer.  (I know
what you are thinking, but I cheated--that pinch was in a cooled electron
beam.  None of those massive protons allowed.) 

>If so, how do you correlate this to the fact that in the lab frame,
>the compressive force between the electrons is calculated as a
>magnetic field based on the electron current, and the distance between
>the two currents? (Or isn't it, and am I completely "up the spout" in
>this regard?)

    No, not up the spout, just missing the point.  There two currents of
interest are the two electrons, so the distance between them matters.  But
to get a current you need to measure velocity, and that is done against the
balancing charges.



                                        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 Jun 25 10:02:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA03824;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:58:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:58:27 -0700
Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5CFD9CB5 xch-cpc-02>
From: "Scudder, Henry J" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:57:59 -0700
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Content-Type: text/plain
Resent-Message-ID: <"gynCZ2.0.fx.o6ear" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20021
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Bill
	I couldn't agree with you more. Bashing of ANY group is
unappropriate behavior. PERIOD.

Hank

> ----------
> From: 	William Beaty[SMTP:billb eskimo.com]
> Reply To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Sent: 	Thursday, June 25, 1998 9:31 AM
> To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Subject: 	public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
> 
> 
> An extremely inappropriate topic, which appalls me in the same way as
> if
> it was about Jewish people or Afro-americans. 
> 
> How many gay people are on this list?  I'll understand if you don't
> stand
> up to be counted, since such an act might be dangerous on vortex-L.
> 
> Hmmm, Maybe I should declare VORTEX-L to be a radical-tolerance,
> pro-gay
> area, and all who don't like it can leave?  Or maybe we should just do
> what we have done in the past, and refuse to bring political or
> religious
> discussions into the science arena.  In this instance, perhaps the
> former
> is the more appropriate response.
> 
>    - Bill "one of the amoral pro-gay bugs under the slimy rocks" Beaty
> 
> 
> ((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 25 10:20:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29021;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35928419.406D interlaced.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:08:41 -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: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"kGOkZ2.0.L57.iMear" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20022
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty wrote:
> 
> An extremely inappropriate topic, which appalls me in the same way as if
> it was about Jewish people or Afro-americans.
> 
> How many gay people are on this list?

Well, I'm straight, Bill, but I have several gay friends - so I'm at
home (if not in bed) in both camps - and I'll go along with what ever
you decide.  (BTW, I don't go both ways - at 63 going one way is all I
can handle!)   --->
	        X
	       <---

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 10:41:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA23298;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:39:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:39:17 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:37:12 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Notes on photovoltaics
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806251338_MC2-5144-5C8F compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"ERxoC2.0.yh5.5jear" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20023
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

I wrote that I think  conversion efficiency falls rapidly at first, and then
levels out for 10 or 20 years because materials degrade and collector surface
gets dirty. Mitchell Swartz asked: "Please cite a reference for this
assertion." Well, I thought I read that somewhere, but I rooted around this
morning and I cannot find it. In my first message I quoted the American Solar
Energy Society from the web, which talked about amorphous silicon PV
efficiency, which starts at 14 to 15% and after "early degradation" falls to
9%.

Most PV devices are supplied in stand alone boxes with regulators and
batteries. I believe I have seen literature from Siemens and other
manufacturers quoting 20 to 30 years life times for these units. Perhaps they
mean the regulators and other electronics fail while the PVs keep working. I
doubt it . . . It is hard to believe the batteries last 20 years. Maybe they
change them out regularly.

I received an interesting message from Bob Huggins about photovoltaics. He
says:

     As is often the case in technological areas, the international
     photovoltaic research community has been charging off in a different
     direction from the commercial community. . . . PV researchers . . . 
     think that the important thing to do is to increase the efficiency, with
     no concern about price or safety. A typical example is the rush toward
     copper-indium-selenide and similar expensive and dangerous materials.
     Anything to get another percent or two in small laboratory samples.

     . . . In contradistinction, the real issue is power output per unit
     price. I think that the most interesting development on the horizon is
     that of Stan Ovshinsky's company Energy Conversion Devices. They are
     partners in United Solar. . . .

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 10:42:58 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA23715;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:40:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:40:19 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:37:23 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Tortoises
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806251339_MC2-514E-9685 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"m_3mI2.0.Ko5.2kear" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20024
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:

     Merriman, Burchard, and Little have run CF experiments.

No they have not. They are not electrochemists, they have not taken courses in
electrochemistry, and they have not read the literature, so they do not know
the first thing about how to run a CF experiment. They can no more run a CF
experiment than I can remove your appendix.

I have read about CF experiments, observed them first hand, and I have spent
about weeks visiting people like Fleischmann, Mizuno and Cravens. I know that
I do not know enough to do an experiment. As I have written here many times,
Mizuno spent two years training one grad student to do cold fusion.
Together they spent eight months *preparing one run*. That's ten hours a day,
six days a week. Learning to do this experiment constituted a graduate level
course in electrochemistry. Oriani is one of the top electrochemists in the
U.S. He is over 70 and he has been doing electrochemistry and physical
chemistry for 50 years. He said, quote: "This experiment is one of the most
difficult I have ever done."


     Scott Chubb and Puthoff are articulate and front-line, if not
     borderline, theorists in cold fusion and new energy.  Sparber and
     Heffner are the rum and soda, so to speak, of Vortex-L discussions.
     Horst has sympathetically attended CF conferences.

What about it? Apart from Chubb, none of these people has performed an
experiment, and none of them are qualified to critique papers. They are not
electrochemists or materials scientists. They have no standing in this field.
I have not contributed much, but I have, at least, written formal papers
summarizing research in I.E. People can read what I have written and judge
whether I understand.

Don't get me wrong; I welcome contributions from these people. They know much
more about basic science than I do, and I have learned a great deal from their
messages. But nobody should confuse musings and playful comments with serious
contributions to the field of cold fusion.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 11:53:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA21733;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:50:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:50:43 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980625144806.007d1200 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:48:06 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
In-Reply-To: <199806251338_MC2-5144-5C8F compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"VuszZ1.0.CJ5.2mfar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20025
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


At 01:37 PM 6/25/98 -0400, Jed wrote:
>To: Vortex
>
>I wrote that I think  conversion efficiency falls rapidly at first, and then
>levels out for 10 or 20 years because materials degrade and collector surface
>gets dirty. Mitchell Swartz asked: "Please cite a reference for this
>assertion." Well, I thought I read that somewhere, but I rooted around this
>morning and I cannot find it. In my first message I quoted the American Solar
>Energy Society from the web, which talked about amorphous silicon PV
>efficiency, which starts at 14 to 15% and after "early degradation" falls to
>9%.

  Accuracy is important in this issue. Several of the PVs
have been found to increase in efficiency with time.

 However, the distribution of this effect, and its dilution
by failure of others, requires looking closer.  
Once again it would be good to have some numbers rather
than guessing because these are important systems.

   Mitchell Swartz



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 11:55:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA23323;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:53:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:53:15 -0700
Message-ID: <19980625171450.27718.rocketmail send1b.yahoomail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:14:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anton Rager 
Subject: Re: Enquiring minds
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"ydSOA2.0.Fi5.Qofar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20026
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Remi,

We're all entitiled to our opinions......but there is a proper place
for this sort of dicussion.  This sort of topic is sure to raise
temperatures on all sides.

You wrote:
> (Oh shit, I shouldn't have written this)

At least you realize this.

I love to discuss these sorts of things.....but not here on Vortex. 
Feel free to email me directly for some good discussions on these
sorts of topics.

Now -- to place this topic in the interest of Science.....One has to
wonder where we would be without the likes of many talented gay/bi men
thoughout history.  Do your research and you will see what I mean.


Anton Rager
Straight as they get
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 Jun 25 12:44:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA18605;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:32:53 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199806251932.OAA28906 dfw-ix16.ix.netcom.com>
From: aki ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki)
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Cc: mikec snip.net
Resent-Message-ID: <"aCTGb2.0.cY4.0Vgar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20027
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 25, 1998

Mike,

Thanks for the informative response.

>Very high effciency phtovoltaics have been
>made -- 25%+ -- by creating several layers, each absorbing some 
>wavelengths while transmitting others to lower layers. 

Any idea why the other 75% is not picked up or lost? Is it in the 
reflection, heat, and other effects not useable as electricity? 

>Details, details. The chlorophyll molecule has strong absorbtion bands 
>in the red and blue, so it looks green. 

I understand that. Interesting that a particular red and green is used. 
Also I believe there are other biological mechanisms that utilizes 
other spectrum as an energy source.
Also as I understand it, the exact mechanism behind plant chlorephyll 
chemistry is still being defined. After that, we could fiddle around 
with it unless someone comes down the mountain with another tablet. 

>You'd have to do some massive bioengineering to find another chemical 
>system that would fit all the requirements. Do that and you could 
>accept applications for God of some new-formed planet ;-).

It's the challenge, is it not, that makes life interesting? A lot of 
this stuff is still begining and will be beyond our own puny mental 
lifetimes to figure out. To figure out all that 'God' has set in a 
given enviroment like earth is the challege. Peck away. What else is 
there to do --- watch TV? :)

-ak-

ps: Nice to have met you at the ICCF-7.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 13:00:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA20963;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5CFD9CB7 xch-cpc-02>
From: "Scudder, Henry J" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: Notes on photovoltaics
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 12:26:51 -0700
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Content-Type: text/plain
Resent-Message-ID: <"fUvQT3.0.N75.Jhgar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20028
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Mitchell	
	Try this URL. http://www.mrsolar.com/solarnewsletter.html 
Hank

> ----------
> From: 	Mitchell Swartz[SMTP:mica world.std.com]
> Reply To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Sent: 	Thursday, June 25, 1998 11:48 AM
> To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Subject: 	Re: Notes on photovoltaics
> 
> 
> At 01:37 PM 6/25/98 -0400, Jed wrote:
> >To: Vortex
> >
> >I wrote that I think  conversion efficiency falls rapidly at first,
> and then
> >levels out for 10 or 20 years because materials degrade and collector
> surface
> >gets dirty. Mitchell Swartz asked: "Please cite a reference for this
> >assertion." Well, I thought I read that somewhere, but I rooted
> around this
> >morning and I cannot find it. In my first message I quoted the
> American Solar
> >Energy Society from the web, which talked about amorphous silicon PV
> >efficiency, which starts at 14 to 15% and after "early degradation"
> falls to
> >9%.
> 
>   Accuracy is important in this issue. Several of the PVs
> have been found to increase in efficiency with time.
> 
>  However, the distribution of this effect, and its dilution
> by failure of others, requires looking closer.  
> Once again it would be good to have some numbers rather
> than guessing because these are important systems.
> 
>    Mitchell Swartz
> 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 14:08:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16925;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:07:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:07:00 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <19980625171450.27718.rocketmail send1b.yahoomail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:05:46 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Enquiring minds is [*WAY* THE **** OFF TOPIC]
Resent-Message-ID: <"w1oFB2.0.E84.plhar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20030
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Remi:

   >  I have to say its amazing to see the creatures on
   >  this list crawl out from behind rocks [...]

Doesn't take you very long to objectify and insult those list members who
might disagree with your views on sexuality or object to such subjects
having a place on this list, does it?

Your comments are bigoted and homophobic. Why do we have to see that stuff
on this list? Take it elsewere. I'm sure there's a right-wing militia freak
newsgroup or something where such views are shared in the appropriate venue.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 14:08:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16274;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:06:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:06:21 -0700
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 17:02:58 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Notes on photovoltaics
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806251705_MC2-5150-4FA4 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"gY89S1.0.8-3.Blhar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20029
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Mitchell Swartz writes:

     Accuracy is important in this issue. Several of the PVs have been found
     to increase in efficiency with time.

Izzatso? Please cite a reference for this assertion. Do they still increase
after 20 years in bright sunlight? Has anyone tested them for 20 years in a
controlled environment, rather than a commercial installation? I imagine it
would be difficult to separate out the causes of changes in performance in a
working installation. It would difficult to determine which changes are caused
by dirt on the surface, chemicals from rain and pollution seeping into the
cell, seasonal temperature changes and so on. I note that the longest
warrantee offered by Siemens is 25 years, and most PVs come with 10-year
warrantees, so I doubt the devices work much longer than that. I suppose I
should have mentioned that as a "reference" but it isn't a scientific paper.
Still, this is the kind of information you can hang your hat on. You can be
sure the Siemens exec who wrote that price list consulted with his engineers.
As I expected, battery warrantees last 5 years.


     Once again it would be good to have some numbers rather than guessing
     because these are important systems.

Well, that's a snide comment. I did not guess. Perhaps I was incorrect about
other types of PV -- althogh Siemens seems to agree with me -- but regarding
amorphous silicon type my statement was not a guess, I cited a reference. I
quoted The American Solar Energy Society, they quoted United Solar, which
quoted Energy Conversion Devices which is run by Ovshinsky. So don't argue
with *me*, Mitch. Get on the horn with Ovshinsky and set him straight.


Reviewing the business aspects of photovoltaics, I conclude that there might
be a good profit opportunity here for a company that focuses on the peripheral
equipment, rather than the PVs themselves. Roughly half the cost of a small
installation is for batteries, regulators, inverter, etc. Even if the price of
PVs came down to zero (which is impossible), small installations tied to the
power grid would still be uneconomical. In other words, if the PVs cost
nothing, and you installed them on your roof, you would lose money. You would
earn more by putting the money in the bank and paying the power company
to deliver electricity. In most houses, you would earn more that the bank pays
by investing in insulation, efficient air conditioners, deciduous trees,
compact fluorescent lights and other energy saving devices. The economics of
this might change, however, if someone invents a cheap inverter and tied all
PV power directly into the urban power grid, so that the electricity is used
immediately by someone or stored by the power company. That would do away with
the need for small batteries, which are terribly expensive.

I believe I read that an engineering prof. in Alabama or someplace is working
on next-generation, reliable, small inverter.

PVs and PV installations are expensive. Check out the "Northern Arizona Wind &
Sun Price List" (www.windsun.com/price_list.htm). Here are some sample items:

Siemens SR-50Z 50 watt single crystal 17 volts   2.95 amps "Z-mount" for RV's
10 year warranty    $290.00

Siemens SR-90 90 watt single crystal 17 volts   5.4 amps 25 year warranty
$516.00

Solarjack SJ-75 75 watt polycrystalline 16.7 volts   4.49 amps 10 year
warranty (fits Solarex MSX-77 mounts) $399.00

These people carry propane powered freezers for $1,100. I did not know they
are still made. A friend of mine who lived in the country used to have a
40-year-old model. They are marvelous, energy efficient gadgets, perfect for
people who live far from the grid. Refrigeration and air conditioning would be
one of the first big markets for thermal output CF devices.

It looks like there is a big market for PVs used with RVs (recreational
vehicles: campers and motor home, or caravans as I believe they are called in
England.)

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 14:29:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA22602;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:24:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:24:18 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980625172150.007d0870 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 17:21:50 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
In-Reply-To: <199806251705_MC2-5150-4FA4 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"-zQ1B1.0.3X5.20iar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20031
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


At 05:02 PM 6/25/98 -0400, Jed wrote:

>Mitchell Swartz writes:
>
>     Accuracy is important in this issue. Several of the PVs have been found
>     to increase in efficiency with time.
>
>Izzatso? Please cite a reference for this assertion.

   Those who dont learn or grow from the past, 
may be condemned to repeat it (*).  Accuracy is important.

   ( * paraphrased)

 =============================================

>     Once again it would be good to have some numbers rather than guessing
>     because these are important systems.
>
>Well, that's a snide comment. I did not guess. Perhaps I was incorrect about
>other types of PV -- althogh Siemens seems to agree with me -- but regarding
>amorphous silicon type my statement was not a guess, I cited a reference.

   Asking for calibration curves, and accuracy is not
snide, but may separate science from hucksters and prattle.
To separate serious systems from the like of the Potapov fantasy (**), 
ZPEvacuum(**), and the purported "kilowatt" which a vertical low-flow 
calorimeter shows for some borderline cf systems, accuracy 
IS important.  Furthermore, this is so because it will rule out some of
both false positive and false negatives.  Jed seems to repeatably
claim that accuracy and calibration are not important.  They are,
and that is an argument for which there is no further time.

(**) data was requested and was not forthcoming

 =============================================


> I quoted The American Solar Energy Society, they quoted United Solar, which
>quoted Energy Conversion Devices which is run by Ovshinsky. So don't argue
>with *me*, Mitch. Get on the horn with Ovshinsky and set him straight.

  I asked for some numbers, curves, and mean time to failure data.
That they were not provided has nothing to do with differences 
between amorphous and other PVs.

   Mitchell Swartz


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 14:33:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA24329;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:27:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:27:58 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199806251339_MC2-514E-9685 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:26:50 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: Tortoises
Resent-Message-ID: <"-XAZH2.0.qx5.T3iar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20032
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed -

   >  Rich Murray writes:
   >
   	>>       Merriman, Burchard, and Little have run
   	>>       CF experiments.
   >
   >  No they have not.

Of course Scott has. He didn't *duplicate* perhaps, but he did experiments
to try and measure some effect from processes substantially similar to
those described as producing some CF effect. It's not Scott's fault that
BLP for instance wouldn't offer any help on the details so he could dupe
them exactly.

It's ok to filter off negative results like Scott's due to inexact
duplication in that particular context, but it's taking it a bit far to say
he doesn't do experiments, isn't it? You'd like them a lot more if they
were positive, wouldn't you? Come on, don't say you wouldn't because they
weren't run exactly right so they can't help prove CF or something like
that. You (and I and most of Vortex) would like positive results from Scott
no matter what sort of derivative gizmo he tested as long as the analysis
of the materials involved and the heat evolved were accurate enough to be
unambiguous.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 16:13:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA01993;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:07:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:07:32 -0700
Message-ID: <002601bda08d$d3421c40$c541d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 17:12:10 -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: <"ONOs63.0._U.pWjar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20033
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Akira, you wrote:

>Thanks for the informative response.


Your'e welcome, glad it was informative.

>>Very high effciency phtovoltaics have been
>>made -- 25%+ -- by creating several layers, each absorbing some
>>wavelengths while transmitting others to lower layers.
>
>Any idea why the other 75% is not picked up or lost? Is it in the
>reflection, heat, and other effects not useable as electricity?

I'm not sure, not being a semiconductor specialist. Basically electron-hole
pairs are created by incident phtons above a certain energy level. Theis
have to get separated by the junction and conducted to the outside world,
with opportunities to get lost on the way. The best cells are
monocystalline. Some decades ago, RCA's Sarnoff center thought they had a
coup by making cells with 10% efficiency with polycrystalline silicon, but
they could not come to a development agreement with a utility (utility put
up money, RCA remain dominant partner {sound familiar?}). In the end the
technology was sold to Soalrex. Some of the indicent photons can produce
heat but are not energetic enough to produce the hole-electron pairs;
depends on material band-gaps. Thus the layers with more exotic materials.
As someone else on vortex notes, these films involve nasty elements as well
as nasty gases during processing. So one hesitates about square miles of the
stuff.
>
>>Details, details. The chlorophyll molecule has strong absorbtion bands
>>in the red and blue, so it looks green.
>
>I understand that. Interesting that a particular red and green is used.
>Also I believe there are other biological mechanisms that utilizes
>other spectrum as an energy source.
>Also as I understand it, the exact mechanism behind plant chlorephyll
>chemistry is still being defined. After that, we could fiddle around
>with it unless someone comes down the mountain with another tablet.
>
>>You'd have to do some massive bioengineering to find another chemical
>>system that would fit all the requirements. Do that and you could
>>accept applications for God of some new-formed planet ;-).
>
>It's the challenge, is it not, that makes life interesting? A lot of
>this stuff is still begining and will be beyond our own puny mental
>lifetimes to figure out. To figure out all that 'God' has set in a
>given enviroment like earth is the challege. Peck away. What else is
>there to do --- watch TV? :)


Touche. i don't watch much, but will acquire a HDTV system as soon as a good
candidate shows up.

>ps: Nice to have met you at the ICCF-7.

Me too.

Regards, Mike

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 16:40:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA16445;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:37:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:37:48 -0700
From: "Brendan Hall" 
To: 
Subject: RE: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:47:49 +1000
Message-ID: <000001bda093$aa078c60$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
In-Reply-To: 
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"GyCfg.0.o04.Bzjar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20034
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A



-----Original Message-----
From: William Beaty

>An extremely inappropriate topic, which appalls me in the same way as if
>it was about Jewish people or Afro-americans.

>How many gay people are on this list?  I'll understand if you don't stand
>up to be counted, since such an act might be dangerous on vortex-L.

>Hmmm, Maybe I should declare VORTEX-L to be a radical-tolerance, pro-gay
>area, and all who don't like it can leave?  Or maybe we should just do
>what we have done in the past, and refuse to bring political or religious
>discussions into the science arena.  In this instance, perhaps the former
>is the more appropriate response.

>   - Bill "one of the amoral pro-gay bugs under the slimy rocks" Beaty

There are probably as many anti-gay vorts as pro-gay vorts (and visa versa).
That view is irrelevant to being subscribed to vortex-l, and should remain
so.  Declaring this pro-gay does not make it irrelevant but makes it a
moral choice as to whether you be part of this e-mail list.  It would
therefore cause several legitimate members to leave the list, ones who
have not wanted to make it into an issue here.  However, if you declare
the topic irrelevant to this list, just as you have done with politics
and religion, then you would not cause people that have a differing view
to you (in this area) to be alienated from this list on moral grounds.

Brendan Hall


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 16:57:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA22508;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:55:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:55:46 -0700
From: "George Holz" 
To: 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:01:41 -0400
Message-ID: <01bda095$98fde7f0$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: <"nz2sJ3.0.aV5.0Ekar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20035
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Vince,
I have made a very interesting plot
of your latest data versus the calibration
run you reported earlier. I used excel
and I'm not sure how to get the graph to you.
Could you read it if I put it on our web site
in HTML? What spreadsheet and version are you using?

George Holz      george varisys.com
Varitronics Systems

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 17:51:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA02246;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 17:48:16 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 17:48:16 -0700
From: "Brendan Hall" 
To: 
Subject: RE: Notes on photovoltaics
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:58:38 +1000
Message-ID: <000101bda09d$8ea79960$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
In-Reply-To: <002601bda08d$d3421c40$c541d3d0 default>
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"TD9RS3.0.0Z.E_kar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20036
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



-----Original Message-----
Mike Carrell wrote:

Akira, you wrote:

>>>Very high effciency phtovoltaics have been
>>>made -- 25%+ -- by creating several layers, each absorbing some
>>>wavelengths while transmitting others to lower layers.
>
>>Any idea why the other 75% is not picked up or lost? Is it in the
>>reflection, heat, and other effects not useable as electricity?

I believe that the maximum theoretical efficiency is ~ 29% for single
crystals and ~ 24% for polycrystals (single layers), but I am not sure if I
am remembering
correctly (33% is max, accounting for misremembering).  Maybe you could
confirm these figures Mike?  Part of UNSW experiments is a honeycomb shape
that creates a larger effective surface area, collecting more of the
reflected photons.

In another set of experiments, at ANU (Australian National University in
Canberra), the cost of PVs are expected to halve.  A large cost of the
current PVs is in the silicon substrate that they are formed on.  Mostly,
these are obtained from large purified silicon blocks - cut off
mechanically.
These are optimised for the computer trade, and can achieve a minimum
practical thickness of 100 micron.  ANU's experiments are in growing
polycrystal surface layers, which can halve the thickness and, more
importantly,
greatly reduce production costs.  (The real intellectual property is in
snapping
them off their substrate to create large thin film wafers.)  This has opened
the
possibility of creating PVs on high rise building windows, as the thin film
still
lets much of the light through.

Brendan Hall

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 18:17:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA04921;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:15:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:15:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:01:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Tell all! Re: H2 Glow 
In-Reply-To: <01bda095$98fde7f0$9b6cd626 george.varisys.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"8UmI11.0.oC1.3Plar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20037
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


	So does it show O/U ????

On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, George Holz wrote:

> Hi Vince,
> I have made a very interesting plot
> of your latest data versus the calibration
> run you reported earlier. I used excel
> and I'm not sure how to get the graph to you.
> Could you read it if I put it on our web site
> in HTML? What spreadsheet and version are you using?
> 
> George Holz      george varisys.com
> Varitronics Systems
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 18:35:17 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA07728;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:33:41 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:33:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:59:54 +1000 (EST)
From: Martin Sevior 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Notes on photovoltaics
In-Reply-To: <002601bda08d$d3421c40$c541d3d0 default>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"wV0hw.0.Yu1.oflar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20038
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Mike Carrell wrote:
> >
> >Any idea why the other 75% is not picked up or lost? Is it in the
> >reflection, heat, and other effects not useable as electricity?
> 
> I'm not sure, not being a semiconductor specialist. Basically electron-hole
> pairs are created by incident phtons above a certain energy level.

The extra energy is mostly lost as heat from the liberated electrons. It 
makes about 1.2 electron volts worth of energy to liberate an electron in 
a silicon semiconductor, if the system is set up correctly this electron 
can do 1.2 ev of useful work before recombining. Since the majority of 
photons from the sun have energies in excess of 1.2 eV this extra energy 
is dissapated as heat as the electron  moves through the lattice. The 
theoretical upper limit for a simple silicon system is only 29% because 
of this.

However by employing multi-bandgap materials wth different energy absorbtion
energies it has been shown that the THEORETCAL upper limit for PV's is 
around 99%. Clearly this is not going to be used commericially soon but 
it is such an interesting challenge that material scientists around the 
world are attempting to build mulit-bandgap devices. Hey this is true 
Basic Research with a potential long term payoff.

I still think that Pacific Solar is the development company to watch in 
this field. 2.5 years into their 5 year program to reduce PV prices by a 
factor 5-10 they're still on track!

Cheers

Martin

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Jun 25 23:52:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA15716;
	Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:48:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:48:53 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980626145051.008a78e0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 14:50:51 +0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: John Winterflood 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980625121304.00c0cd60 spectre.mitre.org>
References: 
 <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"CmPRM2.0.Ur3.KHqar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20040
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robert wrote:
>   Can we drop this now?  TVs, superconducting supercolliders, ebeam chip
>etching machines and faraday cages all work and are very well understood.
>It is just one of those "freshman mistakes" to think that you can get other
>than nonsence from mathematically studying an unbalanced field.  There are
>no such things, in real life, even in van de Graff generators.

Just in case Bill and Robin do decide to drop it, I'm afraid what you
are saying seems quite wrong to me so I would really appreciate some
clarification if you are so certain of your argument. I'm sure you
wouldn't want to leave people who have tried hard to understand, with
an incorrect concept.

Firstly TV focussing for instance as I understand it starts off with
a diverging beam which then passes through some focussing fields
(either with the lovely old fashioned ring magnets around the neck
that are squeezed together, or electrostatically nearer the gun)
and then the inertia carries the electrons closer against their very
strong tendency to want to spread.  Likewise electron microscopes
have significant focussing electronics.  Are you saying that this
is incorrect and that electron beams will self-confine like a
discharge in a plasma (bear in mind that plasmas by definition
have both charges present which shields a large part of the
electrostatic fields and so the magnetic effect easily overrides) ?

It seems to me that unless you can get some positive charge
BETWEEN the electrons (as in a plasma) then both the electrostatic
effects and the magnetic effects (due to positive charges at any
distance speeding the other way) both produce forces which tend
to separate the electrons from any observers point of view.

For instance from the frame of reference of a pair of electrons
at rest with respect to each other, clearly the electrostatic
forces between them are pushing them apart, and the electrostatic
forces to the charges far away are also pulling them apart.
Likewise they feel no magnetic effect with respect to each other
because they are not moving with respect to each other, but they
do feel a magnetic attraction to the positive charges far
away flying in the opposite direction.  And if there is any
separation between them to start with then this magnetic
attraction must be slightly stronger for the shorter distances
and must therefore serve to separate them further and not pull
them together.

>From the frame of reference of the positive charges, they are
not moving and thus have no effect except static - which again
serves to separate the electrons since the shorter distance has
the stronger force.  As the others have said, the magnetic force
now primarily acts between the electrons, but only approaches
equality with their electrostatic repulsion as their speeds
approach c.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 01:01:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA23910;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:53:59 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"z-0c-.0.Rr5.zJrar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20042
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

HI,

Sorry I'm late catching up.

At 3:15 PM 6/24/98, Robert I. Eachus wrote:
[snip]
>
>   Convert the coil to a transformer coil and replace the bar magnet with a
>charged slug, or an electron beam.  Now the magnetic pulse in the core
>depends only on the amount of charge moving through the core, not its
>distance from the core, or the size of the core.  (Relative velocity
>matters, but is best thought of in conjunction with a short pulse rather
>than a continous beam.)
>
>   Finally, put a neutral particle beam through the core, and of course you
>detect nothing.
>
>   Now translate to the real universe.  A charge moving WITH RESPECT TO the
>matching charge generates a self compressing force.  This force increases
>linearly with the amount of charge, and the relative velocity.  Due to the
>charge cancelling effects of conductors, the effective velocity of the
>matching charge may depend on the motions of matter in the vicinity.


It is understandable that the balancing charge q2, though a quantized
value, would be statistically distributed throughout the universe about a
moving chage q1 in a uniform manner.  The radius of interaction is
unimportant because the electrostatic field of q1 is a 1/r^2 field.  The
surface of influence also grows as 1/r^2, so distance becomes comparativly
unimportant, except for very large average distances to q2 and velocity
near c.  It seems, for the same reason, even a fairly large displacement of
q1 in one direction or another should have a small effect on any magnetic
force between q1 and q2, assuming q2 is distant, on average.  The universe
is a large place.  I assume something in this paragraph does not jive with
what you are saying Robert.

Given the above, it is difficult to see how a 1/d^2 magnetic force Fy, or
any significant attracting force, arises between two parallel charges q1
and q3, both moving with velocity v, q3 having an opposite charge q4 which
is distributed throughout the universe like q2.  There seems to be nothing
tied to the distance d between q1 and q3, the nearby charge moving in
parallel.  What am I missing?



At 6:45 AM 6/25/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
[snip]
>so that the force between the charges is:
>
>Fy = q(Ey+vBz)= qEy(1-v^2/c^2)=qEy'(1-v^2/c^2)
[snip]

The above only holds for charges which are adjacent, not one ahead of the
other, right?  If the line between q1 and q2 makes angle w with v, then:

Fy = q(Ey+sin(w)Bz)

true?

Also noteworthy is that for the magnetic dipole fields from the spinning charge

FDy = u0 u/(4 Pi y^3)

can flip the charge spins and attract the charges when the dipole force
eventually overwhelms Fy = qEy(1-v^2/c^2) as v --> c, and by many orders of
magnitude over gravitational forces, which also eventually overtake Fy as v
--> c. What is interesting is that these forces eventually overwhelm Fy for
some v, regardless of distance.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 01:06:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA23885;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:53:54 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"Dnb2b.0.6r5.uJrar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20041
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 9:15 AM 6/23/98, William Beaty wrote:
[snip]
>
>Yes, but any dipole force will depend on electron proximity, and why would
>this be different in the parallel beam?

Because at near C the electrostatic force and magnetic force nearly cancel
- making other forces significant at all distances.


>Any dipole force will apply to
>all electrons everywhere, not just electrons in hi-velocity beams.


No - at lower speeds the electrostatic force overwhelms the magnetic.  Also
the dipole force is totally overwhelmed except at very close distances,
e.g. in the nucleus, where the magnetic dipole force adds to the strong
force, and is an important part of binding energy. Only when the circular
magnetic field lines become significant and match the electrostatic force
can the dipole force become significant.

Also, with the electron, being so light, the deBroglie wavelength is large,
especially when travelling at the same relative velocity (it is infinite,
so almost comlpetely overlaps).  This concept leads to Cagel's deuterium
reator design.

If charge exists distributed in the quantum waveform, psi, then the overlap
of the quantum waveforms of two electrons, to the degree it occurs,
eliminates repulsion.   This notion of charge distributed in the waveform I
think is not widely held.  Also, there is then needed some force or
mechanism that holds the waveform together about its center of charge -
otherwise any charged particle should explode! Two superimposed electron
waveforms should explode even faster than one.


>The
>electrons first have to be near each other before a dipole force would
>have an effect.

Not as near if the electrostatice force is cancelled.  Also not as near
when exeactly in parallel.  By Biot-Savarte, the magnetic field intensity
is proportional to sin(w), where w is the angle from v, a vector in the
direction of motion of the current.


>My point is that the parallel-moving electrons start
>flying apart at the moment they leave the hot cathode of the electron gun.
>If a dipole force was important here, then the emitted electrons would
>already be collapsed together inside the hot cathode, or they might
>collapse together the moment they left it.


The electrons do not parallel velocities v when in the cathode, and yes
they might collapse upon leaving the cathode if it is pointed - according
to Ken Shoulders anyway.


>Out in the parallel beam,
>where electric current and magnetic fields are important, the electrons
>cannot be collapsed together by speeding up the beam.


You are assuming here the negative of the hypothesis under discussion!


[snip]
>
>> Might be worthwhile to search "convergent beams", as I have read an article
>> about such.  Don't remember if a velocity distribution was an important
>> element, but do remember the method only worked at very near light speed.


The above should have said "self convergent beams", or "self focussed
beams", as you note below.  This was in reference to high energy
accelerators.


>
>I know that I've seen stuff about focused beams in vacuum tubes by using
>bowl-shaped cathodes.  If you can find something about "self-focussed"
>electron beams or ion beams, it might lead towards one of those "black
>holes" in physics where Relativity is violated, yet nobody wants to
>acknowledge it and so they shy away from studying the effect.  If
>electrons in a beam will self-focus, how does Relativity explain it?


I think there was a particle velocity distribution maintaned in the beam -
which eliminates any need for a force between adjacent particles with
velocity v.


[snip]

>  But the particles are also moving
>towards each other, not only parallel.  My visual thinking fails here, so
>maybe you have a good point.  Can relative velocity and charged particles
>change the position of a collision, or even make a collision occur yet not
>occur?  Sounds like good material for sci.physics.

It seems much easier to visualize if there is an absolute reference frame -
but that is no indication that that is how nature actually works. It would
be nice to be able to strap a saddle on a charged particle, take a ride,
and find out first hand.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 03:49:51 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA07804;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 03:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 03:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:41:16 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: private: anti-gay "race hatred" (fwd)
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"nfPFK2.0.sv1.6otar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20043
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Sorry Bill,

I won't do it again. I have no trouble with gays who aren't militant (or
anybody for that matter). But, I've seen it happen and I've been on the
end of it myself where people continually try to grind you down by
sledging. Its becoming particularly offensive as now its not enought to
call someone gay. This shit really destroys people and it pure evil. It
seems to me that the gays started it all with their campaign of 'outing'
people. Now the older you are, the easier it is to deal with it. My
concern is for the youngsters, believe me it drives them mad, it isolates
them and makes them worse.

So I say stop it before people, peaceful people, start hitting back.
Remi.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 03:49:52 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA07844;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 03:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 03:48:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:46:32 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Enquiring minds (fwd)
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"8ioDi.0.Mw1.Iotar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20044
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Anton Rager wrote:

> Bullshit. You leave out another reason.....genetics.  We're all wired
> a little differently due to differing DNA.  There's a good bit of
> research indicating that sexual preference is also detemined by
> genetics.  Kinda like handedness, creative approcaches, and cognitive
> abilites.  Environment probably is a factor, but  think things like
> same gender parental sexual-abuse has more to do with it than the
> above reasons.
> 

Some people are genetically prone to violence - about 50% of the
population, they have two X chromosomes. Does that make it right? Or do we
try to understand it and know its limitations and boundaries?
Tolerantly,
Remi.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 04:03:20 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA14722;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 04:02:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 04:02:06 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:02:04 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"eImxE1.0.yb3.k-tar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20045
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

I blame the teachers. Stands to reason. Those who were young in the
sixties are now the professors, senior management.

Have you heard of the term in 'locum parentis'.

I don't bully. Know you right from wrong. I don't regard these people as
worthless, but one must know their limitations. 

Some facts about the lifestyle they chose (this is scientific):-

. Prone to STDs from promiscuity
. Prone to depression and other mental illnesses
. Prone to drug abuse
. Prone to alcoholism
. Prone to blackmail and the underworld

This is what you foist upon the young.

Human beings aren't determined by genetics - personality is a thing that
can be moulded. To say a person is determined by genetics is typical
liberal 'inverted racism'.

>From the genetic argument we infer: girls will never be good at Science
not having the logic, spatial abilities of boys; boys aren't good students
because they have low attention spans; blacks aren't worth educating and
so on.

No, the purpose of education is to develop the child's attributes. Not all
attributes are necessarily equal in potential or compare well with their
peers.

If you train for fitness, most won't become Olympians but they will
achieve a high quality of life. To say that a person won't become A+ is
not an argument to give up. 

No more, unless private email.
Remi.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 05:10:52 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA21111;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 05:09:01 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 05:09:01 -0700
Message-ID: <002a01bda0fb$047edba0$ba41d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:04:06 -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: <"CD9dj1.0.n95.Tzuar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20046
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed's essay on the necessity of expertise is excellent. He tells it like it
is.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 06:05:21 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA01417;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:01:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:01:08 -0700
Message-ID: <003e01bda102$1217d440$96b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:57:17 -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: <"59gAU1.0.3M.Jkvar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20047
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Another way to seeing the cancellation of
the electric field by the magnetic field for
charges moving on parallel paths (in the same direction).

Consider the force on the outer charges in
a cylindrical beam of current I, moving with
velocity v in the z direction.
The tangential magnetic field at the surface
(r = a) is by Ampere's law:

B = 2*uo*I/a  where uo = 4(pi)E-7 henry/meter

Continuity of charge requires the electric charge density per unit length
(tau)to be

     tau = I/v

In which case the radial electric field at the
surface is,by Gauss' law,

E(tau) = 2*I/(eo*v*a)

where eo = 8.84E-12 farad/meter

Thus the radial force on a charged particle at the surface is,

Fr = q[Er - (v*B)]= [2*I*q/(eo*a*v)]*
(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2

confirming the almost complete cancellation of
the electric field by the magnetic field at velocities near the speed of
light c.

This E field canceling MUST occur in the nucleus between the "quarks" of
like charge q, with spin (mvr) = hbar, where v is very,very close to
c,"stacked" side-by-side resulting in
the net positive charge, (net negative charge for antimatter with external
positrons instead of electrons).

On the other hand the "pinch force" by Ampere's law for two parallel
conductors at separation r, in dynes/cm length = I1*I2/(100*r) or
in a wire or charged particle conductor:

P =  I^2/[200*(pi)*r^2] dynes/cm^2

But, for any  current I with electron or ion
drift velocity of fractions of cm/second but,with a "charge flow" below but
near c, what
is the Reference Frame that creates the B field in the first place?   :-)

Regards,    Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 06:56:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA11516;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:53:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:53:58 -0700
Message-Id: <199806261351.JAA03311 mercury.mv.net>
Subject: Robert Park Deception About A.C. Clarke Essay
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 98 09:57:39 -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: <"KLsb12.0.rp2.sVwar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20049
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robert Park (American Physical Society) Deception about Arthur C. Clarke 
Essay in Science


 Dr. Robert Park, Big Chief Science Bigot at the American Physical 
Society -- whose decade-long assualt on cold fusion we skewered in the 
last issue of Infinite Energy (#19) -- doesn't have the integrity and 
decency to report the essence of a major portion of the *brilliant* and 
welcome Science magazine essay by Arthur C. Clarke (5 June 1998). Note 
(below) how in point #4 of Park's What's New weekly propaganda sheet he 
does not mention cold fusion or what Clarke said about cold fusion, when 
almost HALF of the Science essay was about that discovery! The Science 
essay included Clarke's statement that his level of belief that the 
phenomenon is real and important has reached a 99% confidence level. Also 
ignored by Park are Clarke's clear concluding statement about Pons and 
Fleischmann:

"Finally, another of my dubious predicitons: Pons and Fleischmann will be 
the only scientists ever to win both the Nobel and Ignoble Prizes."

I think Park new EXACTLY what Clarke meant, but propagandist for bigoted 
skepticism that he is, he refused to transmit Clarke's clear messsage. Of 
course he didn't! Because in doing so he would have had to attack Clarke, 
something he is not up to -- either in ability or in intelligence.

Park changes the meaning of Clarke's message to the pallid and deceptive 
"new sources"! What more proof does anyone need of Park's M.O., which is 
to ignore and cover up evidence of serious support for phenomena and 
experiments that he does not investigate, understand, or believe.

With that said, I am sure that Arthur C. Clarke will take Park's omission 
with good humor and ascribe them to the foibles of an aging and fearful 
PR man, Robert Park.

Sincerely,

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 What's New by Robert Park of the American Physical Society. Note 
Clarke's point #4 -- DISTORTED by Park from original meaning: 


1. ON SCIENCE, POLITICS, AND ASTEROIDS It is not often that a leading 
science journal invites a leading science-fiction writer to present a 
lead essay in its pages. But there are many scientists at work today who 
made their first youthful contact with the adventurous aspects of science 
in the novels of Arthur C. Clarke. Now 81 years old and Chancellor of the 
University of Moratuwa (LK), Clarke was trained as a scientist and 
originated the idea of satellite communication in a scientific article in 
1945. In a recent essay in the journal *Science*, Clarke makes the 
following points: 1) For more than a century, science and its 
occasionally ugly sister technology have been the chief driving forces 
shaping our world. They decide the kinds of futures that are possible. 
Human wisdom must decide which are desirable. Clarke says it is "truly 
appalling" that so few of our politicians have any scientific or 
engineering background. 2) Clarke says, "I have encountered a few 
'creationists' and because they were usually nice, intelligent people, I 
have been unable to decide whether they were *really* mad or only 
pretending to be mad. If I was a religious person, I would consider 
creationism nothing less than blasphemy. Do its adherents imagine that 
God is a cosmic hoaxer who has created the whole vast fossil record for 
the sole purpose of misleading humankind?" 3) Clarke says the scientific 
establishment has only slowly understood that the history of this planet, 
and perhaps of civilization itself, has been modified in important ways 
by physical impacts from space, and he proposes that we embark on a 
serious study of the probability of comet or asteroid impactors on the 
planet Earth. 4) Concerning energy production from new sources, Clarke 
says his guess is that large scale industrial application will begin 
around the turn of the century -- "at which point one can imagine the end 
of the fossil-fuel-nuclear age, making concerns about global warming 
irrelevant, as oil-and- coal-burning systems are phased out." QY: Arthur 
C. Clarke, 25 Barnes Place, Colombo 7, LK. (Science 5 Jun 98 280:1532) 
(Science-Week 26 Jun 98)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 06:56:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA11342;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:53:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:53:47 -0700
Message-Id: <199806261351.JAA03277 mercury.mv.net>
Subject: UK program on Benveniste - 7/1/98
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 98 09:57:28 -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: <"mzaC-2.0.2n2.gVwar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20048
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Just passing along this information from Dr. Truzzi so that our UK 
colleagues might watch the show.

Gene Mallove


CC:          Jacques Benveniste, jbenveniste lbn.org


This is primarily being sent to those in my address book in the UK plus
a couple of other people who might want to know about this, too. I just
got the following note from Jacques Benveniste who asked me to pass it
on:

"I inform you that I will appear in London on a Channel 4 program
Wednesday July 1st at 23:30, on a show called "weekly planet (?)". The
theme will be the future of medicine. Could you please inform
the friends you know there?"


-- Marcello

P.S. For those interested, I might add that, as I understand it,
contrary to what some of his critics suggested after Benveniste lost the
first round, his  legal action in France alleging libel continues.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 07:50:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA28708;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 07:46:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 07:46:15 -0700
From: Puthoff aol.com
Message-ID: <92b226db.3593b413 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:45:38 EDT
To: 72240.1256 compuserve.com, Blind.Copy.Receiver@compuserve.com,
        vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:  Expertise is essential
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78
Resent-Message-ID: <"7gUAY2.0.T07.sGxar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20050
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


In a message dated 6/25/98 10:53:50 PM, Jed wrote (regarding South Sea
Islander's cargo-cult airplane imitations, used as metaphor for Scott Little's
CF experiments):

<>

There *are* wires and electricity in Scott's electrolysis cells -  I have seen
them!  	:-)

Hal Puthoff

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 08:48:18 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA02198;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:46:37 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:46:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51894749C42BD111AACB00805F191B5CFD9CB8 xch-cpc-02>
From: "Scudder, Henry J" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:37:41 -0700
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Content-Type: text/plain
Resent-Message-ID: <"RJyMm3.0.GY.R9yar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20051
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Frederick
	If you used sine waves, you would have reinvented the skin
effect.
Hank

> ----------
> From: 	Frederick J Sparber[SMTP:fjsparb sprintmail.com]
> Reply To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Sent: 	Friday, June 26, 1998 5:57 AM
> To: 	Vortex-l
> Cc: 	George
> Subject: 	Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
> 
> To: Vortex
> 
> Another way to seeing the cancellation of
> the electric field by the magnetic field for
> charges moving on parallel paths (in the same direction).
> 
> Consider the force on the outer charges in
> a cylindrical beam of current I, moving with
> velocity v in the z direction.
> The tangential magnetic field at the surface
> (r = a) is by Ampere's law:
> 
> B = 2*uo*I/a  where uo = 4(pi)E-7 henry/meter
> 
> Continuity of charge requires the electric charge density per unit
> length
> (tau)to be
> 
>      tau = I/v
> 
> In which case the radial electric field at the
> surface is,by Gauss' law,
> 
> E(tau) = 2*I/(eo*v*a)
> 
> where eo = 8.84E-12 farad/meter
> 
> Thus the radial force on a charged particle at the surface is,
> 
> Fr = q[Er - (v*B)]= [2*I*q/(eo*a*v)]*
> (1-v^2/c^2)^1/2
> 
> confirming the almost complete cancellation of
> the electric field by the magnetic field at velocities near the speed
> of
> light c.
> 
> This E field canceling MUST occur in the nucleus between the "quarks"
> of
> like charge q, with spin (mvr) = hbar, where v is very,very close to
> c,"stacked" side-by-side resulting in
> the net positive charge, (net negative charge for antimatter with
> external
> positrons instead of electrons).
> 
> On the other hand the "pinch force" by Ampere's law for two parallel
> conductors at separation r, in dynes/cm length = I1*I2/(100*r) or
> in a wire or charged particle conductor:
> 
> P =  I^2/[200*(pi)*r^2] dynes/cm^2
> 
> But, for any  current I with electron or ion
> drift velocity of fractions of cm/second but,with a "charge flow"
> below but
> near c, what
> is the Reference Frame that creates the B field in the first place?
> :-)
> 
> Regards,    Frederick
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 09:00:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA17333;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:56:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:56:43 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980625121304.00c0cd60 spectre.mitre.org>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"1MjIv.0.fE4.wIyar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20052
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Robert I. Eachus wrote:

>    Can we drop this now?  TVs, superconducting supercolliders, ebeam chip
> etching machines and faraday cages all work and are very well understood.
> It is just one of those "freshman mistakes" to think that you can get other
> than nonsence from mathematically studying an unbalanced field.  There are
> no such things, in real life, even in van de Graff generators.

OK, but do you mind if I post some of your messages to sci.physics?  I
want to get to the bottom of this, and the relativity experts there will
very quickly leap on my errors and illuminate their exact nature in
excruciating detail.

One last question!  :) if two electrons are 1mm apart and flying initially
parallel down the CRT tube, what velocity causes them to stop repelling?
I mean, can you calculate the velocity where "pinch" overrides repulsion,
the velocity which, if exceeded, causes the electrons to approach each
other?

((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 26 09:24:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA27063;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:20:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:20:29 -0700
Message-ID: <01BDA0F4.BA5C08A0 209-113-17-90.insync.net>
From: Tractebel Energy Marketing 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 08:36:00 -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 JAA27038
Resent-Message-ID: <"8PVg62.0.hc6.Cfyar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20054
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I totally agree with the anti-bashing sentiment, however, I must say that I firmly believe that we all eventually pay the price for our wrong choices in life, whatever those wrong choices are, both as individuals and as a nation.  That's why I don't get t
angled up in trying to tell other people how to live there lives.  Now, if enough people get together and make enough of the wrong choices to where their choices adversely affect my life and the lives of my family, that's another story.

Nuf said.

Allen

-----Original Message-----
From:	Scudder, Henry J [SMTP:Henry.Scudder West.Boeing.com]
Sent:	Thursday, June 25, 1998 11:58 AM
To:	'vortex-l eskimo.com'
Subject:	RE: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"

Bill
	I couldn't agree with you more. Bashing of ANY group is
unappropriate behavior. PERIOD.

Hank

> ----------
> From: 	William Beaty[SMTP:billb eskimo.com]
> Reply To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Sent: 	Thursday, June 25, 1998 9:31 AM
> To: 	vortex-l eskimo.com
> Subject: 	public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
> 
> 
> An extremely inappropriate topic, which appalls me in the same way as
> if
> it was about Jewish people or Afro-americans. 
> 
> How many gay people are on this list?  I'll understand if you don't
> stand
> up to be counted, since such an act might be dangerous on vortex-L.
> 
> Hmmm, Maybe I should declare VORTEX-L to be a radical-tolerance,
> pro-gay
> area, and all who don't like it can leave?  Or maybe we should just do
> what we have done in the past, and refuse to bring political or
> religious
> discussions into the science arena.  In this instance, perhaps the
> former
> is the more appropriate response.
> 
>    - Bill "one of the amoral pro-gay bugs under the slimy rocks" Beaty
> 
> 
> ((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 26 09:24:30 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA26925;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:19:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:19:30 -0700
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:16:21 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: "Crystal Fire" book, et cetera
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806261218_MC2-5172-84B1 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"7eVHV3.0.ca6.Ieyar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20053
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

In my message "Expertise is essential" I mentioned the book "Crystal Fire," by
M. Riordan & L. Hoddeson (W. W. Norton, 1997).

Chapter 10 describes the first information seminars held by Bell Labs to
spread knowledge of the transistor. These were held partly to drum up
customers, since you cannot sell to a technical market until your customer is
educated, and partly in response to threats of antitrust action by the U.S.
government. The government was also concerned about national security. It
wanted to quickly incorporate transistors in weapons in the Korean war. The
first seminar was held on September 17, 1951. Seven charter busloads of
engineers were taken from New York City to a five-day seminar in Murray Hill,
where they were taught a great deal about the physics and applications of
transistors but: "Curiously absent from the symposium, however, was any
mention of the technologies involved in *fabricating* these gadgets." In May
1952 another seminar was held, and this time some of the manufacturing
techniques were discussed. "Teal and Buehler, for example, spent hours
explaining how to build a crystal-pulling mechanism and use it to grow
double-doped germanium crystals." Tom Shepherd of Texas Instruments reported:
"They worked the dickens out of us. They did a very good job; it was very
open and really very helpful."

I contend that until Johnson-Matthey brings in seven busloads of metallurgists
and puts them through an intense 5-day training course on how to make Type A
palladium, progress in cold fusion will be stymied. It may grind to a halt.
The scientists may die before enough progress can be made to sustain interest
in the field. J-M and others who hold the pieces of the CF puzzle must share
this information, just as Bell Labs shared their knowledge of transistors. As
I said, Ma Bell did not do this out of the kindness of her heart. Absent a
kick in the butt from the Feds, she might have kept transistors secret for
decades.

The publication I referred to as "Ma Bell's Semiconductor Cookbook" was the
Proceedings of the May 1952 Seminar. It was formally titled "Transistor
Technology. It was later declassified by Bell and published by Van Nostrand.
"The book became fondly known as 'Mother Bell's Cookbook' by members of the
burgeoning industry" (p. 197). One of the techniques it described was "zone
refining," invented by William Pfann in 1950, which produced germanium "that
was better than 99.99999999 percent pure." This was an extraordinary
achievement, but it was only one of many extraordinary breakthroughs needed
before transistors could be made practical. Bell Labs received one Nobel Prize
for the transistor, which might give you the idea that one group of people
made one concerted R&D effort, and voila, the job was done. That is not true.
Bardeen et al. working by themselves could not have invented the peripheral
technology needed for transistors. They invented the sexy part that makes the
technology possible -- the core technology. This spurred other people to
invent the necessary peripheral technology. That is how innovation proceeds.
Edison was not finished with the incandescent light when he selected a
filament; he had only begun. He went on to invent the manufacturing machinery,
the screw-in mounting, efficient generators, underground cables, and hundreds
of other clever gadgets that made electric lighting possible. 

Germanium transistors are no longer used, but the silicon ones also
incorporate a long line of extraordinary discoveries, labor and knowledge,
stretching back -- if you like -- to prehistoric techniques for mining and
gathering materials, and determining which metal is which. Behind every
artifact of civilization there stands a long line of people. Their knowledge
is passed on for free to each generation. We inherit a nearly perfect world,
already filled with buildings, institutions, books, and knowledge that took
billions of man-years and unbearable sacrifice to produce. Each new generation
takes all previous progress for granted. People have no idea what riches they
have been granted, and how much effort is incorporated in the artifacts of
daily life. When I first used a computer, around 1967, the performance and
capabilities of the machine staggered me. The machine seemed miraculous.  It
gave me what seemed like godlike powers to manipulate information. I shall
never forget the extraordinary sensation when my primitive programs in Fortran
and BASIC executed correctly. I purchased a Data General computer in 1979 for
$30,000. I wheedled the salesman to get me a list 110,000 correctly spelled
words, which filled a substantial chunk of the 12 MB hard disk. One of the
first things I did was to write a word processing program, with on-screen
justification, chapters, underlining, spell-checking and other advanced
features. I became perhaps the first person in the world to have a personal
computer with word processing at his beck and call any hour of the day or
night, for any purpose. This was like owning your own flying saucer, or a time
machine. It was a sensation that my children and the generations that follow
will never recapture, because they take computers for granted, and they do not
know what life was like without them. They cannot grasp how amazing these
machines are. Nobody will ever again program his own word processor in 16 KB
of RAM. Nobody will ever again experience what it feels like to bootstrap
yourself from the pen-and-paper and typewriter era to word processing. My
mother learned to drive an automobile in New York City in the 1920s, and drove
the family around from then on. She knew first-hand what a marvelous
convenience automobiles are compared to horses and trolley cars. I can barely
imagine how she felt. You get a sense of the impact when you see how her
generation fell in love with the automobile and paved over an area larger than
the state of Maryland.

There is no telling how much more labor it will take to make cold fusion
devices reliable and practical, but when I consider the effort and genius
expended to perfect arrow heads, pottery, eyeglasses, nails, guns, concrete,
vaccinations, paper, Hollerith machines, and Uni-ball Micropoint pens, I am
confident that we can master the problems of cold fusion *if only we try*.
Only the will to succeed is missing, which deprives us of the resources needed
to finish the job. Some technologies are beyond our capabilities. Examples
include the Great Eastern, the ground-based navigation systems partially built
by the FAA and rendered obsolete by the GPS, and Tokamak reactors. Sometimes
we overreach. But not in the case of cold fusion. Enough progress has been
made, and enough demonstrations have been performed to give us confidence that
the answers can be found with a reasonable effort, in a reasonably short time,
at a cost commensurate with the value of the results. I am sure it will take
seven busloads of word-class experts from many fields to launch the first cold
fusion production lines. The task will never be successfully undertaken by
lone inventors working in their basements. But it is worth seven busloads of
experts, or 700, or 7,000. We have that many experts waiting in the wings, and
there is no job on earth more important for them to do than CF. We must
convince them that cold fusion is real, and worth pursuing. The first step is
a public relations campaign to accomplish for CF what the prestige of Bell
Labs accomplished in 1951: to convince people it is worth pursuing.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 09:26:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA28789;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:23:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:23:20 -0700
Message-ID: <3593F478.7153 bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:20:24 -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: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ep7B01.0.W17.thyar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20055
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Cornwall RO wrote:
 
> I blame the teachers. Stands to reason. Those who were young in the
> sixties are now the professors, senior management.



My newage friends say homosexuality is Gaia's "immune response" to
overpopulation.

Me, I celebrate diversity and leave judgement to He Who is Qualified.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 09:37:17 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA00094;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:33:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:33:27 -0700
Message-ID: <19980626162736.16197.rocketmail send1d.yahoomail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:27:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anton Rager 
Subject: Stop the Remi discussion - Now!
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"ybigJ1.0.M1.Mryar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20056
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dammit People.....take it offline!!!!!!!  






==
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  Fri Jun 26 10:00:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA06363;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:53:59 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:53:59 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: RE: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
In-Reply-To: <000001bda093$aa078c60$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"HQ_Em1.0.LZ1.d8zar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20057
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Brendan Hall wrote:

> There are probably as many anti-gay vorts as pro-gay vorts (and visa versa).
> That view is irrelevant to being subscribed to vortex-l, and should remain
> so.

Let's take this to private mail people!  Do I have to start unsubscribing
violators?


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 26 10:11:51 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA13107;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:02:14 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
Resent-Message-ID: <"zVZ0t1.0.hC3._Lzar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20058
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 8:04 AM 6/26/98, Mike Carrell wrote:
>Jed's essay on the necessity of expertise is excellent. He tells it like it
>is.
>
>Mike Carrell


Yes, an unfortunate commentary on the state of affairs.  As long as such
extreme expertise is essential, CF has gone nowhere, there is no
significant progress.

One can now mailorder transistorized electronic parts of great complexity,
and use them with no prior expertise.  CF is still on the opposite end of
the spectrum.  At this time the Order of the Tortoise is a giant
improvement on the alternative, which might aptly be designated the "Order
of the Abalone."

ab a lo ne (ah ba' lo ney) n.
Any of various large, edible marine gastropods of the genus Haliotis,
having an ear-shaped shell with a row of holes along the outer edge. The
colorful, pearly interior of the shell is often used for making ornaments.
Also called ear shell. Glues itself to habitat with unusual tenacity.
Often found near dunking birds.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 10:12:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA13331;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 10:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3593D4DC.A69D669F ariel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:05:32 -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: public msg: anti-gay "race hatred"
References: <000001bda093$aa078c60$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"x84b_3.0.DG3.bOzar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20059
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Brendan Hall wrote:
> There are probably as many anti-gay vorts as pro-gay vorts (and visa versa).
> That view is irrelevant to being subscribed to vortex-l, and should remain
> so.  Declaring this pro-gay does not make it irrelevant but makes it a
> moral choice as to whether you be part of this e-mail list.  It would
> therefore cause several legitimate members to leave the list, ones who
> have not wanted to make it into an issue here.  However, if you declare
> the topic irrelevant to this list, just as you have done with politics
> and religion, then you would not cause people that have a differing view
> to you (in this area) to be alienated from this list on moral grounds.
> 
> Brendan Hall


I'm neither anti-gay or pro-gay.  I am however, pro-tolerance.  To each
his own, as there is no such thing as a moral absolute.

I apologize to those who feel this is off topic.  However, no topic is
irrelevant in my view (in deference to mr. beatty, list owner, of
course).  This is the problem with science in general, I believe, the
philosophy that you can and should isolate and compartmentalize things
that have no apparent effect on other things.  If for no other reason,
this topic has stimulated thought, which is always valuable.

Terren


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 11:05:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA26430;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:02:19 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:02:19 -0700
Message-ID: <01BDA102.50212D40.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: Stop the Remi discussion - Now!
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:59:52 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"OjtUL1.0.rS6.g8-ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20060
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



-----Original Message-----
From:	Anton Rager [SMTP:a_rager yahoo.com]
Sent:	Friday, June 26, 1998 11:28 AM
To:	vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject:	Stop the Remi discussion - Now!

>Dammit People.....take it offline!!!!!!!  

Agreed. This is a discussion group for anomalous experiments and cold fusion, not subjects like gay rights.

Kyle R. Mcallister
Who is straight as ever, but tired of this thread

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 11:50:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09212;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:46:57 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:46:57 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
Reply-To: William Beaty 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: move "gay/science" topic to other list?
In-Reply-To: <3593D4DC.A69D669F ariel.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"dV3vE.0.rF2.Wo-ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20061
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Terren Suydam wrote:

> I apologize to those who feel this is off topic.  However, no topic is
> irrelevant in my view (in deference to mr. beatty, list owner, of
> course).  This is the problem with science in general, I believe, the
> philosophy that you can and should isolate and compartmentalize things
> that have no apparent effect on other things.  If for no other reason,
> this topic has stimulated thought, which is always valuable.

Remember the Newman motor discussion?  The cure was to move it to the
other unused vortex list.

Do numerous vortex-L subscribers want to pursue this topic, or just let it
drop?  Vote on this by moving the discussion to VortexB-L list.  If
only a couple of people subscribe, then the discussion will fade quickly.

    To subscribe to vortexB-L, send a blank message to
       vortexB-L-request eskimo.com 
    with the word "subscribe" in the SUBJECT line of the message header. 

I really don't have the time or energy to ride herd on such an
inflammatory topic, so it will be up to the subscribers to follow the
usual vortex-L rules.


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 26 11:53:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09498;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:48:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:48:10 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
Reply-To: William Beaty 
To: VORTEX 
Subject: Re: Robert Park Deception About A.C. Clarke Essay
In-Reply-To: <199806261351.JAA03311 mercury.mv.net>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"YXyL32.0.CK2.fp-ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20062
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, E.F. Mallove wrote:

>  Dr. Robert Park, Big Chief Science Bigot at the American Physical 
> Society -- whose decade-long assualt on cold fusion we skewered in the 
> last issue of Infinite Energy (#19) -- doesn't have the integrity and 
> decency to report the essence of a major portion of the *brilliant* and 
> welcome Science magazine essay by Arthur C. Clarke (5 June 1998).

The Clarke essay is available here:

  http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/280/5369/1532

   Even more controversial than the threat of asteroid impacts is what I
   would call perhaps one of the greatest scandals in the history of
   science, the cold fusion caper. Like almost everyone else, I was...


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 26 12:11:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA16903;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:09:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:09:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:06:42 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Energy to manufacture PVs
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806261508_MC2-516F-D619 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"730uW.0.l74.G7_ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20064
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Here is an interesting comment from www.mrsolar.com.

     Regarding the question, about the power it takes to make a solar panel I
     contacted Solarex, an American producer of solar panels and here is
     their information they provide. 

     "We've analyzed crudely our operation (dividing our total energy use --
     including office A/C, lights, etc. by our MW output) and find that we
     use about 2.5 KWH to make one watt of output. We make some wafers for
     other operations and there is non-manufacturing load in there it is a
     bit higher than the real number. We use this to say that a Solarex
     module panel in a sunny place will pay back the energy used to make it
     in about 1.5 years or alternatively that it will in its life supply 20
     times the energy it took to make it. 

     "Obviously, we've avoided the embedded energy in the materials in this
     calculation. This is something we don't do and can get very complicated
     . . ."

I expect present manufacturing facilities are low volume pilot plants, so
efficiency will be low. A large mass production factory would do much better
than 20:1. I think the embedded energy may be low, because it does not take
much silicon and improved manufacturing techniques will reduce waste.

This 20:1 overhead ratio (5%) may sound dismal, but actually it is better than
most conventional energy systems. In 1985 worldwide crude oil production was
59 million barrels per day. Four million barrels, or 7%, were cycled back into
the system in "Refinery Use / Loss." (Sci. Am., Sept. 1990, p. 59). Natural
gas production was equivalent to 29 million barrels of oil. Of this 3 million,
or 10%, were wasted in "Transmission Loss." 13% of centrally generated
electricity is lost in transmission. Very little PV electricity will be
wasted, because it is consumed on site and battery storage is efficient,
although expensive.

Incidently, 8 million barrels per day of oil (14%) went into "Nonenergy use"
like plastic feedstock. I thought that was 19%, as I have claimed in previous
messages. It turns out 11 million barrels per day of fossil fuel is used for
feedstock, but that includes 1 million barrels equivalent of coal, and 2
million barrels equivalent of natural gas.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 12:16:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA16735;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:08:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:08:58 -0700
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:06:30 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Time-dependent degradation of amorphous
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806261508_MC2-516F-D618 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"K3Q-22.0.I54.87_ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20063
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Bob Huggins relayed some additional information on the degradation problem:

     This is known among folks working in that area as the "Staebler-Wronski
     effect", and has generally been attributed to a light-induced increase
     in the density of localized states. Although I am very out of date on
     this, I think that it probably has to do with the mobility of the
     dissolved hydrogen in the silicon.

     The early references to this effect are:

     D.L. Staebler and C.R. Wronski, Applied Physics Letters 31, 292 (1977)

     D.L. Staebler and C.R. Wronski, Journal of Applied Physics 51, 32 (1980)

     D.L. Staebler, et al., Proc. 15th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists
     Conference, p. 249

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 13:02:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA05705;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:55:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:55:21 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:56:35 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"Gl5ow1.0.0P1.do_ar" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20065
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 6:57 AM 6/26/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>To: Vortex
>
>Another way to seeing the cancellation of
>the electric field by the magnetic field for
>charges moving on parallel paths (in the same direction).
>
>Consider the force on the outer charges in
>a cylindrical beam of current I, moving with
>velocity v in the z direction.
>The tangential magnetic field at the surface
>(r = a) is by Ampere's law:
>
>B = 2*uo*I/a  where uo = 4(pi)E-7 henry/meter


OK - so you are ignoring the two particle model, bypassing the sin(w)
effect of Biot-Savart, i.e. dB = (u0 i dl sin(w))/(4 Pi r^2), by
integrating over the z axis.


>
>Continuity of charge requires the electric charge density per unit length
>(tau)to be
>
>     tau = I/v
>
>In which case the radial electric field at the
>surface is,by Gauss' law,
>
>E(tau) = 2*I/(eo*v*a)
>
>where eo = 8.84E-12 farad/meter
>
>Thus the radial force on a charged particle at the surface is,
>
>Fr = q[Er - (v*B)]= [2*I*q/(eo*a*v)]*
>(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2
>
>confirming the almost complete cancellation of
>the electric field by the magnetic field at velocities near the speed of
>light c.
>
>This E field canceling MUST occur in the nucleus between the "quarks" of
>like charge q, with spin (mvr) = hbar, where v is very,very close to
>c,"stacked" side-by-side resulting in
>the net positive charge, (net negative charge for antimatter with external
>positrons instead of electrons).
>
>On the other hand the "pinch force" by Ampere's law for two parallel
>conductors at separation r, in dynes/cm length = I1*I2/(100*r) or
>in a wire or charged particle conductor:
>
>P =  I^2/[200*(pi)*r^2] dynes/cm^2
>
>But, for any  current I with electron or ion
>drift velocity of fractions of cm/second but,with a "charge flow" below but
>near c, what
>is the Reference Frame that creates the B field in the first place?   :-)


As you surely know, the relative motion of the electrons in the two
conductors, vs the nuclei, serves to eliminate the need for a 3rd
(reference) frame.  The glacial speed is compensated for by quantiy of
electrons.  It is one case where quantity makes quality.

Am curious as to your take on the relativistic effect on magnetic dipole
attraction.  It would seem that, unless the axes are both in the z
direction, for two attracting dipoles q1 and q2, that one side of the field
is rotating faster than the other, thus the Fitzgerald contraction would
compress one side more than the other - a distortion of the dipole field
should occur. However, this field forshortening is happening in the z axis,
so parallel (laterally adjacent, both in x-y plane) particles q2 and q2
should not have their attraction affected?

If you have have idealized to uniform charge density tau = I/v, it then
must be assumed the dipoles all align in the z axis, otherwise the dipole
magnetic fields will cancel, which does not happen in a 2 particle model.
The dipoles in one filament must align in one direction, those in the
opposite filament must therefore align in the opposing direction. If not so
aligned, they will be flipped upon approach if the filaments, so both
filaments are opposed.  This is oddly reminiscent of the filament thread
earlier.

So, a particle beam then might be idealized as a set of filaments with
internal spins aligned and near filaments havng spins reversed.  The
magnetic field of the filament spin then either adds to r subtracts from
the circular B of the filament which is due to the current, depending on
whether the filament's spin is clockwise or counterclockwise.  The net
attraction due to B is then unchanged, but the dipole field attraction is
always additive.  The dipole attraction thus is always present regardless
of v, and has no counteracting electrostatic field repusion due to the fact
the dipole field is generated with no additional charge q.

Does this sound reasonable?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 13:13:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA10848;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:58:17 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Not enough wires . . .
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806261600_MC2-516B-65E5 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"WBp_42.0.Qf2.x-_ar" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20066
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Hal Puthoff points out that Scott Little's experiment does, in fact, contain
wires and electricity. It is not made from discarded packing crates and shells
like the Cargo Cult magic fetishes. Actually, the calorimeter Scott brought to
ICCF6 did look suspiciously like something made from a discarded packing
crate. While the cell does have wires, one of the problems with it according
to Storms, Bockris and McKubre, is that it does not have enough wires. It
could use one or two more, to measure loading, either by resistance across the
cathode or OCV in a luggin capillary (a small glass straw) some distance away
from the cathode. I do not know how that would work with a CETI bead cathode.
It sounds like a can of worms.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 13:26:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA13418;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:17:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:17:35 -0700
Message-Id: <199806262015.QAA21084 mercury.mv.net>
Subject: Quote was not from Park!
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 98 16:21:15 -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: <"f2Vd.0.ZH3.V70br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20067
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vortexians:

I am sorry for the confusion. Summary of A.C. Clarke in Science was NOT 
from Robert Park, it was from "Science Week." The hazards of quick looks 
at e-mail... Well, we'll see what Park really DID say about Clarke. Maybe 
I'll attack that too.

Best, Gene



Subject: 
             SCIENCE-WEEK June 26, 1998
        Date: 
             Thu, 25 Jun 1998 08:19:14 -0600
       From: 
             Science-Week 
Organization: 
             Science-Week
          To: 
             prismx scienceweek.com, prismx@scienceweek.com,
prismx scienceweek.com





-------------- Enclosure number 1 ----------------
SCIENCE-WEEK

A Weekly Digest of the News of Science

June 26, 1998

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 13:37:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA21276;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:32:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:32:49 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:31:47 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: <"ZhJta1.0.4C5.lL0br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20068
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-25 19:56:41 EDT, you write:
   
> I used excel
>  and I'm not sure how to get the graph to you.
>  Could you read it if I put it on our web site
>  in HTML? What spreadsheet and version are you using?
>  George Holz      george varisys.com
George,
Attach the excel file to an e-mail to me. I am using lotus 123 rel.5.
You could try putting it up on your website. Whats the URL?

I ran a test yesterday, H2 no K.  I have to rerun this to be sure I get all
the K off of the upper electrode from previous K runs.  On the test I ran
I got ~20 deg C per watt.  That is the same I got running with K.
I have an idea why degrees C I per watt drops at higher power input; the 
raditiative losses are much greater at the higher temps. Would this
not cause lower C per watt readings?

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 13:39:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA22189;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:35:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:35:08 -0700
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:20:00 -0700
X-Intended-For: 
Message-Id: <199806262020.NAA08939 slave2.aa.net>
X-Sender: knuke pop.aa.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: knuke aa.net (Michael T Huffman)
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
Resent-Message-ID: <"b5iPP3.0.YQ5.wN0br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20069
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>
>ab a lo ne (ah ba' lo ney) n.
>Any of various large, edible marine gastropods of the genus Haliotis,
>having an ear-shaped shell with a row of holes along the outer edge. The
>colorful, pearly interior of the shell is often used for making ornaments.
>Also called ear shell. Glues itself to habitat with unusual tenacity.
>Often found near dunking birds.
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner          

Abalone Boat n.
Nautical term for a boat full of baloney. -Knuke

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 14:04:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA31875;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:58:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:58:43 -0700
Message-ID: <35940BA6.499E interlaced.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:59:18 -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: <"t7ypH2.0.ln7.2k0br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20070
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

VCockeram aol.com wrote:
> 
the
> raditiative losses are much greater at the higher temps. Would this
> not cause lower C per watt readings?

Absolutly, Vince!  (Radiation proportional to absolute T^4)  :-)

Another reason to consider going to the step where you put the reactor
inside a copper tube/absorber and hold the absorber temp constant with
cooling water - of course, that's a lot of work - and you need to
measure water flow (M. Schaffer, I think).

Frank Stenger

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 14:33:18 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA25625;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 14:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 14:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <003601bda146$97ae3100$8b8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:07:44 -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: <"uZ3jD2.0._F6.jy0br" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20071
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, June 26, 1998 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames

Horace wrote:


>At 6:57 AM 6/26/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>>To: Vortex
>>
>>Another way to seeing the cancellation of
>>the electric field by the magnetic field for
>>charges moving on parallel paths (in the same direction).
>>
>>Consider the force on the outer charges in
>>a cylindrical beam of current I, moving with
>>velocity v in the z direction.
>>The tangential magnetic field at the surface
>>(r = a) is by Ampere's law:
>>
>>B = 2*uo*I/a  where uo = 4(pi)E-7 henry/meter
>
>
>OK - so you are ignoring the two particle model, bypassing the sin(w)
>effect of Biot-Savart, i.e. dB = (u0 i dl sin(w))/(4 Pi r^2), by
>integrating over the z axis.

Not ignoring, but passing on the fundamentals
of Relativistic Electrodynamic effects of moving charges. If you remember a
basic tenet
of Electromagnetism. " a MOVING CHARGE creates
a MAGNETIC field, and a time-varying MAGNETIC field creates an ELECTRIC
field." :-)

According to (+/-)q = CV = 1.602E-19 coulombs a constant for ANY PARTICLE
where the sign (+/-)
is merely a matter of phase y = sin x for regular particles (quarks) and y =
cos x for neutrinos,the displacement current of the oscillating "Superstring
Circles" E = kq^2/R
creates the Magnetic Property.

Don't forget that Biot-Savart did their work ca.1820's followed by Ampere
then Maxwell in the 1860's.  :-)

>>
>>Continuity of charge requires the electric charge density per unit length
>>(tau)to be
>>
>>     tau = I/v
>>
>>In which case the radial electric field at the
>>surface is,by Gauss' law,
>>
>>E(tau) = 2*I/(eo*v*a)
>>
>>where eo = 8.84E-12 farad/meter
>>
>>Thus the radial force on a charged particle at the surface is,
>>
>>Fr = q[Er - (v*B)]= [2*I*q/(eo*a*v)]*
>>(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2
>>
>>confirming the almost complete cancellation of
>>the electric field by the magnetic field at velocities near the speed of
>>light c.
>>
>>This E field canceling MUST occur in the nucleus between the "quarks" of
>>like charge q, with spin (mvr) = hbar, where v is very,very close to
>>c,"stacked" side-by-side resulting in
>>the net positive charge, (net negative charge for antimatter with external
>>positrons instead of electrons).
>>
>>On the other hand the "pinch force" by Ampere's law for two parallel
>>conductors at separation r, in dynes/cm length = I1*I2/(100*r) or
>>in a wire or charged particle conductor:
>>
>>P =  I^2/[200*(pi)*r^2] dynes/cm^2
>>
>>But, for any  current I with electron or ion
>>drift velocity of fractions of cm/second but,with a "charge flow" below
but
>>near c, what
>>is the Reference Frame that creates the B field in the first place?   :-)
>
>
>As you surely know, the relative motion of the electrons in the two
>conductors, vs the nuclei, serves to eliminate the need for a 3rd
>(reference) frame.  The glacial speed is compensated for by quantiy of
>electrons.  It is one case where quantity makes quality.

True.
>
>Am curious as to your take on the relativistic effect on magnetic dipole
>attraction.  It would seem that, unless the axes are both in the z
>direction, for two attracting dipoles q1 and q2, that one side of the field
>is rotating faster than the other, thus the Fitzgerald contraction would
>compress one side more than the other - a distortion of the dipole field
>should occur.

The Contraction is fiction in the frame of a string-circle. Why make it
complicated?

 However, this field forshortening is happening in the z axis,
>so parallel (laterally adjacent, both in x-y plane) particles q2 and q2
>should not have their attraction affected?

The "length-only" string circles "quarks" 1,006
of them in U238 stack side-by-side even with
like charge-spin, and with length only dimensions you could put a zillion of
them in a
"nucleus" with a lot less than the 1.0E-15 Meter "Fermi Radius" along the
length of the "stack".

The Time-Dilated Magnetic Field due to this spin "loop current" should be
the Gravitational
Field.

>
>If you have have idealized to uniform charge density tau = I/v, it then
>must be assumed the dipoles all align in the z axis, otherwise the dipole
>magnetic fields will cancel, which does not happen in a 2 particle model.

Oh Yes it does! Current loops ie., magnetic dipoles will ALWAYS ALIGN TO
ATTRACT it would be a violation of conservation of energy otherwise.

>The dipoles in one filament must align in one direction, those in the
>opposite filament must therefore align in the opposing direction. If not so
>aligned, they will be flipped upon approach if the filaments, so both
>filaments are opposed.  This is oddly reminiscent of the filament thread
>earlier.

It was an Odd Thread, wasn't it? Just kidding, Bill.  :-)
>
>So, a particle beam then might be idealized as a set of filaments with
>internal spins aligned and near filaments havng spins reversed.  The
>magnetic field of the filament spin then either adds to r subtracts from
>the circular B of the filament which is due to the current, depending on
>whether the filament's spin is clockwise or counterclockwise.  The net
>attraction due to B is then unchanged, but the dipole field attraction is
>always additive.  The dipole attraction thus is always present regardless
>of v, and has no counteracting electrostatic field repusion due to the fact
>the dipole field is generated with no additional charge q.
>
>Does this sound reasonable?

I'm not sure.   :-)

Regards,    Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 15:19:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22272;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:14:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:14:49 -0700
From: "George Holz" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Tell all! Re: H2 Glow 
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:19:48 -0400
Message-ID: <01bda150$879868d0$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: <"iSPsw3.0.rR5.Mr1br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20073
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

J.H.S. asks:
--> So does it show O/U ????
-
I'm trying to get the graphs to Vince so we
can discuss this intelligently. It's not
clear yet without more no K runs at
the closer electrode spacing,you can
see for yourself if you
are running Win95 or NT, a free 3.5 MB
Excel viewer is available from:
http://premium.microsoft.com/msdn/library/officedev/office/viewers/excelvw.htm
I could put it on a cd and send it to
you if you cannot download it easily.
Regards,
George Holz      george varisys.com
Varitronics Systems

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 15:27:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA21524;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:13:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:13:08 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 14:14:24 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"92co43.0.8G5.qp1br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20072
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 3:07 PM 6/26/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
[snip]
>Horace wrote:
[snip]
>>If you have have idealized to uniform charge density tau = I/v, it then
>>must be assumed the dipoles all align in the z axis, otherwise the dipole
>>magnetic fields will cancel, which does not happen in a 2 particle model.
>
>Oh Yes it does! Current loops ie., magnetic dipoles will ALWAYS ALIGN TO
>ATTRACT it would be a violation of conservation of energy otherwise.


But that is exactly what *I* am trying to say!  If the dipoles in the
filaments remain random their fields cancel, the force disappears. If they
align in +z direction in one filament and -z direction in the other
filament, then there is a net attraction between the filaments.  In a two
particle model, there is only one dipole field per particle, and that field
*must* remian aligned with itself, and the two dipoles will mututally flip
to be 180 deg. opposed, thus aligning to attract, i.e. maximizing the
dipole force.  We are agreed in that point then I take it.


Now, here is where your current filament model gets sticky.  The magnetic
dipoles of a singel filament, all being aligned, NSNSNSNSN, simulate a
magnetic flux up the middle of the filament. There should be a magnetic
flux in the opposite direction on the outside of the filament?  If so, the
filaments should attract, like individual dipoles attarct.  If like with a
torus, the outside fields cancel, the filament model can not be applied
here, because the dipole force clearly will attract two electrons if their
electrosatic force is somehow neutralized.  If we assume each dipole
maintains the integrity of its own field, i.e. superposition, then there
*is* cancellation in the *laterally* oriented dipole fields, i.e. in the x
and y directions, but the vertical fields wil run in a -z direction for a
filamnet with the dipoles aligned S to N in the +z direction, so that is
OK.  It is then a leap of faith that the opposite oriented magnetic fields
in the z axis between the two filaments will attract them.

BTW, the dipole force exceeds the gravitational force by many orders of
amgnitude, so should have a significant effect on already narrow beams,
true?  AT very least it should cause electron pairing, or in your model,
filament pairing.  Once two filaments were paired, they would then have
only gravitational attraction to further build the beam density.

Is this making sense yet?

Somehow the two parallel particle model seems more palatable, but the
filament thing sonds neat if it has a real manifisatation.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 16:20:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA17164;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:12:31 -0700
Message-Id: <199806262312.QAA13926 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: Sad News: SOHO May be Lost;
Resent-Message-ID: <"clOGI1.0.1C4.gj2br" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20074
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Potentially very sad news for this aether theorist.  SOHO has been a
fantastic observatory providing one new observation after another showing
that aether is blasting out of the surface of the sun, despite the fact that
physicists observing these phenomena don't get it yet.  I hope that either
they get SOHO back on line, or that they rush to get another satelite up in
orbit prior to the solar maximum which is coming up in just a couple of
years.  It is a once in 11 year opportunity, so I hope we don't miss it.

Later, Ross Tessien


X-Authentication-Warning: esa.nascom.nasa.gov: majordom set sender to
owner-sohonews using -f
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 14:55:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Luis Sanchez Duarte 
Subject: SOHONEWS 1998-06-26: SOHO Observations Interrupted
To: sohonews esa.nascom.nasa.gov
Content-MD5: TaaaPTrsSd+zw/OcbnFr4Q==
Sender: owner-sohonews esa.nascom.nasa.gov
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: sohonews esa.nascom.nasa.gov
X-UIDL: bcf3b89317b8a0845b7ffbf2a98de4e8

SOHONEWS - June 26, 1998
------------------------

SOHO spacecraft observations interrupted

26 June 1998. At 01:16 Paris time on 25 June 1998 (23:16 GMT 24 June),
during routine maintenance operations, ground controllers lost contact with
the SOHO (Solar and Heliosopheric Observatory) spacecraft and the satellite
went into Emergency Sun Reacquisition (ESR) mode. The ESR mode is activated
when an anomaly occurs and the spacecraft loses its orientation towards the
Sun. When this happens, the spacecraft automatically tries to point itself
towards the Sun again by firing its attitude control thrusters under the
guidance of an onboard Sun sensor.

Efforts to re-establish nominal operations did not succeed and telemetry was
lost. Subsequent attempts using the full NASA Deep Space Network
capabilities have so far been unsuccessful.

ESA and NASA engineers are continuing with the task of re-establishing
contact with the spacecraft.

The SOHO mission is a joint undertaking of ESA and NASA. The spacecraft was
launched aboard an Atlas II rocket from Florida on 2 December 1995 from the
Cape Canaveral Air Station. Mission operations are directed from the control
center at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, USA.

In April 1998 SOHO successfully completed its nominal two-year mission to
study the Sun's atmosphere, surface and interior. Major science highlights
include:

   * the detection of rivers of plasma beneath the surface of the Sun;
   * the discovery of a magnetic 'carpet' on the solar surface that seems
     to account for a substantial part of the energy that is needed to cause
     the very high temperatures of the corona, the Sun's outermost layer;
   * the first detection of flare-induced solar quakes;
   * the discovery of more than 50 sungrazing comets;
   * the most detailed view to date of the solar atmosphere;
   * spectacular images and movies of Coronal Mass Ejections, which are
     being used to improve the ability to forecast space weather.


_____________________________________________________________________________
To subscribe to SOHONEWS send mail to Majordomo sohomail.nascom.nasa.gov with
an empty 'Subject:' line and 'subscribe sohonews' as the body of the message.
To send information to be distributed in SOHONEWS, please, send e-mail to
editor sohomail.nascom.nasa.gov
_____________________________________________________________________________
Luis Sanchez Duarte
SOHO Science Data Coordinator
European Space Agency


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 16:41:00 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA20511;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199806260046_MC2-515A-D90 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 13:06:07 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
Resent-Message-ID: <"PgLh01.0.O05.o_2br" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20075
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed -

[huge snip of excellent piece, then:]

  > [...] I would consider it a miracle
  > if Scott's experiments worked.

Ah - HAH. So they *are* experiments. ;)

That's what I was after. It's more than just a silly semantic argument; he
does do experiments. So he's not an electrochemist. Do you have to be one
to toss some crystals in the bottom of a tank, warm them up in H2 and look
for heat? That's a CF experiment. I don't know that it's a general
qualification of the term "experiment" that whatever the result is, it will
be the definitive end-all last word on the subject because it was so
precisely and painstakingly run by only the top expert(s) in the field.

I think this all revolves around the way CF's detractors refer to, or
themselves perform, poorly run negative experiments as 'evidence' that
there's no phenomena. Yes, that sucks, egregiously. I don't think Scott's
doing that. He buys lottery tickets. He's taking potshots at those methods
that just might turn out to be the idiot-proof works-almost-every-time
version of the phenomena. The Case system has been mentioned by your team
as having a good chance of being such a thing. It's not electrochemistry,
and Scott took a fair potshot at it. He responsibly admitted it didn't
disprove anything, and didn't even duplicate Case in detail. By the way,
what's up with that lately?

   >  Exactly right?!? We have no idea whether they
   >  were exactly right or off by hundred miles.

Initially, who cares? All we need to know is that a "black box" was inside
a  calorimeter. We do at least know enough about the black box to be
confident that there's no internal energy source in it capable of causing
such positive results, and we trust the calorimeter setup and the people
taking the measurements. We see a number of control runs and live runs. We
see repeated clear >10% excess energy in the valid live runs, and nothing
on the blank runs. We like it. No?

Then there's there's Vince's experiments. I doubt he's advancing the field
of plasma physics or CF much by doing them, but would you suggest that he
stop, or at least stop posting publicly on it because he's just an amateur
and not a professional plasma physicist? (I'm sure the Murray Copy Machine
is dutifully crossposting his stuff all over cyberspace and back. Thank
Qualcomm my e-mail filters are still holding back the floods.) Vince might
want to send things over to Scott for calorimetry at some point, and I hope
he does. Would you disparage the results if they showed a good unambiguous
positive? I think not. Well, I wouldn't anyway, but what do I know. I'm far
less educated about these things than you are, and you openly declare your
inadequacy in the math and hard scientific details related to CF work.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 16:57:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA26038;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:54:38 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:54:38 -0700
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:57:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: unsubscribing violators
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"6b4Ba1.0.WM6.xI3br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20076
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, William Beaty wrote:

> > Let's take this to private mail private mail people!  Do I have to
start unsubscribing  violators?  
 
 I would have to agree that at this point this is a most reasonable
 "suggestion" (er ..."command"?) on the part of the captian. 
 
  However I don't think it's a good idea to outlaw all commentary
 pertaining to politics or religion , Bill . Here's why: 
 
  Many of us have suffered "persecution" if you will from those
 perpetrators in the "Establishment" `science' community who would
 like to relegate those researchers interested in such topics as CF
 ,ZPE ,FTL , Freenrg and so on into the "crackpot"  category.  Such
 behaviour on the part of these detractors of our efforts are, as
 we know, motivated politically AND perhaps religiously as it
 pertains to worship of the "Almighty Dollar",which in my opinion
 is not so almighty as you might have gathered from some of my "OFF
 TOPIC" (so labled by myself in these messages) articles. 
 
  In order to combat such persecution we must , on occasion ,
 discuss it , when and if it comes up in the course of conversation
 about our mutual problems with "these people". 
 
  So I do agree that when something becomes so inflammatory of
 emotions that it is probably best conducted off line between the
 disagreeing parties , but this is not to say that we should adopt
 some rule outlawing all mention of politics , religion , race,
 sexual behaviour or any other topic as it may naturally come up in
 the course of our discussions. 
 
 Sexual behaviour is perhaps a topic of interest to geneticists ,
 for example .  The differences between races is not of itself
 unworthy of examination in a scientific context either .  Politics
 and religion have a direct bearing on the very reason we are all
 here on Vortex to begin with . We are "heretics"  of the worst
 kind , denying and questioning authoritarian precepts of law ,
 integrity and of course, so - called "science". 
 
  What is the religious significance of the black robes that judges
 all wear, for example?  ( which judges are supposedly purely
 UNpolitical and NONreligious characters) 
 
 Sorry - I just HAD to get that one in , it's part of my latent
 genetics , I think ... please don't unsubscribe me. 
 
 Jim Ostrowski
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 18:31:49 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA18692;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:27:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:27:13 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:28:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Tell all! Re: H2 Glow
Resent-Message-ID: <"hsMXj.0.zZ4.nf4br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20077
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:19 PM 6/26/98, George Holz wrote:
>J.H.S. asks:
>--> So does it show O/U ????
>-
>I'm trying to get the graphs to Vince so we
>can discuss this intelligently. It's not
>clear yet without more no K runs at
>the closer electrode spacing,you can
>see for yourself if you
>are running Win95 or NT, a free 3.5 MB
>Excel viewer is available from:
>http://premium.microsoft.com/msdn/library/officedev/office/viewers/excelvw.htm
>I could put it on a cd and send it to
>you if you cannot download it easily.
>Regards,
>George Holz      george varisys.com
>Varitronics Systems


Doesn't EXCEL have an option to save graphs as GIFs?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 18:59:52 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA28874;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:56:52 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:56:52 -0700
Message-ID: <007301bda16e$6eba0080$8b8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:52:48 -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: <"0kLDl2.0.-27.a55br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20078
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, June 26, 1998 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames

Horace wrote:


>At 3:07 PM 6/26/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>[snip]
>>Horace wrote:
>[snip]
>>>If you have  idealized to uniform charge density tau = I/v, it then
>>>must be assumed the dipoles all align in the z axis, otherwise the dipole
>>>magnetic fields will cancel, which does not happen in a 2 particle model.
>>
>>Oh Yes it does! Current loops ie., magnetic dipoles will ALWAYS ALIGN TO
>>ATTRACT it would be a violation of conservation of energy otherwise.

Have you ever heard of gravity being anything
other than attractive?
>
>
>But that is exactly what *I* am trying to say!  If the dipoles in the
>filaments remain random their fields cancel, the force disappears. If they
>align in +z direction in one filament and -z direction in the other
>filament, then there is a net attraction between the filaments.

Put two free current loops side-by-side. The magnetic moment M, = T/B = NIA
where T is the
Torque, I is the loop current = qf, A is the area inside the loop (Pi)*R^2,
N is the number of loops, or turns in a coil or solenoid,making up what you
call a "filament". The "solenoids" will align to attract the same as two bar
magnets or a compass needle aligns with the magnetic dipoles of the Earth.

>In a two
>particle model, there is only one dipole field per particle, and that field
>*must* remain aligned with itself, and the two dipoles will mutually flip
>to be 180 deg. opposed, thus aligning to attract, i.e. maximizing the
>dipole force.  We are agreed in that point then I take it.

Yes.
>
>
>Now, here is where your current filament model gets sticky.  The magnetic
>dipoles of a single filament, all being aligned, NSNSNSNSN, simulate a
>magnetic flux up the middle of the filament. There should be a magnetic
>flux in the opposite direction on the outside of the filament?

Yep.

>If so, the
>filaments should attract, like individual dipoles attract.

Yes, and every time you rotate a solid in a gravity-magnetic field  the
nucleons "roll" the same as a gimbaled gyro. The atoms making up the mass of
a swinging pendulum do this as the thing swings back-and-forth.


>If like with a
>torus, the outside fields cancel, the filament model can not be applied
>here, because the dipole force clearly will attract two electrons if their
>electrostatic force is somehow neutralized.  If we assume each dipole
>maintains the integrity of its own field, i.e. superposition, then there
>*is* cancellation in the *laterally* oriented dipole fields, i.e. in the x
>and y directions, but the vertical fields will run in a -z direction for a
>filament with the dipoles aligned S to N in the +z direction, so that is
>OK.

The field "torus" around a solenoid don't care squat compared to the fields
at the ends of the ends of the "torus". One step at a time, Horace.  :-)

>It is then a leap of faith that the opposite oriented magnetic fields
>in the z axis between the two filaments will attract them.

Nope when they flip around to ALWAYS ATTRACT it
is called GRAVITY!
>
>BTW, the dipole force exceeds the gravitational force by many orders of
>magnitude, so should have a significant effect on already narrow beams,
>true?

It is easy to show that the loop current,q*f
is relativistically dilated to q*f/gamma for any particle or "quark". About
21 orders of magnitude for the electron and about 16 orders of magnitude for
the three quarks in the proton, that make a three-turn solenoid each with a
current loop of q*f/gamma.
that

>AT very least it should cause electron pairing, or in your model,
>filament pairing.
>
>Is this making sense yet?

Getting there.  :-)
>
>Somehow the two parallel particle model seems more palatable, but the
>filament thing sounds neat if it has a real manifestation.

It does,in COMPLETE COMPLIANCE WITH ACCEPTED
AND EXPERIMENTALLY MEASURED PHYSICS THAT IT
WAS DERIVED FROM.

Regards,   Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 19:25:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07448;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:22:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:22:53 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 18:24:22 -0800
To: "Vortex-l" 
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Resent-Message-ID: <"LAqWD1.0.Hq1.yT5br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20079
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Some hopefully logical deductions:

Here's another way to look at the electron beam.  The beam consists of a
bunch of charged magnets (electrons).  If, as light speed is approached,
the coulomb force is nearly matched by the attracting magnetic force, then
the magnetic forces between electrons should become manifest.  The coulomb
force is roughly 4.15x10^42 times the gravitational force between
electrons, so, gravity is expected to be comparatively insignificant.  The
dipole field intentisty is given by:

B = (u0 u)/(2 Pi r^3)     (in the dipole axis)

B = (u0 u)/(4 Pi r^3)     (in the perpendiuclar bisector)

If there were no coulomb force, nor current force, just a bunch of solid
magnet dipoles in space, they would quickly clump together, even though the
resulting pole orientations might end up being semi-random, and even though
the dipole force is ~ 1/r^3.  The electrons travelling at near c present an
interesting variation on this, however, because they are not solid, but are
cloud-like.  They have the ability to pass through each other, and to pair
with each other, cancelling thus cancelling their dipole forces. For that
reason, it would appear that beam self-focusing would at least require
enough (relative) electron velocity distribution to prevent dipole pairing.

Assuming for the moment that the electrons in a beam are not, on the whole,
paired, then they would tend to line up with the local flux.  This implies
they would  align with the circular magnetic flux about the current axis z.
The net effect of this is to add their dipole moments to the flux, thus
increasing the flux around the z axis without increasing the charge.  This
effect could thus increase the magnetic attraction beyond the coulomb
force.  There would also be a tendency for the dipoles in a beam to line up
with neighbors to the fore and aft in the beam.  This should put a twist in
the otherwise circular magnetic field, giving it the potential to further
focus the beam, or at least prevent lateral charge motion by skewing it.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 19:27:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA08300;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:24:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:24:29 -0700
Message-ID: <002a01bda172$8475d3a0$e941d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:22:01 -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: <"88fhz1.0.a12.SV5br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20080
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace said:


>At 8:04 AM 6/26/98, Mike Carrell wrote:
>>Jed's essay on the necessity of expertise is excellent. He tells it like
it
>>is.
>>
>>Mike Carrell


>Yes, an unfortunate commentary on the state of affairs.  As long as such
>extreme expertise is essential, CF has gone nowhere, there is no
>significant progress.
>
>One can now mail order transistorized electronic parts of great complexity,
>and use them with no prior expertise.

Almost on the point, but not quite. In the early days of radio, amateurs
made their own parts, down to the resistors, capacitors and inductors, spark
gaps, coherers and got crystal detectors where they could find good chunks
of galena (lead sulfide). Vacuum tubes were beyond the reach of most
amateurs, so these got supplied by manufacturers. [I've been doing some
volunteer curatorial  work at the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia and
have encountered early radio tubes and other instruments. It is most
instructive to look at the years of struggle that went into developing
vacuum tubes, voltmeters, ammeters, etc.., before the now-standard and
"obvious" forms emerged].

There are certain phenomena which can be evoked by ordinary materials. Many
of the devices into Edison's time could have been developed any time in
recorded history by someone with enough resources who knew what to do, like
the Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. Batteries and complex
machinery (the Antikytheria Mechanism) were known decades, if not centuries
BCE.

There are other phenomena which require advanced materials science and are
inaccessible without it, such as transistors, plastics, and a myriad of
other familiar devices. The electronic components from catalogs are
themselves the result of sophisticated manufacturing processes developed
over decades. Same with transistors.

As a young engineer, I built microphones for broadcast studios and military
applications. You don't go to the stock room to get so many acoustic ohms,
or inertance (acoustical inductance) or compliance (acoustical capacitance).
You work directly with materials, and I can testify that performance of
microphone prototypes produced by the notable Dr.. Olsen of RCA Laboratories
depended on patches from a particular swatch of cloth with excellent damping
properties. Needless to say, that cloth wasn't available to the factory, or
even the Camden engineering department, and Olsen's results were difficult
to duplicate. The catch is that cloth has both inertance and acoustical
resistance linked, and you can't separate them.

Television initiated a struggle to produce small microphones with good
frequency response, which is very difficult to do using electrodynamics, for
reasons I won't elaborate here. Capacitor microphones were bulky and balky
until two coincident developments, the field effect transistor and electret
film. Electrets -- the electrostatic analogue of the permanent magnet -- are
old stuff, usually made of wax, bulky and unstable. Then the Japanese
learned how to permanently polarize a plastic film so it would be stable for
years. The field effect transistor has an input resistance in the gigaohms
if not higher, and extremely small input capacitance. Now you can make
excellent, wide range capacitance microphones the size of a pencil eraser,
or smaller, for less than a dollar.

If you want a capacitance microphone also *extremely* quiet, you still have
to use RF excitation and a RF bridge circuit and a pay a few thousand bucks
for the system.

Materials and expertise do make a difference. So does theory. I view
technology as existing on a series of plateaus; it takes a lot of effort to
get to the next higher one. But once there, one can go very far with little
incremental effort. Indeed, civilizations can be defined by the
technological plateau on which they operate.

It should be screamingly obvious at this point that CF is a materials
problem, linked to a theory problem. The naysayers ignore this. I was
blissfully unaware of this until in a casual conversation with McKubre at
ICCF-7, he pointed out that most (not all) of successful CF cathodes come
from a specific J&M palladium ingot. These ingots cost tens of thousands of
dollars, and I conjecture that there is no guarantee that the next such
ingot will be as productive. And part of the poor results from the NHE
effort was that the Japanese decided they didn't have to buy a J&M ingot,
they could do just as well.

In the case of Bell Labs and the transistor, there were decades of material
science and semiconductor theory pointing to where the much-needed device
was to be found. It was compellingly obvious to AT&T that neither mechanical
switches nor vacuum tubes (even small ones like the RCA Nuvistor) would
handle the predicted telephone traffic. The full resources of Bell
Laboratories -- then the premier industrial laboratory in the world -- went
into that search, as the full resources of RCA were used to create
compatible color television a few years later.

Nothing like these efforts have gone into the LENR research, due to factors
all to well known to this group.

I might add that all that would not have changed the world except for an
astonishing concatenation of events and inventions that catapulted the human
race onto a new plateau. These are:

1. The PLANAR transistor (not developed until the '60s)
2. The Integrated circuit
3. Parameter-tolerant circuit design (developed during WW2 for the ENIAC)
4. The stored-program digital computer
5. Software compilers

The first three items mean that computers can be made cheaply by a refined
printing process. Item 4 means that millions of identical computer chips
have their functions defined by the stored programs, not the wiring. And the
last led to mass-produced software.

The fire that drove this was the ICBM program, which placed an extreme
premium on small size, light weight, and flexible functionality and
reliability. It was the US advantage in microprocessors which enabled us to
build smaller rockets, and the reliability that got us to the moon. And it
was the Soviet disadvantage that led then to develop more powerful boosters,
which enabled them to put up a space station first.

There is no fire driving the LENR phenomena yet, no planetary or commercial
emergency that will focus resources on this problem. But this may come. The
naysayers and nit-pickers don't help, the Tortoise moves ever so slowly.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 19:43:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA12114;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:39:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:39:54 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980626224830.007af128 cnct.com>
X-Sender: knagel cnct.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:48:34 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Keith Nagel 
Subject: Re: Sad News: SOHO May be Lost;
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"SvsWY2.0.9z2.vj5br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20081
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is terrible news Ross.

I delighted in tuning in to see the new images, exciting work.

On the lighter side, it seems Mr. Cagle has overestimated the
effects of recent solar activity on earth. Hams too morn the
loss of a good ionospheric reflector. Hell, I'm kinda despondant
all around here...

K.  

At 04:12 PM 6/26/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Potentially very sad news for this aether theorist.  SOHO has been a
>fantastic observatory providing one new observation after another showing
>that aether is blasting out of the surface of the sun, despite the fact that
>physicists observing these phenomena don't get it yet.  I hope that either
>they get SOHO back on line, or that they rush to get another satelite up in
>orbit prior to the solar maximum which is coming up in just a couple of
>years.  It is a once in 11 year opportunity, so I hope we don't miss it.
>
>Later, Ross Tessien
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Jun 26 20:58:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA20733;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 20:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 20:55:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <01BDA154.36E2CD00.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:46:09 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"rPkwD1.0.s35.Dr6br" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20082
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hello all:

Don't know how off topic this is, but...

I have been thinking, and reading the papers by Alcubierre, Pfenning and 
Ford on Alcubierre's "warp drive". According to Pfenning and Ford, the 
amount of mass needed for Alcubierre's drive is 100 billion universes of 
negatively gravitating matter. That makes this drive impossible. Then 
again, if we can bend spacetime to our whims somehow without using matter, 
perhaps FTL travel can be realized.

Question for you all:

What method might be needed to allow a spacecraft to exceed the speed of 
light, something that will not require such an unphysical amount of matter 
to accomplish. Also: If travelling FTL means travelling faster than all 
electromagnetic signals, what effect might this have on the object 
travelling FTL?

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  Fri Jun 26 21:41:09 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA19665;
	Fri, 26 Jun 1998 21:37:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 21:37:08 -0700
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 21:37:03 -0700
Message-Id: <199806270437.VAA16771 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: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Resent-Message-ID: <"jeNip2.0.9p4.pR7br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20083
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 




>Question for you all:
>
>What method might be needed to allow a spacecraft to exceed the speed of 
>light, something that will not require such an unphysical amount of matter 
>to accomplish. Also: If travelling FTL means travelling faster than all 
>electromagnetic signals, what effect might this have on the object 
>travelling FTL?

1)      You need nuclear power.  Chemical is too weak.

2)      You need an aether turbine to drive the craft because "throwing"
matter overboard is a poor way to couple to and accelerate through,
spacetime.   See Tampere work and Japanese rotating wheel for two crude
examples of a device we will know in our future.  It will be no more of a
mystery than would a helicopter to someone a thousand years ago, and with
luck we will develop this technology in the coming 10 or so years.  

3)      Drive the turbine to accelerate the craft up to near light speed in
the crafts local frame of reference.  In so doing, the craft will at first
be moving slower than light relative to a distant observers CBR rest frame.
But after a while, the amount of aether motion associated with the
precession of the solitons (ie sub atomic particles of the craft itself,
treated as waveforms, rather than as particles), will become appreciable and
the craft will actually be moving slightly faster than c relative to a CBR
rest frame far from the craft.  (Note, no one will ever observe the craft
moving faster than c because that would require that the light move faster
than light, but this does not preclude the craft moving faster.  Also, keep
in mind that we DO observe FTL jets shooting out of black holes.  ie, we can
determine something to be moving faster than c via triangulation, delta t
delta s, and then do the math.  But This does not strictly prove that the
motion is FTL since orientation could be at play.  Any way let's move on.

4)      As you approach c, the density of the aether ahead of the craft is
going to become greater, and it is going to become more rigid.  Literally,
your craft is a bunch of waveforms approaching the velocity of waves in the
medium, aether.  At this point you need to punch through the c barrier,
similar to punching through the c barrier of sound in air, where you use a
needle point on front of craft.

This time, however, you are going to have to literally condense the aether
out of your way.  It will already be on the verge of condensation due to the
ramp up in velocity of your craft.  So you will fire an intense beam of
particles such as protons and or electrons through an accelerator out the
nose of the craft.  

In the reference frame inside the craft, the particles will be moving at
slower than c, but when they exit they will be moving faster than c as they
transition ahead of the craft into the compressing aether (spacetime).
Thus, they will be ripped open and their confined aether will leak out (this
is Cerenkov radiation and we observe it in nuclear reactors already, when
particles travel at faster than c in water).

However, because the aether ahead of the craft is already highly compressed,
the extra aether is going to force a condensation of the aether into
localized resonances, aka particles, and in this case, "virtual particles".
They will be blasted outward normal to the line of advance of the craft if
you do it right.  And that will open up a region of lower pressure aether
ahead of the craft and allow the craft to accelerate through the c barrier
as the virtual particles wrap around the craft.

This is similar to how when a supersonic jet flies through moist air, the
water vapor flash condenses forming a sort of cotton tail around the jet.
The cotton tail condensate (virtual particles for aether), flash vaporizes
in the rarefaction wake of the craft, thus restoring the aether ocean local
pressure and providin a wave for the space craft to ride.

A couple of points.  First, the nuclear reactor on board will be bleeding
the aether stored in the matter on board the craft.  And those fusion
reactions, which emit aether, are what will drive spacetime inside of the
warp bubble.  Spacetime for the craft will at this time de-couple from
spacetime of the universe.  Thus, the twins paradox is almost certainly
invalid for this form of travel, and hence we should be able in the future
to travel through at a minimum our local region of the MW without coming
home to find everyone dead.

It seems to me that everything is in place, from first principles to
accomplish all of the above.  What I cannot seem to work out is how to
accelerate to yet higher velocities.  ie, do you shoot energy forward to
force a more rapid condensation ahead of the craft, or do you shoot energy
backward to accelerate into the hole?  Maybe both is the answer.

Also, there is a major problem that will have to be worked out on re-entry
to spacetime.  The spacetime wave structure inside the crafts bubble must be
coupled back into the spacetime of the universe.  Spacetime is at a minimum,
a quadrature structure of wave energy, in order that we account for positive
negative and neutral charged particles.  Thus, there are multiple ways in
which the spacetime nodal structure inside could connect again.  If this is
done incorrectly, then all of the matter of the craft and people would have
been converted into what we call today, "anti matter", or even "neutral
matter" if the phase angle is rotated by 180 or 90 degrees, respectively.
Either way, meeting up with matter in our universe would be disastrous, so
assuming that this is actually possible, which seems logical, then dropping
out of warp is going to be serious navigation.

I expect we will witness the development of the reactors, and the turbines
in the coming decade or two.  I don't expect I will witness the warp drive,
but then at the turn of last century who would have thought they would have
witnessed air flight let alone breaking the sound barrier or going to the moon?

There is astro physical evidence that jets shooting out of black holes
actually do break the speed of light barrier via a similar warp mechanism,
so it isn't as far fetched as it sounds.

Later, Ross Tessien



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 00:43:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA12465;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:41:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:41:25 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 07:41:22 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <35948113.190014987 mail-hub>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
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: <"bXl5n.0.c23.a8Abr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20084
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:00:00 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip]
>It seems like, in most cases, the salt would require a waterproof and
>saltproof  casing.  One possibility might be to design a well casing
>suitable for hot salt storage.  Then conventional drilling rigs could be
>used to install the storage wells next to existing homes.  Could drill on
>an angle to get underneath the house or pool.  A comparatively small dia.
>hole can go pretty deep and hold a lot of material, and might be less
>invasive to install on some lots.

This is true of course, though heat loss would be minimised in a cube.
(least surface to volume ratio).

>
>Could also bury shallow tanks where groundwater prohibits deep
>installation.  Would require a good insulating cap then.  Could pump excess
>heat from the cap area first, to avoid heat loss.

Good idea.

>
>On the very good side is the lack of need of ground water tabel (which the
>two well system requires) and the possibility for a totally self contained
>energy storage system.  I think some ground energy storage systems might
>have a good potential for groundwater polution.

Yes, need to use double casing at least, with inner casing resistant
to hot salt, outer casing resistant to hot salty water (mineral salts
dissolved in ground water), insulated from one another with lots of
insulation.
>
>Some calcs:
>
>The heat of fusion of NaCl is 124 cal/g at 804.3 C, density 2.165 g/cm^3.
[snip]
>Looking at NaCl the storage denity is (124 cal/g)(2.165 g/cm^3) = 268
>cal/cm^3 = (2.68x10^8 cal/m^3)/(0.239 cal/J) = 1.121x10^9 J/m^3.  A 10 m^3
>storage facility could hold (1.121x10^10 J).  1 kwh = (3600 s)(1000 J/s) =
>3.6x10^6 J.  The 10 m^3 storage thus can hold (1.121x10^10 J)/(3.6x10^6
>J/kwh) = 3113 kwh.  Pretty good.
[snip]
I found a site that quoted a price for rock salt of about $22/ton :).
Then I went looking for battery storage costs, in solar installations,
and found http://www.mrsolar.com/solarnewslink.html which allowing for
the misuse of watts and KW, ends up quoting a price of $10800.- for a
storage capacity of just 21.5 kWh. The cost of NaCl to store the same
amount of heat energy, allowing for 30% conversion efficiency (Carnot
theoretical is 65% if exhaust is at 100 C) would be $12.- (roughly
half a ton of salt, or 0.2 m^3,or a cube 60 cm on a side :). Of course
this takes no account of the cost of the vessel required to hold the
salt, nor of the engine and generator to produce electrical power from
the hot air extracted from the salt bed, still it should be possible
to put these together for under $10,000.- wouldn't you think?
Also up to a given point the containment costs/kWh stored, scale with
1/length of side of the cube used, so bigger is better.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 01:12:30 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA18794;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 01:08:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 01:08:00 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:07:59 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3597a823.200017832 mail-hub>
References:  <35948113.190014987@mail-hub>
In-Reply-To: <35948113.190014987 mail-hub>
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: <"qFj2e3.0.Yb4.WXAbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20085
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 07:41:22 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
[snip all]
PS I just found this site.

http://www.sandia.gov/Renewable_Energy/solarthermal/salt.html 


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 01:56:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA17495;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 01:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 01:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:49:04 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"1JBYI1.0.BH4.TDBbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20086
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:41 PM 6/26/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
[snip]
>>
>>The heat of fusion of NaCl is 124 cal/g at 804.3 C, density 2.165 g/cm^3.
>[snip]
>>Looking at NaCl the storage denity is (124 cal/g)(2.165 g/cm^3) = 268
>>cal/cm^3 = (2.68x10^8 cal/m^3)/(0.239 cal/J) = 1.121x10^9 J/m^3.  A 10 m^3
>>storage facility could hold (1.121x10^10 J).  1 kwh = (3600 s)(1000 J/s) =
>>3.6x10^6 J.  The 10 m^3 storage thus can hold (1.121x10^10 J)/(3.6x10^6
>>J/kwh) = 3113 kwh.  Pretty good.
>[snip]
>I found a site that quoted a price for rock salt of about $22/ton :).
>Then I went looking for battery storage costs, in solar installations,
>and found http://www.mrsolar.com/solarnewslink.html which allowing for
>the misuse of watts and KW, ends up quoting a price of $10800.- for a
>storage capacity of just 21.5 kWh. The cost of NaCl to store the same
>amount of heat energy, allowing for 30% conversion efficiency (Carnot
>theoretical is 65% if exhaust is at 100 C) would be $12.- (roughly
>half a ton of salt, or 0.2 m^3,or a cube 60 cm on a side :). Of course
>this takes no account of the cost of the vessel required to hold the
>salt, nor of the engine and generator to produce electrical power from
>the hot air extracted from the salt bed, still it should be possible
>to put these together for under $10,000.- wouldn't you think?
>Also up to a given point the containment costs/kWh stored, scale with
>1/length of side of the cube used, so bigger is better.

For retrofit home installation a 1 m diameter casing about 10 to 15 m long
might be ideal.  I believe here are already drilling rigs designed for 3
foot or 1 meter casings.  They are used for concrete piling foundations on
beachfront property.

For new construction cubic or spherical does seem a lot better.  Container
cost is per side^2, volume is per side^3.

Looking again at NaNO3 the storage density is (45.3 cal/g)(2.168 g/cm^3) =
98.2 cal/cm^3 = (9.82x10^7 cal/m^3)/(0.239 cal/J) = 4.11x10^8 J/m^3.  A 10
m^3 storage facility could hold (4.11x10^9 J).  The 10 m^3 storage thus can
hold (4.11x10^9 J)/(3.6x10^6 J/kwh) = 1141 kwh. Assuming a good house can
be heated and run with 10 kw, that's about 114 hours of total storage
capacity, or about 11.4 hours per m^3 of storage volume.  NaNO3 is only
45.3 Cal/g but melts at only 333 C, so much less insulation is needed.  It
is probably worth the extra cost for the salt.

This might be a very viable solution for wind power storage in Alaska.  The
main need is for heat, and there you don't have the 65 percent Carnot limit
to worry about. There are other sources for heat here as well, like
fireplaces, and even solar. After March our days are longer than in the
lower latitudes, but there is still a need for heat.


How about using salt for powering vehicles?  Looks very feasible to me.  In
fact, I see an immediate prospect for a product.  A car pre-heater and
heater. Would be especially useful for electric vehicles here.  Home gas or
electric heat can be used to heat a container of the salt, which is then
used to warm the car while driving.  Would be very nice for camping, ice
fishing, football games, etc.  Similar but larger heat packs, maybe even on
trailers, might be used at construction sites, etc.

Back to the vehicles. If we are looking at NaNO3, due to lower heat of 333
C, or 631.4 F, we get 1141 kwh/m^3, or 1.148 wh/cm^3, or 0.53 wh/g, or 530
wh/kg.  A car, or van at least, should be able to carry 200 kg, so that is
106 kwh energy storage in the vehicle.  At 30 percent recovery that is 31.8
kwh storage, = (31.8 kwh)(1.341 hp-hr/kwh) = 42.6 hp-hr.  Given a good car
needs only 5 hp for cruising, that is 8 hours of cruising, or a range of
469 miles max at 55 mph.  Not too shabby.   Could reduce the amount of salt
for a day commuter.  Salt storage might even work for an airplane, or boat,
or even commercial truck - as trucks could carry a pretty big load of salt.
Salt would also have the enormous advantage of being available for
regenerative breaking storage.  And you wouldn't have to worry about
heating your car in the winter.  Could put solar cells on the roof to help
recharge a bit during the day as well.

This bird may fly Robin!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 02:09:45 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA18687;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 02:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 02:08:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 01:02:25 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"s9APa1.0.vZ4.OQBbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20087
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:07 AM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 07:41:22 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>[snip all]
>PS I just found this site.
>
>http://www.sandia.gov/Renewable_Energy/solarthermal/salt.html


Gad, they are not even using the phase change for energy storage.  Thay are
simply heating saltpeter from 550 F to 1050 F.  That does let you not worry
about pumping the salt, or tank expansion joints to accomodate the phase
change though.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 02:26:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA27179;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 02:23:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 02:23:06 -0700
Message-ID: <001a01bda1ac$c5231720$82b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:19:56 -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: <"zMR2D1.0.We6.wdBbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20088
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, June 27, 1998 3:07 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Horace wrote:


>At 12:07 AM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 07:41:22 GMT, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>[snip all]
>>PS I just found this site.
>>
>>http://www.sandia.gov/Renewable_Energy/solarthermal/salt.html
>
>
>Gad, they are not even using the phase change for energy storage.  Thay are
>simply heating saltpeter from 550 F to 1050 F.  That does let you not worry
>about pumping the salt, or tank expansion joints to accomodate the phase
>change though.

Aluminum, Beer and Soda Pop cans are the answer.
Enthalpy of fusion,175 btu/lb at 1225 F melting point. Great Thermal
Conductivity Too.

Put this under Robin's proposed Stirling Engine
powered generator and you're in like Gangbusters.  :-)

The Facility moved from Sandia Albuquerque to Barstow-Victorville Cal. 10
Megawatts System.

Regards,   Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 03:30:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA23155;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <003001bda1b4$f310ed80$82b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 04:17:40 -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: <"ipvrC1.0.jf5.ebCbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20089
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Weld a couple of 55 gal drums together,line them with "foamed ceramic"
insulation and fill
them with 3/4" gravel or 10 penny nails,or bent washers, for thermal storage
and easy air/gas flow/heat exchange.

Set a simple 16th century Stirling engine/generator with argon or nitrogen
working gas, on top of this "thermal silo".

You can see how they work with a neat animation
at, www.stirlingengine.com . Might set a windmill on top to pick up some
wind power
and cool the thing too.  :-)

If you paint the South half of the silo with a high emissivity paint and put
a couple of layers of spaced clear Teflon (20 year UV resistance warranty)
around half the silo you can use it as a "tracking" solar collector.

Estimated cost, $1.00/watt, if you build your own Stirling engine.

Regards,  Frederick


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 06:07:39 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA00993;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 06:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 06:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:58:46 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3598ea63.216982607 mail-hub>
References: <001a01bda1ac$c5231720$82b4bfa8 default>
In-Reply-To: <001a01bda1ac$c5231720$82b4bfa8 default>
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: <"r_fvC.0.RF.-uEbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20090
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:19:56 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
[snip]
>Aluminum, Beer and Soda Pop cans are the answer.
>Enthalpy of fusion,175 btu/lb at 1225 F melting point. Great Thermal
>Conductivity Too.
[snip]
You're right! The thermal conductivity would make for very fast
response. Now what do they line aluminium smelters with?
And is there a metal that won't alloy (or amalgamate) with it when
molten?
Or perhaps we could just bubble nitrogen through it to remove the
heat, or will that combine chemically - maybe use argon in a closed
loop?
How much does Al cost/lb?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 08:03:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA12272;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3594FA03.7820 earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:56:19 -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: Science -- Clarke 280 (5369): 1532  6.5.98
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------552D13986CA5"
Resent-Message-ID: <"CoxYp1.0.Y_2.4bGbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20091
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.

--------------552D13986CA5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/280/5369/1532

--------------552D13986CA5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1; name="1532"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="1532"
Content-Base: "http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/
	full/280/5369/1532"









Science --  Clarke 280 (5369): 1532


	







	

	

	
	=

	
	
	
	

	
	
	
	
		
		
		=


		=


		
		

		=


		=


		=


			
	

	

	=



	=


	=




	




	=




	=

		

	          =


                


                


		
                
		=


		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=


		=


		=


		=


		=


		=


		=

		  
		=


		=

		  
		=

		
3D""
			Search Medline for articles by:
			
3D""3D=
			=

				Clarke, S. A.
				=

			=

		  
3D""
			Alert me when:
			
3D""3D=New articles cite this article

		  
 =


		
 
  
	=






	=









	=

	=

	=

		

Also see the archival list =
of the Essays on Science and Society.

ESSAYS ON SCIENCE AND SOCIETY:=


Presidents, Experts, and Asteroids

Sir Arthur Clarke

Sir Arthur Clarke, a graduate of King's College, London,=
 is the author of numerous works of science and science-fiction, includin=
g his well-known collaboration with Stanley Kubrick on the movie 2001:=
 A Space Odyssey. He is presently Chancellor of the International Spa=
ce University and Chancellor of the University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, wh=
ere he has lived for 30 years.



For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert.

(Late 20th-century folklore)

For more than a century science and its occasionally ugl=
y sister technology have been the chief driving forces shaping our world.=
 They decide the kinds of futures that are possible. Human wisdom must de=
cide which are desirable.

It is truly appalling, therefore, that so few of our politicians have any=
 scientific or engineering background. Yet while some scientific=
 training should be a requisite for anyone making policy decisions, it is=
 clearly not sufficient. Herbert Hoover and Jimmy Carter, two U.S. presid=
ents with engineering backgrounds, were probably as perplexed as anyone w=
hen faced with making policy decisions involving science or technology.
Even the wisest and best science-educated of politicians may have difficu=
lty making good decisions when, as is often the case, "experts"=
 disagree. There are some hilarious examples of this in the history of sc=
ience--for example, Lord Kelvin's declaration that x-rays must be a hoax,=
 and Ernest Rutherford's even more famous dismissal of atomic energy as &=
quot;moonshine."

Politicians now are wrestling with the matter of human cloning, perhaps t=
he most notable controversy now facing science and society. Any developme=
nts that concern biology--especially human biology--are liable to arouse =
passions, as witnessed in the debates over abortion, euthanasia, and evol=
ution. I have encountered a few "creationists" and because they=
 were usually nice, intelligent people, I have been unable to decide whet=
her they were really mad, or only pretending to be mad. If I was=
 a religious person, I would consider creationism nothing less than blasp=
hemy. Do its adherents imagine that God is a cosmic hoaxer who has create=
d the whole vast fossil record for the sole purpose of misleading humanki=
nd? And, although I do not necessarily agree with the paleontologist Teil=
hard de Chardin's advocacy of evolution as a major proof of the glory of =
God, de Chardin's attitude is both logical and inspiring. A creator who l=
aid the foundations for the entire future at the beginning of time is far=
 more awesome than a clumsy tinkerer who constantly modifies his creation=
s and throws away entire species in the process. Even the Vatican, while =
firm in its declaration that the human soul is divinely created and not s=
ubject to process, has stated that the theory of physical evolution is mo=
re than just a hypothesis (1996).

Science and society can also clash in the area of military security. I wa=
s involved in the debate over the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI, a.k.=
a. Star Wars) from its inception 15 years ago this spring. My attitude th=
en, as now, was that although it might be possible to construct local def=
ense systems at vast expense that would let through "only" a fe=
w percent of ballistic missiles, the much-touted idea of a national umbre=
lla was nonsense. Luis Alvarez (winner of the 1968 Nobel Prize in physics=
), perhaps the greatest experimental physicist of this century, remarked =
to me that the advocates of such schemes were "Very bright guys, wit=
h no common sense."

Now, looking into my often cloudy crystal ball, I suspect that a tota=
l defense might indeed be possible in a century or so, but the techn=
ology required would produce, as a by-product, weapons so terrible that n=
o one would need any longer bother with anything as primitive as ballisti=
c missiles.

If I might hazard another prediction, I suspect that President Reagan's 1=
983 "Star Wars" speech outlining his idea of an umbrella defens=
e system consisting of armed space satellites to protect America against =
attacks by nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, will one day be regarded as =
a work of political genius. However shaky SDI's technological foundations=
, it may well have contributed to the ending of the Cold War. Yet its tec=
hnology may come to be useful in ways unanticipated at its inception. The=
 projected SDI armory of lasers and interceptors could one day be used to=
 save not only the United States, but indeed the entire human race from t=
he threat of comets and asteroids.


The scientific establishment has only slowly understood that the history =
of this planet, and perhaps of civilization itself, has been modified in =
important ways by physical impacts from space. We have come a long way si=
nce President Jefferson remarked, "I would sooner believe that two Y=
ankee professors lied, than that stones fell from the sky," for now =
we know that mountains can indeed fall from the sky. And here we have per=
haps the most perfect example of the quotation that opens this essay. Vol=
umes of statistics have been amassed on either side of the question: How =
much effort should be devoted to a danger that is probably remote, but th=
at may sterilize our planet? In my estimation we need to embark on seriou=
s study on the probability of comet or asteroid impactors on the planet E=
arth. The cost would be quite trivial, and the results should be of great=
 astronomical value, based on our experience of comet Shoemaker-Levy's im=
pact on Jupiter. And what a tragedy Gene Shoemaker's untimely death was! =
Gene, some of whose ashes are now on the moon, would have been amused by =
the embarrassment that his unusual internment caused at NASA and the Jet =
Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.

Even more controversial than the threat of asteroid impacts is what I wou=
ld call perhaps one of the greatest scandals in the history of science, t=
he cold fusion caper. Like almost everyone else, I was surprised when Pon=
s and Fleischmann announced that they had achieved fusion in the laborato=
ry; and surprise changed to disappointment when I learned that most of th=
ose who had rushed to confirm these results were unable to replicate them=
=2E Wondering first how two world-class scientists could have fooled them=
selves, I then forgot the whole matter for a year or so, until more and m=
ore reports surfaced, from many countries, of anomalous energy production=
 in various devices (some of them apparently having nothing to do with fu=
sion). Agreeing with Carl Sagan's principle that "extraordinary clai=
ms require extraordinary proofs" (spoken in connection with UFOs and=
 alien visitors), I remained interested, but skeptical.

Now I have little doubt that anomalous energy is being produced by severa=
l devices, some of which are on the market with a money back guarantee, w=
hile others are covered by patents. The literature on the subject is now =
enormous, and my confidence that "new energy" is real slowly cl=
imbed to the 90th percentile and has now reached the 99% level. A Fellow =
of the Royal Society, also originally a skeptic, writes: "There is n=
ow strong evidence for nuclear reactions in condensed matter at low tempe=
rature." The problem, he adds, is that "there is no theoretical=
 basis for these claims, or rather there are too many conflicting theorie=
s."

Yet recall that the steam engine had been around for quite a while before=
 Carnot explained exactly how it worked. The challenge now is to see whic=
h of the various competing devices is most reliable. My guess is that lar=
ge-scale industrial application will begin around the turn of the century=
--at which point one can imagine the end of the fossil-fuel-nuclear age, =
making concerns about global warming irrelevant, as oil-and-coal-burning =
systems are phased out.

Global warming is another area where politicians cannot be blamed for bei=
ng confused. Although most scientists agree that warming is occurring, so=
me, such as Fred Singer, who headed the U.S. meteorological satellite pro=
gram, do not. We may need global warming, after all, as the current inter=
glacial period draws to a close. As Will Durant said many years ago, &quo=
t;Civilization is an interlude between ice ages."* If this is true, the cry in the next millennium may be "Spare that=
 old power station--we need more CO2!"

Finally, another of my dubious predictions: Pons and Fleischmann will be =
the only scientists ever to win both the Nobel and the Ig Noble Prizes.



The author is at 25 Barnes Place, Colombo 7, Sri Lanka.
*Will and Ariel Durant, The Story of Civilization, vol. 1 (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1935).


 =

		=









	=

	=

	=




	=

		

	          =


                


                


		
                
		=


		=

		=

		=

		=

		=

		=


		=


		=


		=


		=


		=


		=

		  
		=


		=

		  
		=

		
3D""
			Search Medline for articles by:
			
3D""3D=
			=

				Clarke, S. A.
				=

			=

		  
3D""
			Alert me when:
			
3D""3D=New articles cite this article

		  
 =


		
 
  
	=






















Volume 280, Number 5369 Issue of 5 Jun 1998, =

pp. 1532 - 1533


©1998 by The American Association for the Advancement of Science=
=2E





	

	

	

	
		
		
		
		=


		=


		
		

		
		=


		=


		
			
	

	

	Copyright &cop=
y; 1998 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.






--------------552D13986CA5--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 08:15:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA32225;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:11:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:11:50 -0700
Message-ID: <001701bda1dd$b96832e0$c841d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: More on expertise 
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:09:32 -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: <"7wMl.0.Mt7.skGbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20092
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Scott has been taking some flack from Jed on the matter of expertise and I
offer a bit of perspective.

As I understand, Earth Tech is supported by some investors with a charter to
look for new energy technology and devices, with Scott as the versatile
builder and tester. In quite a few years of work, he has been unable to
replicate or verify O/U claims on any device or process.

Critics of the new energy paradigms cite this record as continuing proof of
the nonexistence of any such paradigms and thereby the validity of reports
of successes by other researchers, since these are not successfully
replicated by Scott. Included are the Patterson Power Cell, the Mills
BlackLight Power process, the Case cell,  and others.

Jed points out that Scott's efforts are imitations, not replications,
because Scott does not bring to the tasks sufficient background expertise to
actually produce the conditions for which positive results are reported by
other workers. Jed has stated this case very, very well. This is not a
put-down of Scott, that he does not have the resources or experience of
others who have spent years of specialization in electrochemistry.

If I were an investor supporting Scott's work, I might regard him as a very
useful gatekeeper. If a technology appears that Scott can replicate, then it
is one which others can replicate as well and is ready for investment and
development. If Scott can't replicate an effect, that does not disprove the
effect's existence. Rather, it suggests that
lacking a theoretical understanding, It is not possible to reliably specify
the materials and conditions which would enable a capable engineer or
technician to duplicate the results.

I won't repeat Jed's very capable analysis of semiconductor production, nor
my previous comments on television picture tube production.

It should be noted that George Miley was able to build a working O/U PPC
from the patent information and some help from Jim Patterson, and he said so
on ABC's Nightline. CETI has had some rough times making working beads until
a technician error in a coating process was discovered. University
laboratories (Lehigh, Penn State) have operated Mills cells for
verifications and tests for the existence of hydrinos.

It is also very interesting that the conditions in the F&P cell may be an a
remote corner of the "parameter space" where the LENR effects occur. Case
got his results by systematically exploring materials, heat and pressure to
find the correct operating conditions. The Ohmari cell effect has been
replicated in at least two places and it produces brilliant luminosity as
well as O/U production with simple materials -- but it's operating
conditions are far from the quiet of  NHE, with carefully controlled cells,
looking for a few watts of excess power. The CG and AquaFuel cells also
involve underwater arcs operating with input powers in the hundred-watt
range.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 09:15:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA19488;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:14:35 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:14:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Puthoff aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:06:04 EDT
To: stk sunherald.infi.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:  FTL travel: how can it be done?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78
Resent-Message-ID: <"SM3OJ3.0.Qm4.ffHbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20093
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


In a message dated 6/26/98 9:55:14 PM, stk sunherald.infi.net wrote:

<>

If the vacuum fluctuations in the vicinity of the spacecraft could be cohered
, you'd be home free.  The energy density is there.  That's what it takes,
IMHO.

Hal Puthoff

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 09:21:21 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA08141;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:17:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:17:47 -0700
Message-ID: <008201bda1e6$adb03c00$82b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: More on expertise
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:13:56 -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: <"EPzx61.0._-1.giHbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20094
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Mike Carrell wrote:

Snip, Snip, And snip!

Gee Mike, I hope you get better real soon.

But, a good dose of Epsom Salts would do wonders.  :-)

Regards,    Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 09:26:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA20663;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <01BDA1BC.8531D100.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:12:48 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"23mha.0.n25.jnHbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20095
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



-----Original Message-----
From:	Puthoff aol.com [SMTP:Puthoff@aol.com]
Sent:	Saturday, June 27, 1998 11:06 AM
To:	stk sunherald.infi.net; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject:	Re:  FTL travel: how can it be done?


>If the vacuum fluctuations in the vicinity of the spacecraft could be 
cohered
>, you'd be home free.  The energy density is there.  That's what it takes,
>IMHO.

Agreed. The only remaining question is, how can we cohere the fluctuations? 

I am also wondering about the problem of the Alcubierre warp being causally 
isolated from the spacecraft. Then again, if there exists an absolute frame 
of reference, this problem might be circumvented. Or there might be other 
solutions.

Kyle R. Mcallister

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 09:36:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA22373;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Puthoff aol.com
Message-ID: <4d6a2657.35951d29 aol.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:26:16 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:  RE: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78
Resent-Message-ID: <"H2tUh.0.VT5.-xHbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20096
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


In a message dated 6/27/98 10:23:21 AM, you wrote:

<>

Valid concerns.  

Hal Puthoff

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 09:57:02 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17806;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:53:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:53:26 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:54:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
Resent-Message-ID: <"vZZMg.0.8M4.5EIbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20097
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:22 PM 6/26/98, Mike Carrell wrote:
[snip]
>There is no fire driving the LENR phenomena yet, no planetary or commercial
>emergency that will focus resources on this problem. But this may come. The
>naysayers and nit-pickers don't help, the Tortoise moves ever so slowly.
>
>Mike Carrell


Staments like Carrell's above, and Murray's earlier, indicate a
misunderstanding of the stated purpose of the Order of the Tortoise.  The
implication is that the order consists of "nay-sayers and nitpickers."  The
implication is there are only two camps, for and against, pro or con CF, as
if it were some kind of religion or something.  It is reasonable to extend
the definition of CF here to include low energy nuclear reations (LENR) as
CF clearly falls in the broader classification of LENR, LENR is in the same
situation, and the charter of the Order of the Tortoise specifically
includes "transmutation".

Since the Order does not admit certain proof of CF, it is considered by
some to be in the con camp.  On the contrary, the order provides a clear
alternative to the pro or con camps.  That is to accept that CF is not
proven, yet to advocate further investigation.  This position is very pro
CF research, thus appears to be far more leaning toward the pro camp than
the con camp, yet it provides a reasonable and clearly separate alternative
3rd position.  In fact, the position is agressively proactive when you
consider the motto:  "You don't make progress unless you stick your neck
out."

CF will most likely not be thoroughly accepted until you can buy that long
promised water heater at Sears, or drive a CF car, or use electricity from
a power plant that doesn't belch smoke or contain high level nuclear waste.
It appears CF has still not arrived at anywhere near a point of practical
application that the transistor or flight achieved within ten years.  It is
still in the "undead" state.  By seeking to legitimize CF research, the
Order serves the function of moving CF from the undead state to the reborn
state.  Great and broad progress can not be made when even in the former
bastions of free speech, our universities, researchers are ostracised and
conferences are ejected from campuses.  The Tortoise's slow movement toward
legitimization is far superior to the Abalone's steadfast clinging to
position as true-believer.  The existence of the Order of the Tortoise is
in fact a milestone in the progress and history of CF.

Before condemning the order as "naysayers and nit-pickers" it may be
worthwhile to consider some of the actual text from the Order's home page:

Definition: "We are a group of conventional scientists and engineers who
wish that Cold Fusion, Free Energy Devices, and Transmutation were real,
and want to see rigorous investigation of the serious claims. The plodding
Tortoise---making
painfully slow progress but undaunted and un-discouraged---symbolizes
mankind's enduring quest for these elusive (illusory?) goals"

Charter: "The primary function is to unite conventional scientists who wish
these phenomena were real, but feel proof of current claims is sorely
lacking, and want to see the questions addressed by rigorous scientific
investigation."

"... the only function performed by the Society is to promote the idea,
through its mere existence, that its OK for professional scientists and
engineers to be interested in such things."

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 10:21:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA24886;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:16:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:16:50 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:18:18 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"M_0hL2.0.h46.1aIbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20098
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 4:58 AM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:19:56 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>[snip]
>>Aluminum, Beer and Soda Pop cans are the answer.
>>Enthalpy of fusion,175 btu/lb at 1225 F melting point. Great Thermal
>>Conductivity Too.
>[snip]
>You're right! The thermal conductivity would make for very fast
>response. Now what do they line aluminium smelters with?
>And is there a metal that won't alloy (or amalgamate) with it when
>molten?
>Or perhaps we could just bubble nitrogen through it to remove the
>heat, or will that combine chemically - maybe use argon in a closed
>loop?
>How much does Al cost/lb?
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk 


The enthalpy of fusion for Al is only 10.71 KJ/mol. You also have to worry
about oxidation.  However, if you can go for a 2054 C process instead of a
660 C process, then Al2O3 has an enthalpy of fusion of 111.10 KJ/mol.
Silicon,at 1414 C puts out 50.21 KJ/mol.

Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb
----   ------   --------    -------    -----
Al     26.98    10.71       397          180
Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917          416
Si     28.08    50.21       811          367

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 10:29:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28264;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:21:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"AjEXw2.0.Uv6.uiIbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20099
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

 
  I read Jed Rothwell's article about how the failure to replicate
 positive - result CF experiments are all due to the inexperience
 and lack of expertise on the part of the technician attempting to
 perform the replication. Nonsense . 
 
  The simple fact is if those researchers claiming to have achieved
 positive results had kept proper notes of what procedures and
 materials THEY used in order to produce those results , they would
 be able to describe what to do down to the minute details.  It
 seems more likely that these people with "expertise"  are more
 comparable to magicians than they are to real scientists. 
 Magicians are able to produce truly amazing effects and nobody but
 other magicians have a clue as to how they did them . 
 
  I believe all these magicians are simply not interested in
 sharing their information about how they achieved these alleged
 positive results for reasons which may include : 
 
 1. Patent and trade secret considerations
 
 2. They are being paid to keep their mouths shut. 
 
 3. They are hiding something about their technique that they don't
    want us to see , because the technique is basically deceptive
    in nature (like a magician's). 
 
 Which of these is correct , I don't know ..  But I'll bet
 anything at least one of them is. 
 
   I have heard this CF positive result process being compared to
 all kinds of things including brain surgery .  But even brain
 surgeons can teach their techniques to others . 
 
   I don't care if the proper procedure and material spec can only
 be contained in a book of several hundred pages. I doubt that the
 lab notebooks of these "experts" detail anything close to that
 extent - AND that would be THEIR fault - not Scott's. 
 
  Jim Ostrowski
 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 10:37:38 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28345;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:34:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:34:26 -0700
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:34:27 -0700
Message-Id: <199806271734.KAA31645 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:  FTL travel: how can it be done?
Resent-Message-ID: <"HcaX01.0.ow6.YqIbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20100
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>
>In a message dated 6/26/98 9:55:14 PM, stk sunherald.infi.net wrote:
>
><
>What method might be needed to allow a spacecraft to exceed the speed of 
>light, something that will not require such an unphysical amount of matter 
>to accomplish.>>
>
>If the vacuum fluctuations in the vicinity of the spacecraft could be cohered
>, you'd be home free.  The energy density is there.  That's what it takes,
>IMHO.

To power such a craft, you are going to need a reactor of some sort.  FWIW,
I am convinced that exothermy results from emission of aether that had been
confined in the solitons we call particles.  Thus, the fact that you have a
reactor on board generating power will allow the internal spacetime wave
energy (QVF or spin foam if you prefer as names), to remain coherent to the
wave energy of the individual solitons (atoms) of the space craft.  Thus,
remaining coherent inside of the warp bubble should be entirely viable.
After all, the fact that we have stars in our universe releasing aether and
driving the spacetime wave energy is why spacetime persists today in the
first place.

As I said, you are not finished there, though.  You still have to drop out
of warp with the proper phase coherency to our universes matter.  It should
be viable to decouple spacetime in the warp from spacetime of the universe.
But when you want to drop back into the spacetime of the universe you need
to get the two spacetime waveforms to rejoin coherently or you will be
shaking hands with other aliens with anti matter hands, not a pretty thing.

Ross Tessien


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 10:51:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA31865;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:49:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:49:30 -0700
Message-ID: <00af01bda1f3$82894140$82b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:46:22 -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: <"UgLiG2.0.pn7.f2Jbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20101
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, June 27, 1998 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Horace Heffner wrote:


>At 4:58 AM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:19:56 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>>[snip]
>>>Aluminum, Beer and Soda Pop cans are the answer.
>>>Enthalpy of fusion,175 btu/lb at 1225 F melting point. Great Thermal
>>>Conductivity Too.
>>[snip]
>>You're right! The thermal conductivity would make for very fast
>>response. Now what do they line aluminum smelters with?
>>And is there a metal that won't alloy (or amalgamate) with it when
>>molten?
>>Or perhaps we could just bubble nitrogen through it to remove the
>>heat, or will that combine chemically - maybe use argon in a closed
>>loop?
>>How much does Al cost/lb?
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Robin van Spaandonk 
>
>
>The enthalpy of fusion for Al is only 10.71 KJ/mol.

Aw get off it, Horace, the HEAT OF FUSION of
Aluminum is 0.897 Joule/gK or 170 BTU/POUND
with a SPECIFIC HEAT of 0.215 BTU/POUND DEG F with a thermal conductivity
next after copper,silver, and gold.

The SECOND MOST ABUNDANT METAL on the Earth obtainable with an expenditure
of 8 to 10
Kw-Hr/pound, or off the side of the highway
by the MEGATON ready to be flattened and suitably curved for use as a
thermal storage
material in a "silo", with or without fusion.

Snip erroneous table.

Regards,   Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 11:11:56 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA03013;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:10:45 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:10:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Puthoff aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:01:55 EDT
To: hheffner corecom.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re:  Re: Expertise is essential
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78
Resent-Message-ID: <"uBqOo1.0.-k.ZMJbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20102
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


In a message dated 6/27/98 10:56:17 AM, hheffner corecom.net wrote:

snip, snip

<>

snip, snip

Well-stated, Horace.  Scott and I are dedicating our lives to the quest with
60+ hours per week.  To be labeled as con as opposed to pro, or only
interested in being nitpickers, is an epithet that cannot stand in the light
of reason.

Hal Puthoff

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 11:39:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA06134;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:37:14 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:37:14 -0700
Message-ID: <00d201bda1fa$2141d3a0$82b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: , "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Re: Expertise is essential
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:33:41 -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: <"KMuRw.0.lV1.QlJbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20103
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Puthoff aol.com 
To: hheffner corecom.net ; vortex-l@eskimo.com

Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Expertise is essential

Hal wrote:


>
>In a message dated 6/27/98 10:56:17 AM, hheffner corecom.net wrote:
>
>snip, snip
>
><some to be in the con camp.  On the contrary, the order provides a clear
>alternative to the pro or con camps.  That is to accept that CF is not
>proven, yet to advocate further investigation. >>
>
>snip, snip
>
>Well-stated, Horace.  Scott and I are dedicating our lives to the quest
with
>60+ hours per week.  To be labeled as con as opposed to pro, or only
>interested in being nitpickers, is an epithet that cannot stand in the
light
>of reason.

Agreed Hal. Horace did a bangup job on what the
Order of The Tortoise stands for. I only wish he would check his figures in
other areas before he posts them, and then posts three more
times correcting himself.   :-)

Best Regards,   Frederick
>
>Hal Puthoff
>
>


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 11:52:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA09211;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:48:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:48:10 -0700
From: Puthoff aol.com
Message-ID: <93fc01f0.35953dfe aol.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:46:21 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Wired Mag
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 78
Resent-Message-ID: <"18QlQ.0.lF2.fvJbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20104
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

For those interestd, the July issue of Wired Mag (on stands now) has a nice
article on the NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program, discussing warp
drive, ZPE, etc.  As might be expected, yours truly gets about a page of PR in
the article.

Hal Puthoff

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 12:18:14 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA18141;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:15:32 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:15:32 -0700
Message-ID: <00ea01bda1ff$849c2540$82b4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Re: Wired Mag
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:12:20 -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: <"xSt3T1.0.NR4.JJKbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20105
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Puthoff aol.com 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 12:51 PM
Subject: Wired Mag

Hal wrote:


>For those interestd, the July issue of Wired Mag (on stands now) has a nice
>article on the NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program, discussing
warp
>drive, ZPE, etc.  As might be expected, yours truly gets about a page of PR
in
>the article.

That's good news, Hal. I'll look for a copy.

Regards,  Frederick
>
>Hal Puthoff
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 12:35:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA21624;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:31:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:31:29 -0700
Message-ID: <000f01bda201$c15e6d60$638f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Web Sites in Inorganic Chemical Thermodynamics (http://www.crct.polymtl.ca/FACT
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:28:07 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01BDA1CF.6C065B20"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Resent-Message-ID: <"Gibd31.0.oH5.GYKbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20106
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_0009_01BDA1CF.6C065B20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Well worth bookmarking. Great conversion units, etc.

http://www.crct.polymtl.ca/FACT/websites.htm


------=_NextPart_000_0009_01BDA1CF.6C065B20
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Web Sites in Inorganic Chemical Thermodynamics.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Web Sites in Inorganic Chemical Thermodynamics.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.crct.polymtl.ca/FACT/websites.htm
Modified=C0AAC54901A2BD01D9

------=_NextPart_000_0009_01BDA1CF.6C065B20--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 12:53:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA24690;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:51:18 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:51:18 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:52:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers - corrections
Resent-Message-ID: <"DSaOW3.0.i16.rqKbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20107
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Oops! Calculation errors! Corrected values:

Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
Al     26.98    10.71       397          875      110     660
Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917         2021      254    2054
Si     28.08    50.21       811         1787      225    1414
NaCl                                              144     804
NaNO3                                              53     333

Note - the NaNO3 wh/kg number is corrected from the 530 wh/kg figure I used
earlier relating to automobile storage, to 52 wh/kg.  Off by a factor of 10
beause the starting number, 1141 kwh, was for 10 m^3 of salt, not 1 m^3.
That means a car could only get about 47 miles on the 200 kg of NaNO3.  Not
very good.  Still like the heating product idea though.

Could get 200 miles on 200 kg of Si though.  On Al could get 97 miles.
Both too hot for a car it seems.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 13:01:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA25084;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:51:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:51:48 -0700
Message-ID: <01BDA1DA.C02A9300.stk sunherald.infi.net>
From: "Kyle R. Mcallister" 
To: "'vortex-l eskimo.com'" 
Subject: RE: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:49:12 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"hOen42.0.j76.JrKbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20108
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:	Saturday, June 27, 1998 11:13 AM
To:	'vortex-l eskimo.com'
Subject:	RE: FTL travel: how can it be done?

I've been asked by private email to elaborate on what I wrote below.

>I am also wondering about the problem of the Alcubierre warp being 
causally
>isolated from the spacecraft. Then again, if there exists an absolute 
frame
>of reference, this problem might be circumvented. Or there might be other
>solutions.

What happens according to Krasnikov, Pfenning, and Ford, is that when the 
Alcubierre warp reaches the speed of light, an event horizon forms around 
it that is the size of the universe. Somehow, this event horizon causally 
isolates the spacecraft from the warp. In other words, since you can't 
transmit outside of the event horizon, the warp cannot be controlled.

Maybe I sound naive, but if the warp is generated from an 'emitter' on the 
spacecraft itself, without using material mass to bend space, shouldn't it 
be possible to disengage the warp simply by cutting power to the emitter? 
If it remains after power is cut, we have a violation of conservation of 
energy, as the warp would be generated from NOTHING. Maybe someone can shed 
some light on this.

If this can't be stopped, and there exists a background absolute time that 
preserves causality for all observers (and I think there is evidence for 
it), then theoretically, might the causal separation be circumvented? I 
don't understand that much of this, being that I have not yet completed the 
years of college required to fully comprehend this.

Thoughts?
Kyle R. Mcallister

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 13:31:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA18032;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:23:56 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"kqePK2.0.gP4.wOLbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20109
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:46 AM 6/27/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Horace Heffner 
>To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
>Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 11:20 AM
>Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
>
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>
>>At 4:58 AM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 03:19:56 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>Aluminum, Beer and Soda Pop cans are the answer.
>>>>Enthalpy of fusion,175 btu/lb at 1225 F melting point. Great Thermal
>>>>Conductivity Too.
>>>[snip]
>>>You're right! The thermal conductivity would make for very fast
>>>response. Now what do they line aluminum smelters with?
>>>And is there a metal that won't alloy (or amalgamate) with it when
>>>molten?
>>>Or perhaps we could just bubble nitrogen through it to remove the
>>>heat, or will that combine chemically - maybe use argon in a closed
>>>loop?
>>>How much does Al cost/lb?
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Robin van Spaandonk 
>>
>>
>>The enthalpy of fusion for Al is only 10.71 KJ/mol.


That number is correct. See p. 6-116 CRC 74th ed.  That's why I quoted it
in those units - to be sure the starting numbers were correct.

>
>Aw get off it, Horace,

Off what?

> the HEAT OF FUSION of
>Aluminum is 0.897 Joule/gK or 170 BTU/POUND

In the original table I hit the wrong button on my calculator for
conversion of kg to lbs.  Went the other way!  It pays to show your work!
Just posted correction to table.  I got 875 KJ/lb. So, (875,000
J/lb)(9.47831x10^-4 Btu/J) = 829 Btu/lb.  Agreed, even this corrected
number does not match well with your 170 Btu/lb.

So, here is the table and calculation in more detail:

Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
Al     26.98    10.71       397          875      110     660
Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917         2021      254    2054
Si     28.08    50.21       811         1787      225    1414
NaCl                                              144     804
NaNO3                                              53     333


For Al, (10.71 KJ/mol)/(26.98 g/mol)= 0.397 KJ/g = (397 KJ/kg)(2.2 lb/kg) =
(875 KJ/lb)(0.9478 Btu/KJ) = 829.5 Btu/lb.

Where did I go wrong now?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 13:51:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04266;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:47:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:47:15 -0700
Message-ID: <004401bda20c$571a71a0$638f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:44:07 -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: <"ITVR_3.0.a21.JfLbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20110
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, June 27, 1998 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers

Horace wrote:


>The enthalpy of fusion for Al is only 10.71 KJ/mol.

10,710J/1055 J/BTU = 10.152 BTU/27 grams
= 10.152 * 454/27 = 170.704 BTU/POUND.  :-)
>
>Where did I go wrong now?

It all started when you said, "I Do".  :-)

Regards,   Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner          
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 13:52:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA04409;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:47:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:47:41 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:49:07 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers - corrections
Resent-Message-ID: <"z2Ne83.0.k41.ifLbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20111
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a corrected table and Si calculation in more detail:

Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
Al     26.98    10.71       397          875      110     660
Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917         2021      254    2054
Si     28.08    50.21      1788         3933      497    1414
NaCl                                              144     804
NaNO3                                              53     333


For Si, (50.21 KJ/mol)/(28.08 g/mol)= 1.788 KJ/g = (1788 KJ/kg)(2.2 lb/kg)
= (3933 KJ/lb).  (1788 KJ/kg)(1000 w-s/KJ)/(3600 s/hr) = 497 wh/kg.



Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 14:40:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA23879;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <003f01bda20a$216b6160$638f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:27:38 -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: <"j1ZsZ.0.zq5.kOMbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20112
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

Snip table
>On Al could get 97 miles.

On a couple of Big Mac's,an order of fries, and
a Dr. Pepper, on a bicycle you could do twice that. Save going to the gym to
watch the fat
roll off.  :-)

Why is it that "THE CAR"is a measuring stick for energy storage need?

If you MUST use the tin lizzie invest 25 kW-hr
from a displacer Stirling Genset as the upper
and integral part of the heat storage silo to
electrolyze water and combine the H2 with
CO2 to make Methanol-Water:

3 H2 (6#) + CO2(44#) ---> CH3OH(32#)+ H2O (18#)

This antifreeze mix is burnable in existing I.C. engines, or the rection can
be reversed to
run a fuel cell-electric car at about
1.5 kW-hr/pound, as opposed to lead acid batteries at 15 watt-hr/pound.

Regards,   Frederick





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 15:09:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA27291;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:02:19 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers - corrected
Resent-Message-ID: <"4j4ov3.0.Lg6.6rMbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20113
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is some more data:

Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
Al     26.98    10.71         397        180      110     660
Al2O3  101.96  111.10         917        416      254    2054
Si     28.08    50.21        1788        812      497    1414 **
NaCl                                              144     804
NaNO3                                              53     333
NaF                           778        354      475     992 **
MgCl2  95.22    30.70         322        146       89     714
FeCL3 162.20    43.10         266        121       74     304 *
MoO3  143.94    48.00         333        151       96     801
Sb    121.75    19.87         163         74       45     631

* note that FeCl3 is better than NaNO3.
** Si and NaF are highest wh/kg.



For Al, (10.71 KJ/mol)/(26.98 g/mol)= 0.397 KJ/g = (397 KJ/kg)/(2.2 lb/kg)
= (180 KJ/lb).  (397 KJ/kg)(1000 w-s/KJ)/(3600 s/hr) = 110 wh/kg.

For MgCl2, (30.7 KJ/mol)/(95.22 g/mol)= 0.322 KJ/g = (322 KJ/kg)/(2.2
lb/kg) = (146 KJ/lb).  (322 KJ/kg)(1000 w-s/KJ)/(3600 s/hr) = 89 wh/kg.

For FeCl3, (43.1 KJ/mol)/(162.2 g/mol)= 0.266 KJ/g = (266 KJ/kg)/(2.2
lb/kg) = (121 KJ/lb).  (266 KJ/kg)(1000 w-s/KJ)/(3600 s/hr) = 73.88 wh/kg.

For MoO3, (48.00 KJ/mol)/(143.94 g/mol)= 0.333 KJ/g = (333 KJ/kg)/(2.2
lb/kg) = (151 KJ/lb).  (333 KJ/kg)(1000 w-s/KJ)/(3600 s/hr) = 92.5 wh/kg.

For Sb, (19.87 KJ/mol)/(121.75 g/mol)= 0.163 KJ/g = (163 KJ/kg)/(2.2 lb/kg)
= (74 KJ/lb).  (163 KJ/kg)(1000 w-s/KJ)/(3600 s/hr) = 497 wh/kg.




Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 15:58:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA25222;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:55:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 15:55:03 -0700
From: VCockeram aol.com
Message-ID: 
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:53:08 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Tell all! Re: H2 Glow
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 62
Resent-Message-ID: <"y4PS01.0.x96.6XNbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20114
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 98-06-26 18:18:12 EDT, you write:

> I'm trying to get the graphs to Vince so we
>  can discuss this intelligently. It's not
>  clear yet without more no K runs at
>  the closer electrode spacing,you can
>  see for yourself if you [get].................
>  Excel viewer is available from:
>  http://premium.microsoft.com/msdn/library/officedev/office/viewers/excelvw.
> htm
>  
>  George Holz      george varisys.com
>  Varitronics Systems

George,
 
 First,thanks for the graph. That really is worth a thousand words.

Looks like smaller electrode gap is better. But I wonder if it's just the
(supposed) reaction taking place in a smaller area, concentrating the
output which shows up as higher Deg. C per watt. Also with a smaller
area there will be smaller radiation losses.
 
Horace, assume T=600 C Tube 1=1 inch gap, tube 2=2 inch gap. 
How do you figure radiation loss in ambient air at 20 C ?   Thanks.

.....Sigh...more stuff to do to capture those radition losses....water flow.
When I get around to this it will be gravity feed as suggested by M. Schaffer,
(I think thats correct Frank.)

Back to the present; 
 I will make some runs at gap=.5, H2 no K and post the data here.

Again, thank you George for taking the time to put up those graphs.

Regards,
Vince Cockeram
Las Vegas

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 18:04:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA12549;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:00:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:00:36 -0700
Message-ID: <006c01bda22f$bba5a680$638f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: The Aluminum Association - Industry Profile (http://www.aluminum.org/ind_indx.h
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:56:20 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0043_01BDA1FD.460E9300"
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: <"jkJnF1.0._33.qMPbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20115
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_0043_01BDA1FD.460E9300
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.aluminum.org/ind_indx.htm

------=_NextPart_000_0043_01BDA1FD.460E9300
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="The Aluminum Association - Industry Profile.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="The Aluminum Association - Industry Profile.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.aluminum.org/ind_indx.htm
Modified=A060977C2FA2BD01A2

------=_NextPart_000_0043_01BDA1FD.460E9300--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 18:19:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17570;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:17:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:17:46 -0700
Message-ID: <008501bda232$1ea2eb60$638f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: On-Line Market Buying Prices (http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.c
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:13:43 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004C_01BDA1FF.B3A7E860"
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: <"wsE432.0.PI4.ucPbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20116
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_004C_01BDA1FF.B3A7E860
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.cgi?section=05&category=03

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BDA1FF.B3A7E860
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="On-Line Market Buying Prices.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="On-Line Market Buying Prices.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=3Dhttp://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.cgi?section=3D05&ca=
tegory=3D03
Modified=3D60BA15E731A2BD01A7

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BDA1FF.B3A7E860--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 18:31:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17847;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:27:51 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:27:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 21:16:46 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Hot fusion R&D
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806272119_MC2-5188-86A9 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"-xKGO.0.nM4.LmPbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20117
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

In another message I wrote: "I have said many nasty things about hot fusion
scientists, but I would never claim they are not doing serious, capable,
difficult research." I would like to clarify and expand on that a little,
because my position on this has often been misunderstood and misrepresented.

I think the government hot fusion program should be terminated because it is
a billion dollar industrial research project to benefit the power industry,
so it should be paid for by the electric power industry. If the industry does
not want it and will not pay for it, "it should be and it must be terminated"
as Mike McKubre said of the NHE cold fusion research project. He and I hold
CF and HF government research projects to the same standard.

I think the government should not be investing in energy development any more
that it should be investing in mining, software, discos or diapers. The
energy sector is no more important than these others. Even if the global
warming threat is real, it is one of many threats from different industries,
and direct government R&D is not likely to fix of these problems. If hot
fusion could be done on the million dollar level as shoestring academic
science like cold fusion, I would support it.

I might be in favor of a joint government - industry research hot fusion
project, in which industry pays 80% or 90% of the cost, and the government
coordinates or helps with the long term physics. Today industry contributes
nothing to the program, and in congressional testimony spokesmen from EPRI and
energy industries say they are not interested in hot fusion and want nothing
to do with it. I cannot imagine a similar situation in another industry!
Imagine the government spending a half-billion every year on operating system
software development, despite the fact that IBM, Microsoft and every other
company in the business goes before Congress and says: "we don't want this and
we will not use it."

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 18:31:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA17938;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 21:16:33 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Expertise is essential
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806272119_MC2-5188-86A8 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"_jFjF1.0.5O4.tmPbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20118
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex; >INTERNET:jimostr victor1.mscomm.com

Jim Ostrowski writes:

     The simple fact is if those researchers claiming to have achieved
     positive results had kept proper notes of what procedures and materials
     THEY used in order to produce those results , they would be able to
     describe what to do down to the minute details.

The researchers do keep proper notes in enormous detail. For example, look at
the work at SRI, Los Alamos, the National Institute, Hokkaido U., or the Navy.
Read their papers, listen to their lectures. They perform hundreds of
experiments with what appears to be identical material, but only 5 or 10 runs
work. They do not know why yet, although great progress has been made in nine
years. Progress is frustratingly slow but real, just as it is with AIDS
research and hot fusion.

The scientists measure loading and other physical characteristics and they
perform detailed analysis of the materials, and they find that "identical
materials" are not identical at all, especially after a run. They are trying
to learn what steps during manufacturing and pre-treatment, and what
electrochemical treatments are needed to optimize performance. These are
extremely complex questions. Similar problems in catalysis and solid state
physics in industrial and pollution control have required enormous cumulative
efforts to answer. Thousands of man years and hundreds of millions of dollars
have been devoted to such questions. Most cold fusion scientists are retired
professors working on a shoestring with their own money.


     It seems more likely that these people with "expertise"  are more
     comparable to magicians than they are to real scientists.

Ostrowski should read the literature before making ignorant, inflammatory
statements like this. This is like saying that AIDS researchers are more like
magicians than real doctors because many of their patients die.


     I believe all these magicians are simply not interested in sharing their
     information about how they achieved these alleged positive results . . .

Some say they are not interested in sharing information. Others, especially
academic scientists like Mizuno, are completely open. The positive and
negative results are not "alleged," they are published in top-notch,
peer-reviewed scientific journals by some of the finest electrochemists in the
world. By every accepted standard of mainstream science these experiments are
superlative. A person who denigrates them as "alleged results" from
"magicians" is biased against the conventional scientific process.


     I have heard this CF positive result process being compared to all kinds
     of things including brain surgery .  But even brain surgeons can teach
     their techniques to others .

CF researchers can and do teach their methods. So do AIDS researchers, but
they still do not have a vaccination, despite years of labor and billions of
dollars. Hot fusion researcher teach their techniques, yet they have fallen 50
years behind schedule. Does this mean they are not scientists? I have said
many nasty things about hot fusion scientists, but I would never claim they
are not doing serious, capable, difficult research.


     I don't care if the proper procedure and material spec can only be
     contained in a book of several hundred pages.

But these pages have not yet been written! That's the problem. The research
has not yet been done, and the money needed to do it is nowhere in sight.


     I doubt that the lab notebooks of these "experts" detail anything close
     to that extent - AND that would be THEIR fault - not Scott's.

There is no need for Ostrowski to "doubt" or "guess" or wonder what is in the
lab notebooks and formal published papers of the cold fusion scientists. Their
work has been published in detail, some of it in our magazine. He can read and
judge whether the details are sufficient. A good place to start would be the
Storms paper "How to Perform a Cold Fusion Experiment." Anyone who reads that
and compares it to Scott Little's work will see that Little never tried to
replicate a cold fusion experiment. He replicated one type of calorimeter, in
a configuration that is likely to inhibit or quench a palladium cold fusion
reaction. He has never taken any of the steps recommended by Storms,
Fleischmann, Oriani, Bockris or the others in the literature, and he has only
done a handful or runs in any case. Even an experienced expert would not
expect to see results after a handful or runs. You have to do the experiment
hundreds of times, under tightly controlled conditions, and you have to
carefully monitor the known control parameters. Little has not done any of
this.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 18:29:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA19453;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:27:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:27:15 -0700
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:48:36 -0700
From: Lynn Kurtz 
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
In-reply-to: <002a01bda172$8475d3a0$e941d3d0 default>
X-Sender: kurtz imap2.asu.edu (Unverified)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <199806271648.JAA14592 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: <"Umm0W2.0.sl4.plPbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20119
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:22 PM 6/26/98 -0400, you wrote:
>Horace said:
>
>
>>At 8:04 AM 6/26/98, Mike Carrell wrote:
>>>Jed's essay on the necessity of expertise is excellent. He tells it like
>it
>>>is.
>>>
>>>Mike Carrell
>
>
>>Yes, an unfortunate commentary on the state of affairs.  As long as such
>>extreme expertise is essential, CF has gone nowhere, there is no
>>significant progress.
>>
>>One can now mail order transistorized electronic parts of great complexity,
>>and use them with no prior expertise.
>
>Almost on the point, but not quite. ...

<****snip****  a very nice essay by Mike>

Well as a CF lurker for a few years, let me explain what bothers me about
this state of affairs. It is certainly possible that you are absolutely
correct that the thing holding back CF is its almost infinite complexity
and extremely high standards of expertise required, and that one day we
will all look back at this period and understand why it took so long.

On the other hand, if the CF effect is in fact an artifact, that too would
explain the extreme difficulty in designing a repeatable rock solid
experiment that would convince the mainstreamers that CF is real. If this
is the truth, then all this stuff about complexity is simply wishful
thinking and making excuses.

We have people and organizations claiming to have working cells, none of
whom will share their findings and expertise. I can't help noticing that
that too easily interprets in two mutually exclusive ways -- it is real and
too valuable a secret to divulge until we have it ready to exploit
commercially or it isn't real and we really don't have anything to show and
we are hiding that fact for whatever reason. And it is impossible to tell
which is the truth.

Finally, we have numerous essays by physicists like Dick Blue which raise
very pertinant and pointed issues, and the stance of many here is to ignore
him, ridicule him, and try to pretend that he is simply so biased and
ignorant that he should simply be shunned. (Please, Jed, don't bother
posting a long essay for me about what you think Dick Blue believes. I have
read what he believes and don't need your misinterpretations of it).

All in all, it is a pretty sad state of affairs alright. To me it seems
like the ball is in the CFers court. Where's the beef?

--Lynn

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 18:58:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA26111;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:55:44 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:55:44 -0700
Message-ID: <010701bda237$6f22e220$638f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re; Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:51:57 -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: <"iD1Zx1.0.vN6.WAQbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20120
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>From what I can find Robin, molten aluminum
is compatible with steel, probably very good with 316 stainless or such.

With a specific heat of 0.215 BTU/Lb/F and
a heat of fusion of 170 BTU/Lb at 1225 F, if
one was to work in the range of 700 to 1700 F
you would be looking at about 215 + 170 BTU/lb
over the 1,000 degree temperature range.

Since molten aluminum will react with N2 and form the Nitride, it would
probably be best to
draw  down a Stainless Steel Jacket over an Al
rod and weld the pinch shut with  a TIG or
Heliarc weld.

This would be a very good "Hot Side" to get a decent Carnot efficiency for a
Stirling engine.

Regards,   Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 19:09:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA23534;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 21:54:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: Vortex 
Subject: Jeanne Manning?  Dale Pond?
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"vbBGP1.0.el5.GMQbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20121
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


	Dear Vo.,

	My address book is goofed up.  Any idea of address for these people?

				JHS

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 19:36:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA26720;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:27:40 -0700
Message-Id: <199806280227.TAA17455 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: Jeanne Manning?  Dale Pond?
Resent-Message-ID: <"vbT7W3.0.LX6.FlQbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20122
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Try Ray Tomes over in New Zealand.Dale and I think Jeanne, attended the
aether conference Ray and I hosted a year ago, out here in California.  Ray
may have an email address for them in his logs.  

Ross Tessien


>
>	Dear Vo.,
>
>	My address book is goofed up.  Any idea of address for these people?
>
>				JHS
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 19:36:24 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA00717;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:33:04 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:33:04 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 02:33:03 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3598a904.265797451 mail-hub>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
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: <"gYs2S2.0.7B.VjQbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20123
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:23:56 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip]
>So, here is the table and calculation in more detail:
>
>Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
>----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
>Al     26.98    10.71       397          875      110     660
>Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917         2021      254    2054
>Si     28.08    50.21       811         1787      225    1414
>NaCl                                              144     804
>NaNO3                                              53     333
>
>
>For Al, (10.71 KJ/mol)/(26.98 g/mol)= 0.397 KJ/g = (397 KJ/kg)(2.2 lb/kg) =
>(875 KJ/lb)(0.9478 Btu/KJ) = 829.5 Btu/lb.
>
>Where did I go wrong now?
[snip]
As Frederick has already pointed out the Btu/lb figure is wrong (you
multiplied by 2.2 lb/kg, iso dividing). The table however at first
glance appears to be correct. In the table, the wh/kg figure for Al,
is not that much less than that for NaCl, and the temp of 660 C is
probably more manageable. The thermal conductivity is also a huge
plus, as it means that heat can be stored and retrieved much more
simply &/or much faster. The cost, on the other hand is probably going
to be higher (about 10 times?), so perhaps there is room for both
versions, each in its own niche?
The question remains, what can be used as a cheap and durable
container? Enamelled steel perhaps?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 20:02:13 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07169;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:59:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:59:23 -0700
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:59:22 -0700
Message-Id: <199806280259.TAA20135 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: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Resent-Message-ID: <"kwe2m2.0.ol1.A6Rbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20124
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:	Saturday, June 27, 1998 11:13 AM
>To:	'vortex-l eskimo.com'
>Subject:	RE: FTL travel: how can it be done?
>
>I've been asked by private email to elaborate on what I wrote below.
>
>>I am also wondering about the problem of the Alcubierre warp being 
>causally
>>isolated from the spacecraft. Then again, if there exists an absolute 
>frame
>>of reference, this problem might be circumvented. Or there might be other
>>solutions.
>
>What happens according to Krasnikov, Pfenning, and Ford, is that when the 
>Alcubierre warp reaches the speed of light, an event horizon forms around 
>it that is the size of the universe.

When I calculate the masses that tauon and muon ought to have, as ratios of
electron, I come up short, but for both particles, I come up short by the
same amount, which was odd if the calcuation had nothing to do with their
actual structures as aether vortices.  

Years of study of how black holes behave, and how stars behave, have led me
to the conclusion that aether can condense, if it is compressed
sufficiently.  The easiest way to do this is to have a spherical convergence
of wave energy, and thus you wind up with a resonance and we call these
particles.

For black holes, the event horizon is the radius at which the inflow
velocity  of  the aether  reaches c, the speed of light.  It is pretty
simply that if you have a soliton such as a smoke ring vortex, or any other
wave form for that matter, and it is in an ocean of medium where that medium
is flowing into a spherical convergence and accelerates up to the velocity
of sound in that medium, then those waveforms will be "blown" into that
"black hole".  We just fail to consider empty space as being substantive,
but if you think of the universe as more of an ocean, then it will become
fairly apparent that if the medium of that ocean is flowing in as fast as
waves (photons) can propogate outward, then they will be blown in.

The reason the event horizon is important is not meerly that light and
matter cannot escape once they cross that boundary.  mc^2 is the energy
required in order to condense the aether!  That is why when you induce
fusion reactions, and aether shoots out, your "particles" are accelerated
according to that equation.  You are literally shooting out some of the
aether that had been confined in and associated with, those particles.

So if you think of the universe as an ocean of aether, and that this aether
can condense if it is compressed in a hydraulic jump in pressure resulting
from aether with a KE of mc^2 slamming into other aether, then we have the
makings of a warp in space.

As the craft crosses the velocity of light barrier, the aether associated
with the craft that is moving with it is super sonic relative to the aether
of the rest of the universe.  So you have a shock front, and the energy of
the shock front is for any elemental volume of aether, mv^2, but this time,
v > c!

Put bluntly, the aether of empty space ahead of the craft doesn't know that
the craft is coming.  Sort of like a super sonic jet sneaking up on
unsuspecting people on the ground.  They hear the sonic boom after the jet
passes by (SR71 makes a double boom at over double the velocity of sound!)

But this is not a normal event horizon, though I agree that the craft will
be causily isolated from the rest of the universe, but it probably will
still be able to observe light and other EM wave energy coming from outside,
though the signal may be very different from what we observe as EM.  This
shock is at the leading edge of the craft, sort of like a tear drop shape of
a rain drop with the tail pointing backwards.  

Behind the craft, the aether you forced to condense in front of the craft is
going to flash vaporize again.  So this is a very different geometry of
event horizon.  


 Somehow, this event horizon causally 
>isolates the spacecraft from the warp. In other words, since you can't 
>transmit outside of the event horizon, the warp cannot be controlled.

I don't think this is necessarily true.  You should be able to transmit out
of the interior, but if you try to transmit forward, the craft would get
there before the transmission.

That said, the condensation of the aether ahead of the craft in the shock
dome may well destroy any EM like signal you try to push out of the warp in
the forward direction.  If you shoot it backwards, then it may make it out
of the warp bubble,  But notice that even if it does, it will still be
moving in the same direction as the craft.  Sort of like how the sonic boom
is falling away behind a super sonic jet, and yet it is still moving foward,
just slower than the jet is.


>Maybe I sound naive, but if the warp is generated from an 'emitter' on the 
>spacecraft itself, without using material mass to bend space, shouldn't it 
>be possible to disengage the warp simply by cutting power to the emitter? 

The aether associated with the entire ship, is your "emitter".  This isn't
some hocus pocus magic, it is an actual acceleration up to the velocity of
light, and then a punching through that shock front via condensation of the
medium out of the way of the craft.  So the craft will have formed a vortex
in the aether that is so intense that the aether ahead of the craft is
condensing, and then flash vaporizing again behind the craft.  The lifetimes
of the condensate droplets will be so short that to a stationary observer
(relative to CBR), those particles would not be observable any more than the
craft would be because they are effectively "virtual" particles.


>If it remains after power is cut, we have a violation of conservation of 
>energy, as the warp would be generated from NOTHING. Maybe someone can shed 
>some light on this.

I would expect that some wave energy from the vortex will bleed off over
time, and so such a vortex would have to be maintained by aether emission
(nuclear reactions) internal to the warp.  But the warp is definitely a
phenomena of interaction of FTL aether with stationary aether.

>
>If this can't be stopped, and there exists a background absolute time that 
>preserves causality for all observers (and I think there is evidence for 
>it), then theoretically, might the causal separation be circumvented? I 
>don't understand that much of this, being that I have not yet completed the 
>years of college required to fully comprehend this.

If you study quasars, you will learn that they have FTL appearing jets.  I
am convinced that those jets are due to the core of the black hole breaching
confinement and the aether condensate in the core is shooting out at FTL
velocities as it vaporizes.  The same thing happened during the big bang,
except that there you had the entire core breach all at once, whereas these
BH's are only breaching via the paths of least resistance (ie, the paths
where the core is being rammed by inflowing aether, the least.  Those places
are at the poles, because just like a bath tub drain that forms a tornado
like vortex, the inflow to the black hole is least intense at the poles.
Thus, the poles are the directions of least confinement of the core, and
therefore the paths of preferential breach of confinement.)

Anyway, if you look at those million light year long jets (we see thousands
of them), you will notice that they are symmetric for the most part.  ie,
the extent of lobes on one side are the same as the extent of lobes on the
other side.  If those jets were not truly FTL, and the FTL observations were
due to projection on the sky, then there would always be one really long
jet, and one really short jet.  But most jets are about the same size on
both sides.  Anyway, to me the evidence is pretty overwhelming that the FTL
observations are truly FTL.

Later, Ross Tessien




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 20:32:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA13664;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 20:30:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 20:30:00 -0700
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers - corrections
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:29:56 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3599b80f.269649702 mail-hub>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
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: <"i0ix81.0.QL3.tYRbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20125
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 11:52:45 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:

>Oops! Calculation errors! Corrected values:
>
>Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
>----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
>Al     26.98    10.71       397          875      110     660
>Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917         2021      254    2054
>Si     28.08    50.21       811         1787      225    1414
>NaCl                                              144     804
>NaNO3                                              53     333
>
[snip]
Note the correlation between wh/kg and melting point. Higher bond
energies mean better storage, but also higher melting points.
Actually I would expect an almost perfect correlation between temp and
wh/mole.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 20:35:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA15288;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 20:33:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 20:33:05 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:34:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Easy Energy Answers
Resent-Message-ID: <"jOV7P2.0.Yk3.mbRbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20126
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:33 PM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 12:23:56 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>[snip]
>>So, here is the table and calculation in more detail:
>>
>>Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
>>----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
>>Al     26.98    10.71       397          875      110     660
>>Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917         2021      254    2054
>>Si     28.08    50.21       811         1787      225    1414
>>NaCl                                              144     804
>>NaNO3                                              53     333
>>
>>
>>For Al, (10.71 KJ/mol)/(26.98 g/mol)= 0.397 KJ/g = (397 KJ/kg)(2.2 lb/kg) =
>>(875 KJ/lb)(0.9478 Btu/KJ) = 829.5 Btu/lb.
>>
>>Where did I go wrong now?
>[snip]
>As Frederick has already pointed out the Btu/lb figure is wrong (you
>multiplied by 2.2 lb/kg, iso dividing). The table however at first
>glance appears to be correct.

Silicon is incorrect (too low), and a very interesting prospect. (See below)

>In the table, the wh/kg figure for Al,
>is not that much less than that for NaCl, and the temp of 660 C is
>probably more manageable. The thermal conductivity is also a huge
>plus, as it means that heat can be stored and retrieved much more
>simply &/or much faster. The cost, on the other hand is probably going
>to be higher (about 10 times?), so perhaps there is room for both
>versions, each in its own niche?


Yes.  There are lots of possibilities depending on requirements for weight,
volume, temperature, storage times, insulation cost, etc.


>The question remains, what can be used as a cheap and durable
>container? Enamelled steel perhaps?


Ceramics might work for interior layers.  Insulation is a big problem,
especially if any portable use is anticipated.

Below is history of errors. Hopefully the final set of numbers is correct,
as they have already been posted.  Sorry for the problems.  I am working on
too many things at once, so am in big hurry.  I figure numbers can be
fixed, ideas and data are harder to come by, so I post rather than not
post.


At 9:18 AM 6/27/98, Horace Heffner (originally) wrote:
[snip]
>The enthalpy of fusion for Al is only 10.71 KJ/mol. You also have to worry
>about oxidation.  However, if you can go for a 2054 C process instead of a
>660 C process, then Al2O3 has an enthalpy of fusion of 111.10 KJ/mol.
>Silicon,at 1414 C puts out 50.21 KJ/mol.
>
>Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb
>----   ------   --------    -------    -----
>Al     26.98    10.71       397          180
>Al2O3  101.96  111.10       917          416
>Si     28.08    50.21       811          367


At 11:46 AM 6/27/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
[snip]
>>The enthalpy of fusion for Al is only 10.71 KJ/mol.
>
>Aw get off it, Horace, the HEAT OF FUSION of
>Aluminum is 0.897 Joule/gK or 170 BTU/POUND
>with a SPECIFIC HEAT of 0.215 BTU/POUND DEG F with a thermal conductivity
>next after copper,silver, and gold.
[snip]


Actually at this point I was 100 percent correct about aluminum.  I then
went and messed up the Btu/lb numbers.  The Si numbers are incorrect
however, and fixed below.

At 2:02 PM 6/27/98, Horace Heffner wrote:
>Here is some more data:
>
>Item   Mol Wt   KJ/mol      KJ/kg      KJ/lb    wh/kg   Temp.C
>----   ------   --------    -------    -----    ------  ------
>Al     26.98    10.71         397        180      110     660
>Al2O3  101.96  111.10         917        416      254    2054
>Si     28.08    50.21        1788        812      497    1414 **
>NaCl                                              144     804
>NaNO3                                              53     333
>NaF                           778        354      475     992 **
>MgCl2  95.22    30.70         322        146       89     714
>FeCL3 162.20    43.10         266        121       74     304 *
>MoO3  143.94    48.00         333        151       96     801
>Sb    121.75    19.87         163         74       45     631
>
>* note that FeCl3 is better than NaNO3.
>** Si and NaF are highest wh/kg.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 22:14:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA13684;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: On-Line Market Buying Prices (http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.c
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:05:11 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <359acdcc.275215675 mail-hub>
References: <008501bda232$1ea2eb60$638f85ce default>
In-Reply-To: <008501bda232$1ea2eb60$638f85ce default>
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: <"R9Tvk.0.kL3.03Tbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20127
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:13:43 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:

>
>
>http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.cgi?section=05&category=03

I guessed at 10 times more expensive, it looks more like 65 times!

BTW I just had a thought about the insulation and outer shell. If you
use old cinders for the insulation, say a layer about 3 ft thick, then
the outer shell will be at about ambient temperature, so could be
simply a large sturdy plastic bag. It only has to keep water out after
all (though tree roots might be a bit of a problem).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 22:22:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA03421;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:19:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:19:17 -0700
Message-ID: <3595D2BF.C068693D axionet.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:21:04 -0700
From: Jeane Manning 
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Jeanne Manning?  Dale Pond?
References: <199806280227.TAA17455 Au.oro.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"4hsSu2.0.Ir.K9Tbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20128
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Nope, I didn't make it to the aether conference, tho I'd planned to.  Try the
most recent address I have for Dale Pond - DaleSVP ipa.net.
Jeane Manning

Ross Tessien wrote:

> Try Ray Tomes over in New Zealand.Dale and I think Jeanne, attended the
> aether conference Ray and I hosted a year ago, out here in California.  Ray
> may have an email address for them in his logs.
>
> Ross Tessien
>
> >
> >       Dear Vo.,
> >
> >       My address book is goofed up.  Any idea of address for these people?
> >
> >                               JHS
> >
> >



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 22:52:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA18789;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: CF Funding
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:41:13 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <359bd6d2.277527364 mail-hub>
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: <"2XQhp.0.Tb4.taTbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20129
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

It occurs to me that large insurance companies have a vested interest
in assuaging the effects of global warming, and hence might be enticed
into providing funding for alternate technologies.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Jun 27 23:43:15 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA15819;
	Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:41:49 -0700
Resent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:41:49 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:43:05 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: On-Line Market Buying Prices
 (http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.c
Resent-Message-ID: <"zQM__3.0.5t3.jMUbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20130
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 9:05 PM 6/27/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
[snip]
>BTW I just had a thought about the insulation and outer shell. If you
>use old cinders for the insulation, say a layer about 3 ft thick, then
>the outer shell will be at about ambient temperature, so could be
>simply a large sturdy plastic bag. It only has to keep water out after
>all (though tree roots might be a bit of a problem).


This will not work unless there is a heat sink near the plastic.  A 100 C
change in surface temperature can freeze water pipes 12 feet down in a
matter of weeks.  Cinders provide good insulation, but like fiberglass,
support some convection.  Most important is the fact that, if there is no
heat sink, the temperature rises just like voltage rises on a resistor with
an open end, regardless of how large the resistance.  The surrounding soil
goes on and on, and is a good resistor.  Eventually, the soil will be very
hot over a wide area, unless groundwater siphons the heat off.  Might be of
use to put a water filled coil around the tank + some insulation, to use
for water heating, pool heating, a sink for a heat pump, etc.  If high heat
worked its way up to a foundation it might be a fire hazard or burn hazard,
especially if steam (from rain, etc.) gets involved.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 00:54:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA27557;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:51:44 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
In-Reply-To: <199806272119_MC2-5188-86A8 compuserve.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"FAaEX3.0.Vk6.EOVbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20131
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 




 Jed Rothwell wrote: 
 
 > Jim Ostrowski writes: 
 
 >> The simple fact is if those researchers claiming to have
 >> achieved positive results had kept proper notes of what procedures
 >> and materials THEY used in order to produce those results , they
 >> would be able to describe what to do down to the minute details. 
 
 Jed responded: 
 
 > The researchers do keep proper notes in enormous detail. For
 > example, look at the work at SRI, Los Alamos, the National
 > Institute, Hokkaido U., or the Navy. 
 
  Look , you certainly have your job to do , running your magazine
 or whatever and I have mine, running a small business totally
 unrelated to cold fusion .  I have other interests and agendas
 related to other areas of experimental science , I will leave it
 to you to read for me AND summarize what these CF papers have to
 say here on Vortex and in your magazine. 
 
 > Read their papers, listen to
 >their lectures. 
 
   No. I have a life too so I'll let YOU do that required reading
 and lecture attending. 
 
 I have time for the Reader's Digest version. ... describing a
 successful , repeatable CF demo . 
 
 >They perform hundreds of experiments with what
 >appears to be identical material, but only 5 or 10 runs work. 
 
  This appears to be saying that these researchers perform hundreds
 of experiments over and over again the same exact way each time
 without altering a single parameter. 
 
 I find that a little difficult to believe. This doesn't coincide
 with any reasonable procedure that I have ever heard of. 
 
 When you are searching for something you try different things in
 different ways until a break or a good clue comes along , then you
 follow that line until something else happens , and so on . 
 
 When things like that start to happen , you get out the tape
 recorder and describe everything you are doing into it while you
 are doing it . 
 
 If you can manage it simultaneously while tweaking your dials and
 knobs or whatever you draw a diagram or put data in your notebook. 
 
 if not you get someone to help you with recording your processes
 That's what video cameras and lab assistants are for -
 Toward the end of the day's work you compile and correlate your
 data and run whatever software analysis you can on them. 
 
 Then you confer with your associates about what to do next. 
 
 It works like that. 
 
 > They
 > do not know why yet, although great progress has been made in nine
 > years. 
 
 Like what ?....and please give me the short version. 
 
 > Progress is frustratingly slow but real, just as it is
 > with AIDS research and hot fusion. 
 
 Can you quantify this progress in any way ? How close are they to
 "break even" ? How close were they nine years ago ? 
 
  OH ... I almost forgot , that's when the first amazing results
 were produced by P&F . So are things just getting more amazing or
 are we regressing somehow? 
 
 >The scientists measure loading and other physical characteristics
 >and they perform detailed analysis of the materials, and they find
 >that "identical materials"  are not identical at all, especially
 >after a run. 
 
  So this says they notice something different about a material
 that they didn't notice before ? And that little something either
 inhibits or enhances a result ... and they re-adjust accordingly,
 right ? What's the problem ? These little differences should be
 clues leading to straighforward procedures , in a reasonable
 amount of time. These guys have had 9 years! 
 
 > They are trying to learn what steps during
 > manufacturing and pre-treatment, and what electrochemical
 > treatments are needed to optimize performance. These are extremely
 > complex questions. Similar problems in catalysis and solid state
 > physics in industrial and pollution control have required
 > enormous cumulative efforts to answer. Thousands of man years and
 > hundreds of millions of dollars have been devoted to such
 > questions. Most cold fusion scientists are retired professors
 > working on a shoestring with their own money. 
 
   Well , here at least I can sympathize - but upon what particular
 results do these scientists base their optimism , and how were
 these results achieved ? 
 
 They don't know and aren't sure , is what I gather ,basically. 
 
  >> It seems more likely that these people with "expertise"  are more
  >> comparable to magicians than they are to real scientists. 
 
> Ostrowski should read the literature before making ignorant,
> inflammatory statements like this. 
 
 You presumably read the literature , and boil it down for your
 magazine and this list . The similarity lies in the fact that
 magicians and these scientists can't or won't describe a specific
 procedure to produce the effect in question (o/u) . 
 
>  This is like saying that AIDS researchers are more like magicians than
> real doctors because many of their patients die. 
 
  Oh please enough of the CF experimenters being like dedicated
 heroic doctors or something .  Jeez.  Maybe some scriptwriter
 should make a tv show out of it if it's THAT dramatic. 
 
 
>> I believe all these magicians are simply not interested in >> sharing
their information about how they achieved these alleged >> positive
results . . . 
 
>  Some say they are not interested in sharing information. Others,
> especially academic scientists like Mizuno, are completely open. The
> positive and negative results are not "alleged," they are published in
> top-notch, peer-reviewed scientific journals by some of the finest
> electrochemists in the world. 
 
 OK - " Results " then ... again , what progress has been made
 since 1989 , when the first "amazing"  "results" were achieved? 
 
>   By every accepted standard of mainstream science these experiments are
> superlative. A person who denigrates them as "alleged results" from
> "magicians" is biased against the conventional scientific process. 
 
  I'm biased against a lot of conventional things inasmuch as they
 appear not to be working or are causing a detriment of some kind. 
 
 I won't go so far as to say that CF is causing some kind of
 detriment ... BUT.. 
 
 It doesn't seem to be working. 
 
>> I have heard this CF positive result process being compared >> to all
kinds of things including brain surgery .  But even brain >> surgeons can
teach their techniques to others . 
 
> CF researchers can and do teach their methods.  So do AIDS researchers,
> but they still do not have a vaccination, despite years of labor and
> billions of dollars. 
 
 AGGGGHHHHH! 
 
 ( Ostrowski rolls eyes , groans.....) 
 
 > Hot fusion researchers teach their techniques, yet they have
 > fallen 50 years behind schedule.  Does this mean they are not
 > scientists? 
 
 They may be scientists , and if they are doing it with their own
 funds with their own equipment , they have my respect .  The
 bigtime Gov't funded project wasted billions however . 
 
>  I have said many nasty things about hot fusion scientists, but I would
> never claim they are not doing serious, capable, difficult research. 
 
 With whose money? 
 
 >> I don't care if the proper procedure and material spec can only be
 >> contained in a book of several hundred pages. 
 
 
 Jed , here you say: 
 
 > But these pages have not yet been written!  That's the problem. 
 
 [.. snippage...]
 
 But over here you say: 
 
 > A good place to start would be the Storms paper "How to Perform a
 > Cold Fusion Experiment." 
 
 So THERE IS a hardcopy procedure (of some kind) , right ? 
 
>  Anyone who reads that and compares it to Scott Little's work will see
> that Little never tried to replicate a cold fusion experiment. He
> replicated one type of calorimeter, in a configuration that is likely to
> inhibit or quench a palladium cold fusion reaction. He has never taken
> any of the steps recommended by Storms, Fleischmann, Oriani, Bockris or
> the others in the literature, and he has only done a handful or runs in
> any case. 
 
 Is that so ? 
 
 Well , I can acknowledge a point when you make one , Jed , and in
 all this you finally made one . 
 
 What about it Scott ? 
 
>   Even an experienced expert would not expect to see results after a
> handful or runs.  You have to do the experiment hundreds of times, under
> tightly controlled conditions, and you have to carefully monitor the
> known control parameters. Little has not done any of this. 
 
 Hundreds of runs , huh ?...the exact same way each time ? 
 
 There's something about this that just isn't right and doesn't
 sound like the way a naturally curious experimenter would procede. 
 
  What it sounds like is sort of a broken record method of
 research- do something over and over again until you get an
 artifact , then claim the artifact means something if repeats
 occasionaly 5 or ten out of several hundred tries.  And keep
 repeating the experiment that way so you keep seeing the effect
 (once in a while). 
 
 Then claim that THAT is progress. 
 
 In the labs I've worked in , that would be called called obsessive
 and unproductive activity. 
 
 Sorry. 
 
 Jim O. 
 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 02:59:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA09727;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 02:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 02:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 01:52:07 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Tell all! Re: H2 Glow
Resent-Message-ID: <"iB1GE.0.tN2.ZEXbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20132
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:53 PM 6/27/98, VCockeram aol.com wrote:
[snip]
>George,
>
> First,thanks for the graph. That really is worth a thousand words.

Would be nice if wee could see GIF or JPEG of it.


>Looks like smaller electrode gap is better.

Need to watch the effect of lowered resistance - as that means more
current, thus more power.  Power is I^2*r, so I is more important than r.


>But I wonder if it's just the
>(supposed) reaction taking place in a smaller area, concentrating the
>output which shows up as higher Deg. C per watt. Also with a smaller
>area there will be smaller radiation losses.

There is less area, but a higher temperature in the subject area greatly
overrides the area loss of 50 percent.

>
>Horace, assume T=600 C Tube 1=1 inch gap, tube 2=2 inch gap.
>How do you figure radiation loss in ambient air at 20 C ?   Thanks.\


Using Stefan-Boltman law:

    P = (5.67x10^-8 W/m^2-K^4)(0.8)*area*(T^4)

where P is power out in watts, T is surface temperature in deg. K., area is
in m^2.  Note that I used (0.8) as emissivity for quartz, as that is
emissivity for glass at your temperatures, and I can't locate emissivity of
quartz.  I don't have the actual number, but the real emissivity will vary
with dirt, etc. anyway.  I don't recall the diameter of your tube, but to
give an example will assume 1/4 inch, or 1/8" radius.  That gives a radius
of 0.003175 m, and length of 1" = 0.0254 m, or an area of 2*pi*r*h =
3.14159*2*(0.003175 m)*(0.0254 m) = 5.07X10^-4 m^2. The temperature, 600 C,
is 873.15 K, so:

   P = (5.67x10^-8 w/m^2-K^4)(0.8)(0.0254 m)(873.15 K)^4
   P = 670 watts   (way too high)

The 2" long area would radiate twice as much (1340 w), if at the same
temperature.  There is the problem with this approach.  You have no way to
really check the surface temperature.  A small change in surface
temperature results in a large difference in radiated watts.  This is
complicated by the fact that the surface temperature is not uniform.

Suppose the surface temperature is 287 K.  Then the radiation is

   P = (5.67x10^-8 w/m^2-K^4)(0.8)(0.0254 m)(560 K)^4
   P = 113 watts   (closer)

These numbers look very high, so possibly you have a smaller diameter tube?
Any help correcting numbers appreciated, as always.  8^)

The real answer is to do calorimetry.  I would suggest you consider
isperibolic calorimetry, as it should be much easier to pull off. To do
this, you could surround your tube in a length of 4" copper pipe, with a
copper cap that can be placed on top.  Cut hole in the cap for wires, and
mount the tube assembly to the cap, so when the cap is put on the top of
the 4" pipe (when vertical) the tube hangs down into the calorimeter
chamber.  At the voltage you are using (2 kV you should have no problem
with shorts provided you use HV test lead wire into the cap and inside the
chamber, and provide at least a 1/4" air gap all around.

Now - the tricky part.   The pipe needs to be pinched flat at the bottom,
say in a vice.  A 2" wide strip around the flattened bottom of the copper
pipe needs to be sprayed with insulation foam.  The part that sticks out
beyond the foam, and the tip of the foam, will be placed in ice water -
water with ice cubes floating in it.  The 2" (about 5 cm) of foam
establishes the length of your thermal resistor.  Heat will flow through
the copper in the foam down into the copper immersed in the ice water.
This creates a fixed amount of heat transfer per deg C, your calorimeter
calibration constant.  The rest of the calorimeter is then wrapped in
fiberglass, including aboiut half of the foamed section.

Now to figure out what the piece of copper should look like that is
insulated with foam (the thermal resistor).  One possibility is to cut the
flat part of the chamber up before the foamed portion.  You can then make
thermal resistors of various sizes by applying about 2" of insulation to
copper elements of differing cross sections, which are then bolted to the
bottom of the copper calorimeter chamber.

Let's assume you want the internal temperature in the calorimter to be 50
C, when you are inputting 100 W.  You thus want a calorimeter constant of
0.5 C/w.  You need a thermal resistor that passes 100 watts when the
temperature differential is 50 C.  Copper has thermal conductivity K = 2.4
w/C-cm, or 2.4 watts per C  per cm.  The copper of area A, length l, will
pass:

   P = K*A/l

   P = (2.4 w/C-cm)*A/(5 cm) = 0.48*A W/cm^2

So, you want your cross section of the copper to be about 1 cm^2, i.e.:

   A = P/0.48 W = (0.5 W)/(0.48 W) = 1.042 cm^2.

If the copper is 1/16" thick, that is 0.15 cm thick, so you need (1.042
cm^2)/(0.15 cm) = 6.56 cm of copper.  Since the copper was bent two layers
thick, it needs to be trimmed so that it is (6.56 cm)/2 = 3.28 cm wide.

To calibrate, use the the tube with the resitor coil inside. Your
temperature probe should be placed on the copper pipe, near the top of the
foam.  To get good results run until temperature stablizes.

The pipe might be affixed vertically through a hole in a horizontal plate
of wood or plastic to act as a lid to be set on a bowl carrying the ice
water.

This method avoids flowing water, but requires some ice cubes.

Hope I got all that right, as I am dead tired and still have my own
projects yet to work on.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 04:42:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA23624;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 04:39:42 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 04:39:42 -0700
Message-ID: <000101bda289$02477a60$8cb4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re; Easy Energy Answers-Thermal Storage Costs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:35:47 -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: <"mbTKD2.0.2n5.zjYbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20133
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here you go Robin.  :-)

Matl   k   Sp. Ht  Lb/Ft^3  Btu/Ft^3*  $/Lb

Al    130   0.215    168    64,680     0.70

Steel 26.2  0.105    485    51,000     0.10

Rock  1.0   0.180    100    20,000     0.01

* 700  to 1700 Deg F storage range (1,000 deg)

Forget NaCl, the toxic vapors generated would eat up your containers and
kill you!

Regards,  Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 05:32:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA16853;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Re; Easy Energy Answers-Thermal Storage Costs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 12:24:11 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <35a035c6.301842007 mail-hub>
References: <000101bda289$02477a60$8cb4bfa8 default>
In-Reply-To: <000101bda289$02477a60$8cb4bfa8 default>
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: <"-83p43.0.E74.aUZbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20134
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:35:47 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:

>Here you go Robin.  :-)
>
>Matl   k   Sp. Ht  Lb/Ft^3  Btu/Ft^3*  $/Lb
>
>Al    130   0.215    168    64,680     0.70
>
>Steel 26.2  0.105    485    51,000     0.10
>
>Rock  1.0   0.180    100    20,000     0.01
>
>* 700  to 1700 Deg F storage range (1,000 deg)
>
>Forget NaCl, the toxic vapors generated would eat up your containers and
>kill you!
Thanks for the warning, but what vapours are they?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 06:31:58 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA21281;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 06:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 06:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980628082441.0087d970 mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: little mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 08:24:41 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Scott Little 
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
In-Reply-To: 
References: <199806272119_MC2-5188-86A8 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Mab8L3.0.RC5.EMabr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20135
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:47 AM 6/28/98 -0700, Jim Ostrowski wrote:

> What about it Scott ? 

in response to Jed's:

>>  Anyone who reads that and compares it to Scott Little's work will see
>> that Little never tried to replicate a cold fusion experiment. He
>> replicated one type of calorimeter, in a configuration that is likely to
>> inhibit or quench a palladium cold fusion reaction. He has never taken
>> any of the steps recommended by Storms, Fleischmann, Oriani, Bockris or
>> the others in the literature, and he has only done a handful or runs in
>> any case. 

Let's see, Jim...First we have worked on CF experimentation on and off
since 1989 and quite steadily for the past three years.  I have constructed
about 5 different types of calorimeters for this investigation (three are
described on our web page and a 4th was exhibited at ICCF-7), most of which
exert very little "thermal clamping" on the cell. I have studied the papers
of Storms, Fleischmann, Miley, McKubre, Miles, Cravens and others and
followed many of their recommendations.  We have performed at least 20
handfuls of runs of various types the great majority of which are not
represented on our web page...only in our growing library of lab notebooks
(now > 15).  Jed's inaccuracy is easily explained...he has never visited
EarthTech to see firsthand the effort we have invested in this research.

...but let me be the first to point out this fact:  Our negative CF results
prove little or nothing...and certainly cannot be construed to imply that
CF is not real.  

However, we HAVE concluded from our results that CF is not a sufficiently
reproducible phenomenon to warrant further independent efforts in our
laboratory at this time.  With our pretty-good calorimeters, we are still
willing and eager to evaluate CF devices provided by other investigators
(e.g. Case, Vince's K tube, etc.) but we are turning our own research
efforts towards fundamental investigations of the zero-point field.


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 Jun 28 06:48:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA23070;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 06:47:27 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 06:47:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <001201bda299$d4430560$8cb4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Re; Easy Energy Answers-Thermal Storage Costs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 07:36:55 -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: <"WU9bM1.0.Ne5.ibabr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20136
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Robin van Spaandonk 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Sunday, June 28, 1998 6:29 AM
Subject: Re: Re; Easy Energy Answers-Thermal Storage Costs


>On Sun, 28 Jun 1998 05:35:47 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>
>>Here you go Robin.  :-)
>>
>>Matl   k   Sp. Ht  Lb/Ft^3  Btu/Ft^3*  $/Lb
>>
>>Al    130   0.215    168    64,680     0.70
>>
>>Steel 26.2  0.105    485    51,000     0.10
>>
>>Rock  1.0   0.180    100    20,000     0.01
>>
>>* 700  to 1700 Deg F storage range (1,000 deg)
>>
>>Forget NaCl, the toxic vapors generated would eat up your containers and
>>kill you!
>Thanks for the warning, but what vapours are they?

They will be Cl2, NaOx,  ClOx, NaOH, plus some
COCl2 (Phosgene) from CO + Chlorine, to name a few. Never put NaCl on a hot
stove either!

Regards,    Frederick
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk 
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 06:57:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA04273;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 06:51:56 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 06:51:56 -0700
Message-ID: <000001bda293$2990f560$9a41d3d0 default>
From: "Mike Carrell" 
To: 
Subject: Order of the Tortise
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:13:15 -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: <"_DRi82.0.h21.yfabr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20137
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

An apology: I let my rhetoric a bit too loose.

I don't doubt the extended and concentrated effort on the part of Hal and
Scott. I did not and do not intend to demean that. I believe the fact
remains -- correct me if I'm wrong -- that Scott has not duplicated the
reported successes of others.

I would have to agree that the case for CF is not proven in the sense of
multiple replications and commercialization, with an agreed-upon theory.
This is so strict a criterion that one can always use it to justify negation
of any particular result.

I prefer the softer criterion that there are many reports by capable
researchers and honest observers that a set of LENR phenomena exist and
warrant intense research and funding support. The experiments are so
diverse, and mostly difficult, that replication is rare, but it has
happened, as I noted.

There are a few that look very good for replication and more information
should be forthcoming.

Mike Carrell

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 07:53:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA11413;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 07:45:47 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 07:45:47 -0700
Message-ID: <19980628154517.35721 tao.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:45:17 +0100
From: Josef Karthauser 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FTL travel: why 'on earth' not? :)
References: <199806270437.VAA16771 Au.oro.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.84
In-Reply-To: <199806270437.VAA16771 Au.oro.net>; from Ross Tessien on Fri, Jun 26, 1998 at 09:37:03PM -0700
Resent-Message-ID: <"iuLX6.0.Ao2.QSbbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20138
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Fri, Jun 26, 1998 at 09:37:03PM -0700, Ross Tessien wrote:
> 
> 4)      As you approach c, the density of the aether ahead of the craft is
> going to become greater, and it is going to become more rigid.  Literally,
> your craft is a bunch of waveforms approaching the velocity of waves in the
> medium, aether.  At this point you need to punch through the c barrier,
> similar to punching through the c barrier of sound in air, where you use a
> needle point on front of craft.
> 

I must has missed something somewhere, but I don't see why there has to be
a c 'barrier'.

Can anyone point out the flaws my logic?

For sake of argument imagine that I'm a spacecraft accelerating at a steady
rate of 1g away from the Earth.

As I accelerate I can measure my velocities relative to the objects that
I can see.  The Earth is directly behind me and I can measure my velocity
easily, but I can also measure my velocity relative to the sun, jupiter,
venus, alpha centuri, etc, and each of those velocities will be different.
The velocities will be different because each object that I use as a reference
is also moving relative to everything else (depending upon gravitational
constants, and other laws that we've cooked up to explain this.)

>From another perspective I could imagine that I'm the centre of the universe.
I have a vector of acceleration and this causes changing velocity vectors,
which I can observe in the objects around me. (their velocities relative to
me).

If c = 3e8 m/s, g = 10m/s/s, and I continue to accelerate at the same rate
(with reference to my starting point - the Earth), then it will take me
3e8 / 10 seconds (about 350 days) to reach a velocity of 'c' relative to
the Earth, putting aside Einstein,etc for a moment. Or from the other
perspective it will take that long for the Earth to reach a that velocity
relative to me.

What happens next?

Can I suggest this:  I can only measure my velocity relative to the Earth,
and visa versa, using the electromagnetic signals that I receive.  This
signal arrives at a rate 'c'.  If the relative velocity between two objects
is more than 'c' then they can't communicate using em signals.

So after almost a year of acceleration at a comfortable rate the Earth
disappears (into a blackhole?) [I also disappear to observers on Earth].

Interestingly I can probably still see some of the objects that I could see
from Earth, alpha centuri - perhaps.  Because my relative velocity isn't
'c' in relation to that star I can still see it, and it can still see me.

If I was clever and measured all the velocity changes, I can probably use
them to find my way back to Earth, by triangulating off other stars.
If not then I'm lost, and I can't send out a distress signal either; not
until we invent/discover a different way of communication that is.

So where's the 'c' barrier?



As an aside to this I'm firmly of the opinion that 'red shift' doesn't
tell us that the universe is expanding.  It would only do this is
space were flat or straight.  Because it's curved the frequency shifts
actually tell us about the shape of space.

Joe
-- 
Josef Karthauser Bsc(Hons)
Computing Science & Artificial Intelligence, Sussex University.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 09:06:21 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA22994;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:03:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:03:46 -0700
Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980628160448.006ad4a8 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, 28 Jun 1998 12:04:48 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Edwin Strojny 
Subject: Things recently learned
Resent-Message-ID: <"-n3ZA.0.Bd5.Xbcbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20139
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

A. Passing hydrogen over LiOH coated ceramic tube at 750 deg. C required as
much power to maintain 750 deg C as a blank run with hydrogen at 750 deg C.

B. Type K thermocouple (1/16" dia. 304SS sheathed chromel alumel, grounded,
in an atmosphere of hydrogen) appears to degrade slowly at 750 deg C and
faster at 900 deg C. A current of 4.5 amp passing through a 28 gauge
Ni80/Cr20 wire should give a roughly estimated 975 deg. C; the temperature
indicated by the thermocouple was 860 deg C. which dropped to that point
over a few hours from a control temperature of 900 deg. C.

C. A phototransistor responds to a light from a flashlight, laser diode,
ruby laser and a xenon strobe but not from a bright red LED or a bright
white LED.  The latter is surprising (to me) because the light is brighter
to my eyes than the light from the flashlight.  

Ed Strojny

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 09:29:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA28788;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:27:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:27:36 -0700
Message-ID: <35966175.15C1 earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:29:58 -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: Perrault: FREE Radiant Energy Research Manual! 6.28.98
Content-Type: message/news
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"u5XT7.0.j17.sxcbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20141
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

Path: nntp.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!206.229.87.25!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!204.97.16.5!news.monad.net!not-for-mail
From: "Bruce A. Perreault" 
Newsgroups: sci.energy,alt.energy.homepower,alt.energy.renewable,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,alt.electronics.design,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Subject: FREE Radiant Energy Research Manual!
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 12:06:50 -0400
Organization: International Society for Integrated Science (ISIS)
Message-ID: <35966A1A.32C1 cyberportal.net>
Reply-To: nuenergy cyberportal.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: plym3-pool-9.cyberportal.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
CC: nuenergy cyberportal.net
Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.energy:60987 alt.energy.homepower:6720 alt.energy.renewable:33768 sci.physics.fusion:22297 sci.physics:236322 sci.physics.particle:21347 alt.sci.physics.new-theories:57539

My updated Radiant Energy Research Manual is now given freely to provide
validation
for my Radiant Energy discoveries. All I ask is that you spread the word
about this technology and that you give me credit for my research.
E-mail me your intentions, promise to spread the word, giving me full
credit and I will e-mail you back a 
password to open this manual ASAP. It contains full construction details
and I am 
sure that you will be thrilled with the information within. 

       Radiant Energy Research Manual 2.0.1 - updated June 28, 1998
       http://www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/swampy/1/manual201.pdf

Documents will be in the Adobe Acrobat format (PDF) that require the
Acrobat
Reader program, available free of charge at Adobe Acrobat Free Reader.

            http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html

Warm regards,
-Bruce A. Perreault

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 09:30:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA28077;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:26:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 09:26:41 -0700
Message-ID: <3596613B.414 earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:28:59 -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: Perrault:  "Free Energy" Product pre-announcement! 6.28.98
Content-Type: message/news
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"wQ5FX1.0.Ss6.0xcbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20140
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!news.idt.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!204.97.16.5!news.monad.net!not-for-mail
From: "Bruce A. Perreault" 
Newsgroups: sci.energy,alt.energy.homepower,alt.energy.renewable,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.particle
Subject: "Free Energy" Product pre-announcement!
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:22:38 -0400
Organization: International Society for Integrated Science (ISIS)
Message-ID: <3595002E.484 cyberportal.net>
Reply-To: nuenergy cyberportal.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: plym2-pool-7.cyberportal.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.energy:60970 alt.energy.homepower:6713 alt.energy.renewable:33756 sci.physics.fusion:22292 sci.physics.particle:21336

http://www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/swampy/1/products.htm

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 10:49:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08617;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:48:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:48:06 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: Vortex-L eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Perrault: FREE Radiant Energy Research Manual! 6.28.98
In-Reply-To: <35966175.15C1 earthlink.net>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"ci4p22.0.U62.L7ebr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20142
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, Rich Murray wrote:
> My updated Radiant Energy Research Manual is now given freely to provide
> validation for my Radiant Energy discoveries. All I ask is that you
> spread the word about this technology and that you give me credit for my
> research. 

Does anyone know Mr. Perrault?  From his behavior on freenrg-L last year,
I assumed that he was a classic crackpot with serious ego/paranoia
problems, whose main goal seemed to be to attract attention to himself. 
Was he just going through a bad time, or is he always like that?  If I'm
wrong in my opinion about him, then I want to know about it.


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 28 10:52:19 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA08934;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:48:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 10:48:27 -0700
From: Tstolper aol.com
Message-ID: <64a261e3.35968148 aol.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 13:45:43 EDT
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Calorimetric Demands on Cockeram
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Mac sub 84
Resent-Message-ID: <"jI6bi3.0.TB2.g7ebr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20143
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vince,

You've been getting a temperature difference of about 200 degrees C between
your working runs (H and K) and your control runs (H without any K), is that
right?

It seems to me that it matters little how accurate the temperature readings
are as long as they're taken in the same way.  It's the difference that
counts.  Is your temperature probe in exactly the same place relative to the
cell for both working and control runs?

Tom Stolper

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 16:00:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA15583;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 15:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Re; Easy Energy Answers-Thermal Storage Costs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:51:17 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3596c7e4.339258710 mail-hub>
References: <001201bda299$d4430560$8cb4bfa8 default>
In-Reply-To: <001201bda299$d4430560$8cb4bfa8 default>
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: <"rth4H1.0.Jp3.Ugibr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20144
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sun, 28 Jun 1998 07:36:55 -0600, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
[snip]
>>Thanks for the warning, but what vapours are they?
>
>They will be Cl2, NaOx,  ClOx, NaOH, plus some
>COCl2 (Phosgene) from CO + Chlorine, to name a few. Never put NaCl on a hot
>stove either!
Ok, but in a closed environment, there needn't be any C present, hence
no phosgene at least (I was thinking of flushing the inner container
before sealing it). The next question is, does this chemical
decomposition already become important at the melting point of the
salt, or not until considerably higher temps are reached?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 21:24:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA27631;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 21:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 21:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: rvanspaa vic.bigpond.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: On-Line Market Buying Prices (http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.c
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 04:13:17 GMT
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3599138a.5906260 mail-hub>
References: 
In-Reply-To: 
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: <"CP6YX.0.cl6.cOnbr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20145
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:43:05 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
[snip]
>goes on and on, and is a good resistor.  Eventually, the soil will be very
>hot over a wide area, unless groundwater siphons the heat off.  Might be of
>use to put a water filled coil around the tank + some insulation, to use
>for water heating, pool heating, a sink for a heat pump, etc.  If high heat
>worked its way up to a foundation it might be a fire hazard or burn hazard,
>especially if steam (from rain, etc.) gets involved.
[snip]
You are of course correct. I was thinking primarily of areas where
ground water was likely to be a "problem". In areas where it would not
be (solid bedrock perhaps, or very dry?), it might be possible to do
without an outer shell altogether. 


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 22:49:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA08357;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:43:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Making CF more "fun"
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"ToBGZ1.0.U22.pfobr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20146
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

 

  Regarding CF research I would like to offer a suggestion that
 would perhaps make this effort a little more exciting to the
 amateur scientists who might otherwise not be interested in this
 phenomena , because it appears so complex , and in my view ,
 rather boring (you have to do the same experiment over and over
 again hundreds of times in order to see any effect). 
 
  I read somewhere that in the early days of this research , at SRI
 I believe , there was an explosion of a CF cell that was so
 powerfull it actually killed someone. 
 
  There are two ways of general approach to a problem of figuring
 out how something can be done.  One is the inductive reasoning
 approach where you take a specific set of desired goals and design
 your experiments around what you think an ideal representation of
 the effect you want to achiieve should look like , i.e. a beaker -
 like apparatus with calorimeters attached to it showing that o/u
 power is being generated. 
 
  The other approach is the deductive one which looks back at the
 observed phenomena , calculates the required parameters which
 would have been present at the time to have enabled the phenomena
 to occur with the amount of energy it exhibited , and attempt to
 duplicate that exact phenomena in the same general way . 
 
  In this case we are talking about making a fairly powerful
 explosion from an "ordinary" CF cell , if there is anything about
 CF cells that are common to all of them so that they can be called
 "ordinary". 
 
  Presumably , the explosion at SRI was not due to hydrogen-oxy
 combustion because this would have been carefully prevented by
 standard safety measures . 
 
  Perhaps a CF cell could be sufficiently overpressurized see if
 the resulting explosion is any more powerful than would be
 expected normally . 
 
  Of course the usual safety precautions should be observed for
 these sorts of tests . 
 
 
  Jim Ostrowski
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  your hypothesis based on the principles that these facts
 suggest. Experiments are then designed with the goal in mind




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Jun 28 22:56:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA09242;
	Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Offer: Property for Solar Power Site
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"Gnim11.0.KG2.Inobr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20147
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


 
  A friend of mine has a 167 acre parcel of land which he owns free
 and clear in New Mexico that he would be willing to contribute to
 the purpose of building a solar power site. 
 
  Terrain : Flat, with a "little hill in the middle of it" 
 (according to my friend) . 
 
  He estimated the elevation of the hill to be over 100 feet (from
 it's base) . There is a gravesite on one side of the hill where
 his antecedents are buried , and he says there is plenty of room
 for an access road to the crest around that. 
 
  He figures there would be no more spectacular monument possible
 for his family members who have passed on than to have the focus
 of a large solar array converge on the hill above their resting
 place. 
 
 Proposal: 50 percent partnership with project investor(s). 
 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Posted by: 
 
 Jim Ostrowski 
 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 01:41:35 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA29064;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 01:37:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 01:37:34 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: exeter.city.ac.uk: remi owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:37:33 +0100 (BST)
From: Cornwall RO 
X-Sender: remi exeter
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Holy cow
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"qQPVN3.0.z57.E9rbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20148
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

You see,

its the same human nature getting in the way. Whether your holy cow is
establishment science, non-establish science, left or rightwing politics
or anything else. Same game plan of cliques and mafias bashing each other,
'I'm right, you're wrong'.

At least in Science its Fact and Logic. So it should be in all matters,
not what enough people say to make a thing right.

Collectivism, that is the problem. I don't care if some one is 'educated'
and tells me something I know is wrong - no amount of pressure will make
me crumble. Fact and Logic.

Thanks for the experiment in human behaviour.
Bye!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 02:24:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA00710;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:19:15 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:19:15 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 01:20:51 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner corecom.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: On-Line Market Buying Prices
 (http://www.recycle.net/cgi-bin/recycle/pricev01.c
Resent-Message-ID: <"LvLQb2.0.0B.Jmrbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20149
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:13 PM 6/28/98, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:43:05 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:
>[snip]
>>goes on and on, and is a good resistor.  Eventually, the soil will be very
>>hot over a wide area, unless groundwater siphons the heat off.  Might be of
>>use to put a water filled coil around the tank + some insulation, to use
>>for water heating, pool heating, a sink for a heat pump, etc.  If high heat
>>worked its way up to a foundation it might be a fire hazard or burn hazard,
>>especially if steam (from rain, etc.) gets involved.
>[snip]
>You are of course correct. I was thinking primarily of areas where
>ground water was likely to be a "problem". In areas where it would not
>be (solid bedrock perhaps, or very dry?), it might be possible to do
>without an outer shell altogether.

Yes - if there is no groundwater to worry about, as might be the case in
some Australian locations?

The other alternative might be of interest as well - a highly self
contained system. In the arctic foundation pilings sometimes have to be
refrigerated.  It takes energy just to maintain a structure, due to melting
of the permafrost caused by pressure and thermal wicking.  Underground heat
storage would be infeasible.   In such areas there are places which are
very good for wind power, and which have very high energy costs. Energy
storage is one of the big problems with wind power utilization.  An above
ground  residential storage unit, with windpower electricity to heat the
unit, distributed from a central site based on availability, might work
well. This would overcome the 30 percent recovery problem as most of the
use would be for heating.  Also the thermodynamics might look a lot better
where ambient is -55 C and wind blows steady at 20 knots.  The tank would
require fantastic insulation though!  A central storage tank at the wind
farm might be workable also.

I have many demands on my time now, so may not respond for a while.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 05:48:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA24903;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 05:44:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 05:44:26 -0700
Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980629124529.0069d828 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: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 08:45:29 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Edwin Strojny 
Subject: Re: Holy cow
Resent-Message-ID: <"l_X0v3.0.056.gmubr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20150
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 09:37 AM 6/29/98 +0100, you wrote:
>You see,
>
>its the same human nature getting in the way. Whether your holy cow is
>establishment science, non-establish science, left or rightwing politics
>or anything else. Same game plan of cliques and mafias bashing each other,
>'I'm right, you're wrong'.
>
>At least in Science its Fact and Logic. So it should be in all matters,
>not what enough people say to make a thing right.
>
>Collectivism, that is the problem. I don't care if some one is 'educated'
>and tells me something I know is wrong - no amount of pressure will make
>me crumble. Fact and Logic.
>
>Thanks for the experiment in human behaviour.
>Bye!
>
I like R. Feynman's philosophy on these areas which he talks about in a
recent book published after his death, "The Meaning of It All, Thoughts of a
Citizen-Scientist" , Perseus Books, 1998.

Ed Strojny

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 06:41:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA05083;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 06:40:00 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 06:40:00 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980629093719.008d4750 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:37:19 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: Expertise is essential
In-Reply-To: <199806271648.JAA14592 smtp1.asu.edu>
References: <002a01bda172$8475d3a0$e941d3d0 default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"OL-da.0.KF1.lavbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20151
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


At 09:48 AM 6/27/98 -0700, Lynn Kurtz wrote:

>Well as a CF lurker for a few years, let me explain what bothers me about
>this state of affairs. It is certainly possible that you are absolutely
>correct that the thing holding back CF is its almost infinite complexity
>and extremely high standards of expertise required, and that one day we
>will all look back at this period and understand why it took so long.
>
>On the other hand, if the CF effect is in fact an artifact, that too would
>explain the extreme difficulty in designing a repeatable rock solid
>experiment that would convince the mainstreamers that CF is real. If this
>is the truth, then all this stuff about complexity is simply wishful
>thinking and making excuses.
>
>We have people and organizations claiming to have working cells, none of
>whom will share their findings and expertise. I can't help noticing that
>that too easily interprets in two mutually exclusive ways -- it is real and
>too valuable a secret to divulge until we have it ready to exploit
>commercially or it isn't real and we really don't have anything to show and
>we are hiding that fact for whatever reason. And it is impossible to tell
>which is the truth.


  Nope.
  Much information is shared. Not on vortex much (*), and never
anymore on spf.

  Therefore, the above initial assumption is wrong, 
and the purported two 'reasons' illogical.

=============================================
(*) IMO one issue of the COLD FUSION TIMES
      http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html
has more science and engineering about cold fusion (**) than 
vortex has in months unfortunately, and s.p.f. in years.

(**) palladium, nickel electrolysis and gas systems;
others welcome sufficient evidence is provided.

=====================================


>Finally, we have numerous essays by physicists like Dick Blue which raise
>very pertinant and pointed issues, and the stance of many here is to ignore
>him, ridicule him, and try to pretend that he is simply so biased and
>ignorant that he should simply be shunned. (Please, Jed, don't bother
>posting a long essay for me about what you think Dick Blue believes. I have
>read what he believes and don't need your misinterpretations of it).


  The pro-cf scientists have published theoretical and
experimental papers which tend to be quantitative; unlike most of
the TBlue-skeptics "bricktoss" near-perpetual comments.
Threfore, the 'beef' is in the literature.  Many of the TB-skeptics
will neither read it, nor follow quantitative arguments 
but instead many thend to shift to ad hominems OR to
endless word games.
The 'beef' in the literature supports cold fusion, and indicates
cold fusion is quite real.  

   Mitchell Swartz


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 07:56:46 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA24319;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 07:51:31 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 07:51:31 -0700
Message-ID: <3597D3A1.62D6 bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:50:21 -0700
From: Terry Blanton 
Reply-To: commengr bellsouth.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-BLS20  (Win16; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex 
Subject: [near topic] UFO Studies Warranted
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"kqISz2.0.6x5.hdwbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20152
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

An interesting press release from the 

SOCIETY FOR SCIENTIFIC EXPLORATION at:

http://www.jse.com/PR_UFO_98.html

including a report from a panel co-moderated by Dr. Puthoff at:

http://www.jse.com/ufo_reports/Sturrock/toc.html

And from the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1998-06/29/075r-062998-idx.html

And one more from ABC News (plus a GMA report this morning):

http://www.abcnews.com/sections/science/DailyNews/ufo980629.html

Regards,
Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 10:10:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA04746;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:07:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:07:49 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: The first cold fusion bomb?
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=dos-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"PZTu42.0.3A1.Ydybr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20153
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


 
                          FIRST COLD-FUSION BOMB? 
 
   Possibly we are overreacting to the following event: 
 
     "Cold fusion researchers are puzzled and worried by an explosion
     last week that killed one of their colleagues, a British
     electrochemist. A cold fusion 'cell' at SRI International in Menlo
     Park, California, blew up while Andrew Riley was bending over it,
     killing him instantly." 
 
   Now small explosions in cold-fusion cells are not unknown. At the tops
   of some cells palladium-wire electrodes are exposed to oxygen and
   deuterium (heavy hydrogen) gases. If the palladium wires are not
   protected by films of water, the palladium can catalyze the explosive
   combination of the oxygen and hydrogen. This sometimes happens if a
   dry spot develops on a wire. Such detonations, though, cause little
   damage. The SRI explosion was much more powerful. The detonating cell
   (only 2 inches in diameter and 8 inches long), not only killed Riley
   but peppered three other researchers in the lab with debris. 
 
   (Charles, Dan; "Fatal Explosion Closes Cold Fusion Laboratory," New
   Scientist, p. 12, January 11, 1992.) 
 
   Comment. One cannot refrain from asking if the explosion involved only
   chemical energy. 
 
    From Science Frontiers #80, MAR-APR 1992. © 1997 William R. Corliss
     _________________________________________________________________
 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 10:13:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA09677;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:08:37 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:08:37 -0700
Reply-To: 
From: "Reed Huish" 
To: 
Subject: RE: Perrault: FREE Radiant Energy Research Manual! 6.28.98
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:13:20 -0700
Message-ID: <000201bda381$36cf35e0$545b96d1 reed-huish>
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 V4.72.3110.3
In-Reply-To: 
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"JohD61.0.2N2.Keybr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20154
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I have known Bruce Perreault for a few years, and he can be perceived to be
'unique', but I believe that is simply his passion to build a working energy
technology.  He certainly believes in himself and is doing the best he can
to build a working prototype.

- Reed, Zenergy


> On Sun, 28 Jun 1998, Rich Murray wrote:
> > My updated Radiant Energy Research Manual is now given freely to provide
> > validation for my Radiant Energy discoveries. All I ask is that you
> > spread the word about this technology and that you give me credit for my
> > research.
>
> Does anyone know Mr. Perrault?  From his behavior on freenrg-L last year,
> I assumed that he was a classic crackpot with serious ego/paranoia
> problems, whose main goal seemed to be to attract attention to himself.
> Was he just going through a bad time, or is he always like that?  If I'm
> wrong in my opinion about him, then I want to know about it.
>
>
> ((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 29 10:29:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA13598;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:24:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:24:54 -0700
Message-ID: <004601bda382$5b9af5c0$5a8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Terry Blanton's  Slightly Off-Topic Stuff
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 11:21:14 -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: <"B8kfi3.0.3K3.Ytybr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20155
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I perused the web sites,Terry. Interesting stuff.

Seems to me that if you create antigrav sync you will also swirl the aether
which will
negate inertial mass, thus F = ma  will go to zero since m has gone to zero.
Thus when you "pour the coal" to a craft it will disappear the same as a
bullet coming out of a Colt 45. :-)

Since all of this ties to aether rarification,
FTL travel and time reversal occurs concurrently.

When you pulse a current loop at about 3.16 Megahertz you literally create a
vortex in the aether around the craft thus creating your
own personal "wormhole" in the vacuum, and away you go, mystifying all
observers until you
go back in time and crash  into the RADAR STEALTHED payload hung from a SPY
BALLOON near
Roswell NM in July 1947.

I Think.   :-)

Regards,    Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 10:46:58 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA19436;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:37:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:37:46 -0700
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:32:21 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Ostrowski's comments
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806291335_MC2-519E-ECB0 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"dKDJA.0.Ul4.e3zbr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20156
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex; Jim Ostrowski > INTERNET:jimostr victor1.mscomm.com

Jim Ostrowki writes:

     I have other interests and agendas  related to other areas of
     experimental science , I will leave it  to you to read for me AND
     summarize what these CF papers have to say here on Vortex and in your
     magazine.

And in response to my suggestion that he read the literature he adds:

     No. I have a life too so I'll let YOU do that required reading  and
     lecture attending. . . .  I have time for the Reader's Digest version.
     ... describing a successful, repeatable CF demo.

On one hand I am flattered and pleased to be of service, but on the other hand
I find this disturbing. To judge a controversial scientific claim you MUST
read original sources.

I cannot do Jim's homework for him. If he will not take the time to examine
the evidence, he should refrain from making an evaluation. Judging by my
summary (or Dick Blue's) is like judging a movie by reading a review instead
of seeing the film.

I said that researchers perform hundreds of experiments with what appears to
be identical material, but only 5 or 10 runs work. Ostrowki responded:

     This appears to be saying that these researchers perform hundreds of
     experiments over and over again the same exact way each time without
     altering a single parameter.

Not at all. Sometimes the samples look identical, but a detailed analysis
shows they are not. Often they start off similar but the intense pressure
electrolysis physically alters the material, fracturing it and even flipping
grains upside down, as Oriani and others showed decades ago. When the
experiment fails, a knowledgeable researcher can tell you why and how in
general terms, but he may not be able to fix the problem. Finding the cause of
the Challenger rocket explosion was easy, fixing the problem was difficult.


     I find that a little difficult to believe. This doesn't coincide with
     any reasonable procedure that I have ever heard of.

Many scientific and industrial processes start off being highly
irreproducible, sometimes for years, sometime for decades. Here are some
eclectic examples:

The incandescent light. From 1858 to 1880 many of the most brilliant
electrical engineers and scientists in Europe and America struggled to make
this effect reproducible and reliable, without success. Lights would flash and
burn instantly, or burn out after a few seconds, or they would glow weakly and
then burn out. Two samples of nominally "identical" samples of filament
material, like cotton thread from the same spool, would perform differently.
Edison embarked on a famous "trial and error" search for a practical filament.
In my opinion this was a more sophisticated search than it has been portrayed
in popular literature; it was not blind trial and error. By 1880 the problem
was tamed, although far from solved. Incandescent light performance remained
unpredictable for a long time.

The internal combustion engine before 1920. Automobile ICEs varied
constantly, improving at first and then degrading. Engines would put out
10 HP one day and 12 or 15 the next. The metallurgical techniques of fitting
pistons to cylinders precisely was not perfected until after WWI. Gasoline
was impure and of unknown octane rating. Automobiles frequently stopped for
no apparent reason. This performance did not matter much on the ground at
slow speeds, but engine failures killed hundreds of aviators before 1920.

The transistor effect. Research on this began around 1925. No results were
seen for the first 23 years. Many people doubted the semiconducting effect
existed. Research intensified after WWII and in late 1947 the first transistor
worked at Bell Labs. The device remained very difficult to reproduce until the
1960s. In the mid '50s transistors cost $16 each competed with vacuum tubes
costing a few dollars, because so many transistors had to be scrapped. With
some devices a 2 to 5% success rate was normal. Production would be okay for
weeks and then a spate of failures would occur, for reasons nobody understood,
according to old-line semiconductor engineers and people like Chris Tinsley,
who were there.

Shaped charge implosion fission bombs 1943 - 1945. When implosion was first
proposed, many Los Alamos scientists derided it as science fiction. Hundreds
of tests were performed, but they resulted in uneven compression. Gradually
the technique was improved, at immense cost and effort.

The Fermilab Top Quark experiment. Months are spent firing particles at one
another. Out of countless trillions of misses, one or two hits produced a
top quark. If the equipment could improved the success rate would improve,
but this would cost billions more. For now, the scientists are willing to
accept this highly irreproducible effect, and make allowances for the
difficulties.

Hot fusion. Milestones that scientists confidently and rationally expected
they would meet decades ago have still not been met. The process remains
extremely difficult to control.

Sending robot rockets to Mars. I have not been keeping track, but I believe
about half of these have disappeared and the recent one did not last as long
as they hoped it would.

A new, experimental mini-steel mill I visited in 1977, to do some translating
work. The production line was down more often than up at first because of
chaotic and hazardous equipment failures, which caused incandescent chunks of
steel to fly though the air and whack into machinery with enough force to chop
a man in two.

The TRS-80 computer audio tape data recording method. It was unworkable and
irreproducible, even with quality recording equipment.

Windows 95. Mine fails once or twice a day. More money and effort has been
invested in this software than any other in history, but because of the need
for backward compatibility and the inherent complexity of the program it is
unreliable. It would have been unacceptable by the standards of 1978
minicomputer software.

Firing paper caps with a rock on a sidewalk: "tap, tap, tap, tap BANG! . . .
tap, tap, tap, tap, tap, FFFUT!!! . . . . tap, tap, tap, tap . . ." Taps
outnumber bangs by a wide margin.

During WWII, manually aimed antiaircraft guns without proximity shells seldom
hit the target. Ships in the Pacific might fire ten thousand rounds of
ammunition at a single attacking Kamikaze airplane -- expending a million
dollars in ordinance in a few minutes -- yet they would fail to hit the
target. An experiment with this hit rate would be judged a failure. A
peacetime industrial process this inefficient would be judged insane, like
chopping down a whole tree to make one toothpick.

Fleischmann and other experts say that most solid state, catalysis and
electrolysis industrial process are a mixture of science, know-how, intuition
and black magic. Tom Droege's brother is an experienced electrochemist. He
told me once that in one electroplating factory he knows, they dump a cup of
coffee into the vat every morning. They have been doing this for years.
Someone did it on a whim decades ago, and the next day the coating was
markedly brighter -- I think it was.


     When you are searching for something you try different things in
     different ways until a break or a good clue comes along , then you
     follow that line until something else happens , and so on . . . When
     things like that start to happen , you get out the tape recorder and
     describe everything you are doing into it while you are doing it . . . .
     Then you confer with your associates about what to do next. . . .  It
     works like that.

Umm . . . are you suggesting that you know how to do R&D better than
Fleischmann or Bockris? Don't teach grandma how to suck eggs.

I wrote earlier that although great progress has been made in nine years.
Ostrowki asks:

     Like what ?....and please give me the short version.

No can do. You must read the literature.


     Can you quantify this progress in any way ? How close are they to "break
     even" ? How close were they nine years ago ?

Break even is slippery concept, with different definitions. All energy
systems, including CF and HF (hot fusion) always produce more energy out than
in (excess energy). When output equals input -- say 1 watt in and 2 watts
total output -- some people call that "break even." That was achieved in Stan
Pons' basement long before the world heard about CF. I do not think HF has
ever achieved it, but I am not sure. The largest HF output was ~10 MW for ~0.6
seconds, at the PPPL, but I do not know what the input power was. Thus, total
energy output from the best HF experiments is a mere 6 MJ, which is laughable
by our standards. Hundreds of CF experiments have exceeded that; some have
output hundreds of megajoules. HF puts out more power but less energy, at a
lower input to output ratio. The input to output ratio in CF has increased,
but not uniformly in all labs. Most CF researchers struggle to get 20% input,
but a few know how to get 200% or 2000% reliably. Unfortunately, most of them
are working at Japanese corporations or CETI and they do not want to share
the information.

Others say break even is when output energy is recycled to keep the input
going. This has never been down with HF, but many CF cathodes self-heat and
self sustain for long periods after the power is turned off, before the
cathodes de-gas, in what is called "heat after death" or a "fully-ignited
reaction."

Finally, there is "engineering break even" in which an engine or plant
produces enough to keep itself going, including blowers and pumps, and
"commercial break even" in which you generate enough energy reliably to sell
the excess.


     So this says they notice something different about a material that they
     didn't notice before?

"Notice" is the wrong word. After exhaustive multi-year studies they build up
a statistically significant pattern that points to a host of metallurgical and
physical differences which play important roles in the process. See McKubre's
latest work.


     And that little something either inhibits or enhances a result ... and
     they re-adjust accordingly, right? What's the problem ? These little
     differences should be clues leading to straightforward procedures , in a
     reasonable amount of time. These guys have had 9 years!

There will never be straightforward procedures for CF. Why should there be?
That's like asking for a straightforward method of reproducing a six-course
formal Chinese banquet. (Watch the movie "Eat Drink Man Woman" and tell me if
you see any straightforward procedures.)

That's nine man years times the number of workers, most of whom have no
sophisticated equipment. It is impossible to do advanced materials science
without equipment. Scientists grappling with a materials problem with steel at
Ford, or with silicon at Intel would have a hundred million dollars worth of
lab equipment to work with. CF scientist have microscopes and 19th century
metallurgical techniques. Some can afford to pay for one or two
spectroanalyses per year, most cannot. A few are properly equipped. CF
scientists at Mitsubishi's headquarters R&D lab have their own clean room and
millions of dollars of state-of-the-art equipment. They have made excellent
progress over the last two years. They performed six experiments and all six
yielded positive results: heat, x-rays and transmutations.

The Mitsubishi work is a good example of what Ostrowki, Morrison and the
Tortoises claim they want: "a successful, repeatable CF demo." I expect it
could be reproduced by any major industrial corporation with clean room, a
dozen world-class R&D people, and five years.


     Well, here at least I can sympathize - but upon what particular results
     do these scientists base their optimism , and how were these results
     achieved ? . . . They don't know and aren't sure, is what I gather
     ,basically.

That's absurd. Of course they know! Don't "gather." Don't guess, suppose,
wonder or speculate. Your speculation is nonsense. Read the literature and get
the facts!!!!


     You presumably read the literature , and boil it down for your  magazine
     and this list .

I never boil anything down. When someone asks me a simple question and I hand
him a hundred pages of reading material a week later. I usually say: "I looked
into it and I can't decide. Here are my notes, read them and draw your own
conclusion." Last week I wrote a little about photovoltaics. Tallying up the
stuff left on the table I find five reference books marked with post-it notes
and ~150 pages printed from Internet sources.


     The similarity lies in the fact that magicians and these scientists
     can't or won't describe a specific procedure to produce the effect in
     question (o/u) .

They do describe them in as much detail as they can. Unfortunately they have
much left to learn.

I mentioned the imperfect nature of AIDS research, comparing it to CF. We
would not say that AIDS researchers are more like magicians than real doctors
even though many of their patients die. Ostrowki responded:

     Oh please enough of the CF experimenters being like dedicated heroic
     doctors or something .  Jeez.  Maybe some scriptwriter should make a tv
     show out of it if it's THAT dramatic.

Actually, I was talking about the tentative nature of the discoveries. Both
lines of research are work-in-progress, especially AIDS vaccinations. But in
fact I do regard most CF researchers as heroic scientists, and the story is
dramatic. Some are scoundrels and some are idiots, but the leading people are
the best scientists alive today. They are struggling against enormous odds and
ferocious opposition to bring limitless pollution free energy to mankind.
Without money, without support, with little hope of success, they are
struggling to solve the most important problem faced by the human race. If
they succeed they may soon save 30,000 to 50,000 innocent lives every week,
and open up the solar system to manned exploration and exploitation, ending
material shortages for all time. The impact on health alone will be on same
scale as the discoveries of Pasteur. Pons and Fleischmann are the closest
thing we shall see to a modern-day Prometheus. No television drama could do
this story justice.


     OK - " Results " then ... again , what progress has been made since 1989
     , when the first "amazing"  "results" were achieved?

You must read the literature and judge for yourself.

I wrote that "CF researchers can and do teach their methods.  So do AIDS
researchers,  but they still do not have a vaccination, despite years of labor
and billions of dollars. Ostrowski responds cryptically:

     AGGGGHHHHH!

     ( Ostrowski rolls eyes , groans.....)

Why groan? What's with the ASCII histrionics? The comparison is apt. I spent
several hours talking with a leading AIDS researcher in Washington DC, and
with my brother-in-law, who does microbiology. The challenges and difficulties
sound similar to those the CF researchers face.


     Jed , here you say: "But these pages have not yet been written!  That's
     the problem." . . . But over here you say: "A good place to start would
     be the Storms paper "How to Perform a Cold Fusion Experiment." . . . So
     THERE IS a hardcopy procedure (of some kind) , right ?

Yes of course, there are hundreds of hardcopy procedures. But they are not
perfected yet. Storms' works better than most. There was a hardcopy procedure
for transistors in 1950, but it did not work well. It was improved in 1952 and
perfected gradually over the next 20 years.


     Hundreds of runs , huh ?...the exact same way each time ?

No, of course not. If the runs were *exactly* the same, they would produce the
same results. The starting conditions are as closely alike as we know how to
make them, but when you monitor the control parameters carefully you can watch
most of the experiments crash and burn for various complex reasons. It is like
watch airplane flight tests in 1910.


     There's something about this that just isn't right and doesn't sound
     like the way a naturally curious experimenter would proceed.

What do you expect these poeple to do? Do you think Fleischmann or Oriani
has God's toll-free technical support number in his back pocket? What else is
there to do but to proceed patiently, by inches, building up experience and
knowledge one experiment at a time?


     What it sounds like is sort of a broken record method of research - do
     something over and over again until you get an artifact . . .

Artifacts are eliminated with control runs and by the high S/N ratio. Once you
get the effect to turn on, it is robust, easy to detect, and it tends to stick
around. As McKubre says "The effect is . . . neither small nor fleeting." It
is similar to the Meissner effect to test superconductors, or the transistor
effect confirmed by feedback oscillation on December 23, 1947. (See "Crystal
Fire," p. 140.) CF is hard to achieve but easy to recognize when it does
finally happen, and easy to confirm with confidence.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 11:46:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA16693;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 11:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 11:43:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980629143851.00bfbc70 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:38:51 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: Hot fusion R&D
In-Reply-To: <199806272119_MC2-5188-86A9 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Lcfgw.0.l44.h1-br" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20157
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 09:16 PM 6/27/98 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>Imagine the government spending a half-billion every year on operating system
>software development, despite the fact that IBM, Microsoft and every other
>company in the business goes before Congress and says: "we don't want this
>and we will not use it."
 
   I agree with most of what Jed said, but I have to take exception here.
Why do you think imagination is required?  The government has spent at
least that much on OS development. Some has been worthwhile, in fact the
whole concept of operating systems was developed on government funded
projects. But the most recent such projects for example PCTE, fit Jed's
model almost perfectly.  (The exception is that ours is not the only
government throwing money into the PCTE rathole.)

                                        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 Jun 29 11:54:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA18540;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 11:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 11:52:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <001701bda38d$e7fd1100$255b2bcf ar91037.argis.com>
From: "Craig Haynie" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Ostrowski's comments
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:44:03 -0000
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: <"X9lbB3.0.PX4.Z9-br" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20158
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: Monday, June 29, 1998 17:45
Subject: Ostrowski's comments


>Sending robot rockets to Mars. I have not been keeping track, but I believe
>about half of these have disappeared and the recent one did not last as
long
>as they hoped it would.


Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Russians something like 0
for 18? Haven't they launched 18 probes to Mars without a single success? I
think the weekly tabloids ('hot-sheets') were using this as evidence of
Martian inhabitation.

Craig


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 12:27:32 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA19846;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:22:21 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:22:21 -0700
From: "George Holz" 
To: 
Subject: Re: H2 Glow discharge with a K electrode
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:28:01 -0400
Message-ID: <01bda394$079ba4d0$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: <"aGbGm1.0._r4.ib-br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20159
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace wrote:
>Doesn't EXCEL have an option to save graphs as GIFs?
Not directly, but by saving to the clipboard and processing
with PhotoShop I was able to save them as GIFs.
Your suggestion made me rethink the problem and find
the obvious solution, thanks.
-
>Would be nice if we could see GIF or JPEG of it.
I have placed the GIF graphs of Vince's results on our web site at:
http://www.varisys.com/vortex.htm
-
Vince wrote:
>Looks like smaller electrode gap is better. But I wonder if it's just the
>(supposed) reaction taking place in a smaller area, concentrating the
>output which shows up as higher Deg. C per watt. Also with a smaller
>area there will be smaller radiation losses.
The influence of varying active length is certainly important.
Remember also that heat loss is quite complex here involving
conduction, convection and radiation. The simplest approach
to clarifying the situation is to perform a thermal calibration run
with the .5" gap tube with no K. Place a short across some ballast
lamps if necessary to obtain thermocouple readings in the range
of those obtained with H2 + K. The exact placement of the
thermocouple may also be very important.
-
Regards,
George Holz      george varisys.com
Varitronics Systems

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 12:37:53 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA24278;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:32:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:32:20 -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: <3597EB12.99B7A564 css.mot.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:29:22 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Discussion Group - Vortex 
Subject: Sandia Lab's Z Machine -> 290 Terawatts / 1.6 Million Degrees C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"STbH22.0.rw5.1l-br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20160
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ladies and Gents-

There is an interesting article in this month's Machine Design
 on the Sandia Lab's Z Machine that I thought
might be of interest.  MD did not have the article online so I went over to
Sandia's site and did a quick search. 

Another Dramatic Climb Toward Fusion Conditions for Sandia Z Accelerator
Full Story:  


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 12:50:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA28963;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:43:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:43:25 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980629154731.00c30a40 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:47:31 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980626145051.008a78e0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
References: <3.0.1.32.19980625121304.00c0cd60 spectre.mitre.org>
 
 <3.0.1.32.19980624151527.00c4b100 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"2PI902.0.T47.Qv-br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20161
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>I wrote:
>>   Can we drop this now?  TVs, superconducting supercolliders, ebeam chip
>>etching machines and faraday cages all work and are very well understood.
>>It is just one of those "freshman mistakes" to think that you can get
>>other than nonsence from mathematically studying an unbalanced field.
>>There are no such things, in real life, even in van de Graff generators.

At 02:50 PM 6/26/98 +0800, John Winterflood wrote:
>Just in case Bill and Robin do decide to drop it, I'm afraid what you
>are saying seems quite wrong to me so I would really appreciate some
>clarification if you are so certain of your argument. I'm sure you
>wouldn't want to leave people who have tried hard to understand, with
>an incorrect concept.

   Let me first see if I can hammer home my point about models with
unbalanced charges.  Consider a system consisting of the right ends of
several lengths of string.  Difficult to imagine?  I have the same problem
every time someone describes a system with an unbalanced charge.  I have
all these pieces of string with one end fading off to hyperspace or
somewhere.  There are physical systems which can be imagined--and maybe
someday built--where that happens, but for now, don't even waste time on
systems with unbalanced charges.

>Firstly TV focussing for instance as I understand it starts off with
>a diverging beam which then passes through some focussing fields
>(either with the lovely old fashioned ring magnets around the neck
>that are squeezed together, or electrostatically nearer the gun)
>and then the inertia carries the electrons closer against their very
>strong tendency to want to spread.

   Yes and no.  The guns produce a "flood" of electrons, as these are
accelerated, their own magnetic fields tie them closer and closer together.
 The focusing magnets are much more concerned about getting the beam to
track linearly across the screen horizontally and vertically.

> Likewise electron microscopes have significant focussing electronics.

   Depends on the type of microscope.  Most popular nowadays is the SEM,
scanning electron microscope, in which a beam is scanned across a surface.

>  Are you saying that this is incorrect and that electron beams will
>self-confine like a discharge in a plasma (bear in mind that plasmas by
>definition have both charges present which shields a large part of the
>electrostatic fields and so the magnetic effect easily overrides) ?

   I've worked with those plasmas.  A lot.  Basically in an arc you have a
very thin conducting "wire" of relativistic electrons surrounded by a
sheath of positively charged ions moving at much lower speeds.  If you know
exactly what you are doing, you can create a "braid" where instead of a
sheath surrounding the wire, you have two parallel threads rotating around
each other.  (The displacement in the electron thread is usually much
greater, so much so that it looks like you have a central current wrapped
in a wire.)

>It seems to me that unless you can get some positive charge
>BETWEEN the electrons (as in a plasma) then both the electrostatic
>effects and the magnetic effects (due to positive charges at any
>distance speeding the other way) both produce forces which tend
>to separate the electrons from any observers point of view.

    Nope.  If you don't believe me, DO THE EXPERIMENT.  Create a DC arc
between two refractory electrodes in a jar.  Start at about 10-100 pascals,
and then pump down.  Eventually, you should be able now to let some air
back in the jar in such a way that it blows on the arc.  Do it right, and
you will see the two threads separate, totally at variance to any model
where relativistic electrons repel each other.  (If the pressure is low
enough, most of the current will be in the electron beam.  You can make the
ion beam more visible by choosing a more visible gas, such as neon or
argon, or by using unplated copper electrodes.)
 


                                        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 Jun 29 12:50:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA29188;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:44:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:44:05 -0700
Message-Id: <3597ECDA.71DB6D9C verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:36:58 +0300
From: Hamdi Ucar 
Organization: Orchestra
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: vortex 
Subject: Re: [near topic] UFO Studies Warranted
References: <3597D3A1.62D6 bellsouth.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ff5Xk3.0.r77.3w-br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20162
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Thanks Terry for your announcement. Last week I examined many documents released by FBI on FOIA. I saw that FBI is looking to flying saucers as a fact in early 1950. They had no doubt that extraterrestrial flying objects are existing.
 
Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 12:59:41 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA01380;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:55:45 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:55:45 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980629155910.00c9bc80 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:59:10 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"_URPg3.0.QL.05_br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20163
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 11:53 PM 6/25/98 -0800, Horace Heffner wrote:

>It is understandable that the balancing charge q2, though a quantized
>value, would be statistically distributed throughout the universe about a
>moving chage q1 in a uniform manner.  The radius of interaction is
>unimportant because the electrostatic field of q1 is a 1/r^2 field.  The
>surface of influence also grows as 1/r^2, so distance becomes comparativly
>unimportant, except for very large average distances to q2 and velocity
>near c.  It seems, for the same reason, even a fairly large displacement of
>q1 in one direction or another should have a small effect on any magnetic
>force between q1 and q2, assuming q2 is distant, on average.  The universe
>is a large place.  I assume something in this paragraph does not jive with
>what you are saying Robert.

   Nope, so far on target.  I would rather word it as the sum of all
possible paths is a constant, but you get the same effect--distance is
relatively unimportant to cancelling charges.

>Given the above, it is difficult to see how a 1/d^2 magnetic force Fy, or
>any significant attracting force, arises between two parallel charges q1
>and q3, both moving with velocity v, q3 having an opposite charge q4 which
>is distributed throughout the universe like q2.  There seems to be nothing
>tied to the distance d between q1 and q3, the nearby charge moving in
>parallel.  What am I missing?

   Two electrons moving in parallel, wrt their balancing charges, see each
other as magnetic dipoles perpendicular to the direction of motion in
addition to the (repulsive) charge effects.  Since these dipoles are all
aligned to attract each other, the net magnetic force on any electron in a
beam is proportional to the speed and the number of electrons, and
inversely proportional to the square of the distance.  If the velocity is
high enough, you get a beam.  (Takes several hundred volts, and depends in
part on the temperature of your electron source.)

                                        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 Jun 29 13:22:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA08839;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:18:30 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:18:30 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980629162242.00c26500 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 16:22:42 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: Re: pinch, electrons & reference frames
Cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: 
References: <3.0.1.32.19980625121304.00c0cd60 spectre.mitre.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"LIjcS1.0.v92.MQ_br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20164
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 08:56 AM 6/26/98 -0700, William Beaty wrote:
>OK, but do you mind if I post some of your messages to sci.physics?  I
>want to get to the bottom of this, and the relativity experts there will
>very quickly leap on my errors and illuminate their exact nature in
>excruciating detail.
 
   Hmmm.  I'm not sure how you extract a coherent set of messages from this
discussion, but it is fine with me if you don't quote too far out of context.

>One last question!  :) if two electrons are 1mm apart and flying initially
>parallel down the CRT tube, what velocity causes them to stop repelling?
>I mean, can you calculate the velocity where "pinch" overrides repulsion,
>the velocity which, if exceeded, causes the electrons to approach each
>other?

    Interesting question, I'll have to see if I can compute it from first
principles.  However there are lots of vacuum tubes on the market (or at
least there WERE) that require electron beams at voltages on the order of
one hundred volts.  The diameter of the beam depends on the temperature of
the electrons as they boil off the cathode, and the voltage, so devices
that require a sharply focused beam use much higher voltages.  (About 12 kV
for black and white TVs, 25-30 kV for color.)

                                        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 Jun 29 13:42:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA15149;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:39:05 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:39:05 -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: <3597FB5F.1015C2F8 css.mot.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:38:55 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Discussion Group - Vortex 
Subject: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"IfptS.0.bi3.fj_br" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20165
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ladies and Gents-

Another interesting article in this month's Machine Design
 on the Los Alamos MEG brain-imaging system. 
Again, MD did not have the article online so I went over to Los Alamos and did
a quick search.

Lab Unveils New Brain-Imaging System
Full Story:  


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 14:17:18 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA26005;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:11:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:11:08 -0700
Message-ID: <009301bda3a1$fca9f1e0$5a8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Subject: Re: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:07:50 -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: <"k4uBV1.0.FM6.hB0cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20166
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: John Steck 
To: Discussion Group - Vortex 
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 2:41 PM
Subject: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...

I think you're seeing the Sandia -Los Alamos budget Show-and-Tell, John.

I read the press release you cited, I think their "Milestones" are arranged
in a circle.  :-)

If you buy that CRAP, I know of a certain bridge up for sale. In my book it
borders on Criminal misuse of public funds.

Regards,     Frederick


>Ladies and Gents-
>
>Another interesting article in this month's Machine Design
> on the Los Alamos MEG brain-imaging system.
>Again, MD did not have the article online so I went over to Los Alamos and
did
>a quick search.
>
>Lab Unveils New Brain-Imaging System
>Full Story:  
>
>
>John E. Steck
>--------------------------------o]{:
>  Senior Mechanical Engineer
>  Rapid Tooling Applications
>  Motorola CSS, Libertyville
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 14:47:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA01167;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:42:12 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:42:12 -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: <35980A0B.816C93E4 css.mot.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 16:41:31 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...
References: <009301bda3a1$fca9f1e0$5a8f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"QbZQd3.0.8I.pe0cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20167
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:
> If you buy that CRAP, I know of a certain bridge up for sale. In my book it
> borders on Criminal misuse of public funds.

Ok, you've confused the hell out of me.  What leads you to this conclusion?  As
I understand it, the MEG technology suposedly already exists, the story is
regarding a new insulating material that is suposed to dramatically reduce the
cost of the device and make it more practical for widespread use.  Did I miss
something?


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 15:01:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA05576;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:55:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:55:54 -0700
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:55:57 -0700
Message-Id: <199806292155.OAA26597 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: Sandia Lab's Z Machine -> 290 Terawatts / 1.6 Million Degrees C
Resent-Message-ID: <"sWvDS1.0.yM1.fr0cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20168
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Ladies and Gents-
>
>There is an interesting article in this month's Machine Design
> on the Sandia Lab's Z Machine that I thought
>might be of interest. 

Which week MD is this in?  I have June 18 and don't see it.  Maybe I already
threw it away?????????  

Ross Tessien


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 15:04:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA10150;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <00aa01bda3a7$f5fe6dc0$5a8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: 
Subject: Re: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:50:36 -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: <"7xSFS3.0.WU2.mw0cr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20169
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: John Steck 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...

I was referring to the Sandia "Z Pinch " blurb, John. Tevawatt-nanoseconds
is a kilojoule. This stuff was killed at Los Alamos nearly a decade ago.

With a $1.3Billion budget you would think they could come up with something
more useful.

FJS


>Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>> If you buy that CRAP, I know of a certain bridge up for sale. In my book
it
>> borders on Criminal misuse of public funds.
>
>Ok, you've confused the hell out of me.  What leads you to this conclusion?
As
>I understand it, the MEG technology suposedly already exists, the story is
>regarding a new insulating material that is suposed to dramatically reduce
the
>cost of the device and make it more practical for widespread use.  Did I
miss
>something?
>
>
>John E. Steck
>--------------------------------o]{:
>  Senior Mechanical Engineer
>  Rapid Tooling Applications
>  Motorola CSS, Libertyville
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 15:08:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA08012;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:03:41 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:03:41 -0700
Message-ID: <00af01bda3a9$533625e0$5a8f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject:  Industrial and Marine Engines (http://www.allison.com/www/product/industrial/h
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 16:00:13 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B1_01BDA377.003A5320"
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: <"2iHks1.0.6z1.zy0cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20170
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_00B1_01BDA377.003A5320
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This is Technology, Not Tax Funded either.

http://www.allison.com/www/product/industrial/home.html

------=_NextPart_000_00B1_01BDA377.003A5320
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name=" Industrial and Marine Engines.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=" Industrial and Marine Engines.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.allison.com/www/product/industrial/home.html
Modified=406BB623A9A3BD018E

------=_NextPart_000_00B1_01BDA377.003A5320--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 15:51:11 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA22377;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:47:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:47:39 -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: <35981987.C9B0E05 css.mot.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 17:47:35 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: More Neat Stuff From Machine Design ...
References: <00aa01bda3a7$f5fe6dc0$5a8f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jqz5s3.0.YT5.Ac1cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20171
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:

> I was referring to the Sandia "Z Pinch " blurb, John. Tevawatt-nanoseconds
> is a kilojoule. This stuff was killed at Los Alamos nearly a decade ago.

Well see?  That's why I post these things.  Thanks for your insight.  8^)

> With a $1.3Billion budget you would think they could come up with something
> more useful.

In that light, I agree.  Hope I didn't spoil your day...


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 15:55:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA23112;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:50:28 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:50:28 -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: <35981A32.2CA33263 css.mot.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 17:50:26 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Sandia Lab's Z Machine -> 290 Terawatts / 1.6 Million Degrees C
References: <199806292155.OAA26597 Au.oro.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"h5M76.0.we5.pe1cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20172
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ross Tessien wrote:

> Which week MD is this in?  I have June 18 and don't see it.  Maybe I already
> threw it away?????????

June 18, 1998 - Page 22.  The online information is more extensive though.

BTW, Page 79 is my sandbox....  8^)


John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 18:21:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA32576;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:18:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:18:50 -0700
Message-ID: <19980629235752.5699.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 16:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anton Rager 
Subject: [Off-Topic] Need Circuits -- Any Refs/Links?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"4Fepo1.0.ky7.vp3cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20173
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Hello All,

Off topic -- but does anyone have a reference for the following types
of circuits?

1 - Lie Detector/Sensitive Galvanometer circuits
2 - Homemade EEG and electrodes [brainwave monitoring]
3 - Biofeedback circuits
4 - Any combination of the above

Sorry to bother,

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  Mon Jun 29 18:56:05 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA06351;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Brendan Hall" 
To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" 
Subject: RE: The first cold fusion bomb?
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:57:08 +1000
Message-ID: <000201bda3ca$64dbf560$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: 
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Resent-Message-ID: <"NSx-T2.0.7Z1._K4cr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20174
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A



 Jim Ostrowski wrote:

                          FIRST COLD-FUSION BOMB?

>   Possibly we are overreacting to the following event:

>     "Cold fusion researchers are puzzled and worried by an explosion
>     last week that killed one of their colleagues, a British
>     electrochemist. A cold fusion 'cell' at SRI International in Menlo
>     Park, California, blew up while Andrew Riley was bending over it,
>     killing him instantly."

>   Now small explosions in cold-fusion cells are not unknown. At the tops
>   of some cells palladium-wire electrodes are exposed to oxygen and
>   deuterium (heavy hydrogen) gases. If the palladium wires are not
>   protected by films of water, the palladium can catalyze the explosive
>   combination of the oxygen and hydrogen. This sometimes happens if a
>   dry spot develops on a wire. Such detonations, though, cause little
>   damage. The SRI explosion was much more powerful. The detonating cell
>   (only 2 inches in diameter and 8 inches long), not only killed Riley
>   but peppered three other researchers in the lab with debris.

>   (Charles, Dan; "Fatal Explosion Closes Cold Fusion Laboratory," New
>   Scientist, p. 12, January 11, 1992.)

>   Comment. One cannot refrain from asking if the explosion involved only
>   chemical energy.

>    From Science Frontiers #80, MAR-APR 1992. © 1997 William R. Corliss

I talked to Mike McKubre at ICCF-7 about this incident.  He was one of the
injured in this explosion, and he still gets glass coming to the surface of
his skin on occasions.  He told me that the cause was recombination
(i.e. totally chemical).  Apparently there was a faulty or blocked pressure
relief valve, allowing large amounts of hydrogen and oxygen gas to build
up in the cell.  He said that hydrogen-oxygen recombination has a greater
explosive power than TNT.  I believe him, but I haven't tried to check that
out - can anyone here confirm whether this is true?

Brendan Hall

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Jun 29 19:11:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA23698;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 19:08:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 19:08:48 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 19:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: William Beaty 
To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" 
Subject: RE: The first cold fusion bomb?
In-Reply-To: <000201bda3ca$64dbf560$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"1V8fD.0.4o5.kY4cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20175
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Brendan Hall wrote:
> up in the cell.  He said that hydrogen-oxygen recombination has a greater
> explosive power than TNT.  I believe him, but I haven't tried to check that
> out - can anyone here confirm whether this is true?

TRKnudtson on the Freenrg-L list has experimented with this as part of
"Brown's Gas" research.  It is nasty because of the ease in which bombs
can be made.  Run a few tens of watts into it for many hours, and you
essentially are synthesizing a high explosive which is not terribly
stable.

((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 29 20:01:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA10623;
	Mon, 29 Jun 1998 19:59:36 -0700
Resent-Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 19:59:36 -0700
Message-ID: <000e01bda3d2$b0e37c00$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: The first cold fusion bomb?
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 20:56:22 -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: <"2LyRT3.0.mb2.NI5cr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20176
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: William Beaty 
To: 'Vortex Discussion Group' 
Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 8:10 PM
Subject: RE: The first cold fusion bomb?

Bill Beaty wrote:


>On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Brendan Hall wrote:
>> up in the cell.  He said that hydrogen-oxygen recombination has a greater
>> explosive power than TNT.  I believe him, but I haven't tried to check
that
>> out - can anyone here confirm whether this is true?

2 H2 (4 lbs) + O2 (32 lbs) = 2 H2O (36 lbs)

The heat of combustion of Hydrogen is 320 Btu/fT^3 or 56,000 Btu/lb.

So for the 40 lb mix: 4*56,000/40 = 5,600 Btu/lb

About the same as TNT (4,500+ btu/lb).

Works good on the Shuttle.   :-)

Regards,    Frederick

>
>TRKnudtson on the Freenrg-L list has experimented with this as part of
>"Brown's Gas" research.  It is nasty because of the ease in which bombs
>can be made.  Run a few tens of watts into it for many hours, and you
>essentially are synthesizing a high explosive which is not terribly
>stable.
>
>((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (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 Jun 30 01:01:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA15770;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:54:43 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: New email address
Resent-Message-ID: <"oimcd3.0.Ks3.Ni9cr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20177
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I now have a new email address:

   hheffner mtaonline.net

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 03:28:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA12661;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 03:23:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 03:23:03 -0700
Message-ID: <002401bda410$a5584760$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Terry Blanton's Slightly Off-Topic Stuff ... Signal Mirror Effect
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 04:19:18 -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: <"Ki5Kn2.0.g53.6oBcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20178
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Terry,

If the AG field around the craft is changing
the index of refraction in the air-vacuum
around itself, then to an observer seeing it
in daylight, as it maneuvers, one might see it
"move" at tremendous speeds or disappear the same as when you are watching
the reflection of the sun off a signal mirror.

The same for a Radar blip? Cheshire Cat effect?

Now you see it, now you don't?  At night if it has it's lights on, a
different story.

Regards,     Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 05:05:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA20270;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 05:02:17 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 05:02:17 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980630075949.007cd540 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:59:49 -0400
To: Jim Ostrowski , vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: Making CF more "fun"
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"BY1jr1.0.cy4.8FDcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20179
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


At 10:43 PM 6/28/98 -0700, Jim Ostrowski wrote:
> 
>
>  Regarding CF research I would like to offer a suggestion that
> would perhaps make this effort a little more exciting to the
> amateur scientists who might otherwise not be interested in this
> phenomena , because it appears so complex , and in my view ,
> rather boring (you have to do the same experiment over and over
> again hundreds of times in order to see any effect). 
> >  I read somewhere that in the early days of this research , at SRI
> I believe , there was an explosion of a CF cell that was so
> powerfull it actually killed someone. 
> 


  There is nothing responsible about this thread.

   The tragic death of researcher by an explosive decompression
is not "fun" in any way whatsoever.   


 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 06:16:17 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA15740;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:14:49 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:14:49 -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: <3598E309.6E8040B7 css.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:07:21 -0500
From: John Steck 
Organization: Motorola CSS, Libertyville
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.6 sun4u)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Discussion Group - Vortex 
Subject: New Innovations - Biochips
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"1UZVe3.0.rr3.7JEcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20180
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Motorola, Packard to make ``biochips''
06:55 a.m. Jun 30, 1998 Eastern

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Motorola Inc., Packard Instrument Co., and the U.S.
government's Argonne National Laboratory say they have teamed up to mass
produce ``biochips'' -- devices akin to computer chips, with widespread
implications in medicine and agriculture.

Like computer chips, which perform millions of mathematical operations a
second, biochips can perform thousands of biological reactions, such as
decoding genes, in seconds.

Motorola will develop the manufacturing process for the chips and Packard, a
subsidiary of Connecticut-based Packard BioScience Co., will make instruments
to analyze them.

The pre-production costs of these machines -- the so-called imager and arrayer
-- are initially put at $30,000 and $75,000. Chips could initially cost about
$100 each but eventually be a dollar or less, the companies said.

Argonne and the Russian Academy of Science's Englehardt Institute of Molecular
Biology, based in Moscow, are providing 19 inventions related to the biological
microchips, while Motorola and Packard will contribute a total of $19 million
over five years to support the joint research. Argonne's inventions are
licensed exclusively to the two companies.

These biochips employ ``micro-gel'' technology in which microscopic structures
-- as many as 10,000 or more on a glass surface about the size of a single
microscopic slide -- act like mini-test tubes. Within each micro-gel structure,
chemical compounds can be tested against biological targets to provide answers
to questions such as DNA sequence, genetic variation, gene expression, protein
interaction and immune response.

The chips work faster than conventional methods.

``Instead of reading DNA one letter or word at a time, the biochips read whole
phrases and sentences at a time,'' said Andrei Mirzabekov, a biologist whose
research at Argonne and Engelhardt developed the biochips, in a news release.

In a telephone news conference, U.S. Energy Secretary Federico Pena called the
project one of  ``profound importance to all Americans.'' The Energy Department
has funded the project in conjunction with the Human Genome Project, a task to
map the entire set of human chromosomes by the year 2005. Pena said it could be
the birth of a new multi-billion industry.

The partners expect the greatest impact in the field of medical diagnostics.
They say researchers would be able to identify in minutes mutated genes that
could lead to later medical problems, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis or
Alzheimer's.

Widespread use of biochips could remove the guesswork from early treatment of
many diseases. On-the-spot identification of specific bacteria, such as
Streptococci in a sick child, viruses and other micro-organisms, would be
possible, the partners said.

Other uses are foreseen. ``With a commercial biochip to rapidly and
economically perform genetic analysis, within a few years we should see better
pharmaceuticals developed more rapidly,'' said Richard McKernan, president of
Packard Instrument Co. In agriculture, he sees improved crop strength and
better breeding and disease detection in animals.

Motorola vice president Rudyard Istvan declined to give revenue projections
from the biochip venture but said initial production will take place in the
United States by conversion of some of the company's existing plants. The
partners see drug companies as the first customers, with universities and large
labs worldwide coming down the line in four to five years. Eventually, they
foresee doctors having this technology in their offices.



John E. Steck
--------------------------------o]{:
  Senior Mechanical Engineer
  Rapid Tooling Applications
  Motorola CSS, Libertyville

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 06:34:27 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA18735;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3599497E.BFF178F4 ihug.co.nz>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:24:31 -0700
From: John Berry 
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: New Innovations - Biochips
References: <3598E309.6E8040B7 css.mot.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"xQtTq2.0.fa4.VZEcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20181
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Seen GATTACA?
Where getting too close to, It will happen :-(

John Steck wrote:

> Motorola, Packard to make ``biochips''
> 06:55 a.m. Jun 30, 1998 Eastern
>
> CHICAGO (Reuters) - Motorola Inc., Packard Instrument Co., and the U.S.
> government's Argonne National Laboratory say they have teamed up to mass
> produce ``biochips'' -- devices akin to computer chips, with widespread
> implications in medicine and agriculture.
>
> Like computer chips, which perform millions of mathematical operations a
> second, biochips can perform thousands of biological reactions, such as
> decoding genes, in seconds.
>
> Motorola will develop the manufacturing process for the chips and Packard, a
> subsidiary of Connecticut-based Packard BioScience Co., will make instruments
> to analyze them.
>
> The pre-production costs of these machines -- the so-called imager and arrayer
> -- are initially put at $30,000 and $75,000. Chips could initially cost about
> $100 each but eventually be a dollar or less, the companies said.
>
> Argonne and the Russian Academy of Science's Englehardt Institute of Molecular
> Biology, based in Moscow, are providing 19 inventions related to the biological
> microchips, while Motorola and Packard will contribute a total of $19 million
> over five years to support the joint research. Argonne's inventions are
> licensed exclusively to the two companies.
>
> These biochips employ ``micro-gel'' technology in which microscopic structures
> -- as many as 10,000 or more on a glass surface about the size of a single
> microscopic slide -- act like mini-test tubes. Within each micro-gel structure,
> chemical compounds can be tested against biological targets to provide answers
> to questions such as DNA sequence, genetic variation, gene expression, protein
> interaction and immune response.
>
> The chips work faster than conventional methods.
>
> ``Instead of reading DNA one letter or word at a time, the biochips read whole
> phrases and sentences at a time,'' said Andrei Mirzabekov, a biologist whose
> research at Argonne and Engelhardt developed the biochips, in a news release.
>
> In a telephone news conference, U.S. Energy Secretary Federico Pena called the
> project one of  ``profound importance to all Americans.'' The Energy Department
> has funded the project in conjunction with the Human Genome Project, a task to
> map the entire set of human chromosomes by the year 2005. Pena said it could be
> the birth of a new multi-billion industry.
>
> The partners expect the greatest impact in the field of medical diagnostics.
> They say researchers would be able to identify in minutes mutated genes that
> could lead to later medical problems, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis or
> Alzheimer's.
>
> Widespread use of biochips could remove the guesswork from early treatment of
> many diseases. On-the-spot identification of specific bacteria, such as
> Streptococci in a sick child, viruses and other micro-organisms, would be
> possible, the partners said.
>
> Other uses are foreseen. ``With a commercial biochip to rapidly and
> economically perform genetic analysis, within a few years we should see better
> pharmaceuticals developed more rapidly,'' said Richard McKernan, president of
> Packard Instrument Co. In agriculture, he sees improved crop strength and
> better breeding and disease detection in animals.
>
> Motorola vice president Rudyard Istvan declined to give revenue projections
> from the biochip venture but said initial production will take place in the
> United States by conversion of some of the company's existing plants. The
> partners see drug companies as the first customers, with universities and large
> labs worldwide coming down the line in four to five years. Eventually, they
> foresee doctors having this technology in their offices.
>
> John E. Steck
> --------------------------------o]{:
>   Senior Mechanical Engineer
>   Rapid Tooling Applications
>   Motorola CSS, Libertyville



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 07:10:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA07652;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:07:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:07:24 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: Mitchell Swartz 
cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Making CF more "fun"
In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980630075949.007cd540 world.std.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"QWgTk.0.Ot1.R4Fcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20182
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Mitchell Swartz wrote:

> 
> At 10:43 PM 6/28/98 -0700, Jim Ostrowski wrote:
> > 
> >
> >  Regarding CF research I would like to offer a suggestion that
> > would perhaps make this effort a little more exciting to the
> > amateur scientists who might otherwise not be interested in this
> > phenomena , because it appears so complex , and in my view ,
> > rather boring (you have to do the same experiment over and over
> > again hundreds of times in order to see any effect). 
> > >  I read somewhere that in the early days of this research , at SRI
> > I believe , there was an explosion of a CF cell that was so
> > powerfull it actually killed someone. 
> > 
> 
> 
>   There is nothing responsible about this thread.
> 
>    The tragic death of researcher by an explosive decompression
> is not "fun" in any way whatsoever.   
> 

This suggests that I might have said something to the effect (in the part
you edited out ) that blowing up  researchers is  fun ,and I somehow
advocated doing so.

Why are you characterizing my suggestion in that way?


The fact that a researcher was killed by an an explosion is certainly   
tragic , but that should not deter those who wish to and can take
appropriate safety measures pertaining to performing explosive experiments
from having "fun" while doing so. They are fun .


Things that are somewhat hazardous and sometimes result in spectacular
mishaps are often considerable "fun" , like auto racing , and the fact
that occasionally a participant may become injured or even killed
does not deter people from continuing in the sport because it is still 
"fun". 


I was just suggesting a CF research approach that might require some extra
safety measures , but would be more "fun" to do ,for those of you who
might enjoy such things, that's all . I might try it myself sometime ,
after I wind up some of my present projects.

Jim Ostrowski

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 07:26:26 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA13142;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:22:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:22:35 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:22:33 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980630222601.2baf653a 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: RE: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Resent-Message-ID: <"srcr62.0.FD3.gIFcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20183
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ross Tessien posted the following (edited for brevity) at 19:59 1998.06.27
-0700:


>
>When I calculate the masses that tauon and muon ought to have, as ratios of
>electron, I come up short, but for both particles, I come up short by the
>same amount, which was odd if the calcuation had nothing to do with their
>actual structures as aether vortices.  
>
>Years of study of how black holes behave, and how stars behave, have led me
>to the conclusion that aether can condense, if it is compressed
>sufficiently.  The easiest way to do this is to have a spherical convergence
>of wave energy, and thus you wind up with a resonance and we call these
>particles.
>

>
>The reason the event horizon is important is not meerly that light and
>matter cannot escape once they cross that boundary.  mc^2 is the energy
>required in order to condense the aether!  That is why when you induce
>fusion reactions, and aether shoots out, your "particles" are accelerated
>according to that equation.  You are literally shooting out some of the
>aether that had been confined in and associated with, those particles.
>

And so second prize goes to whoever can come up with a method
 of confining aether back into particles, right ?


>
>Behind the craft, the aether you forced to condense in front of the craft is
>going to flash vaporize again.  

So what you do if you're smart is condense aether in front into mass
 which you convert back to aether behind the craft.
  That way you avoid shock-waves and other relevant losses.
If you convert aether to mass quickly enough, the loss of aether
 at the front of the craft will drag it forward (tractor propulsion)
   

>
>Later, Ross Tessien

cheers

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 07:44:40 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA17205;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:41:23 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:41:23 -0700
Message-ID: <3598EB90.1F89 earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:43:45 -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: Brittz: Miles rebuttal out 6.30.98
Content-Type: message/news
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"8-X1X.0.fC4.JaFcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20184
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!news.idt.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!news.daimi.aau.dk!kemi.aau.dk!britz
From: britz 
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Miles rebuttal out
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:51:57 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University
Message-ID: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kemi.aau.dk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.physics.fusion:22314

A week or so ago, I emailed Mel Miles to ask yet again whether his
rebuttal of the Jones et al paper in J. Phys. Chem. is out. It is, and has
been for a couple of months, I guess (I don't check JPC regularly). There
is a page in my web site devoted to this saga, which is now at an end. As
most of you will know, Jones et al's (1995!) polemic was critical of the
published work of Miles et al. Miles' first go at writing a rebuttal was
knocked back by referees (an unusual thing to happen, most journals do not
referee rebuttals). Upon Steve Jones' and my pleading the case to the
journals' editor, that editor did reconsider and appointed new referees.
Miles' rebuttal must have been rather long, because what has now been
published (see the abstract in Recent Additions in my web site) is still
quite long for a rebuttal, and Miles tells me he was forced to cut out a
lot. A further unusual thing is that this rebuttal, which comes about 3
years after the polemic it responds to, is followed, in the same issue, by
a re-rebuttal by Jones et al; and this is followed by a re-re-rebuttal by
Miles (very short), who thus has the last word. I think.

-- Dieter Britz.    Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 08:03:48 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA26893;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:00:40 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:00:40 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Ostrowski's comments
In-Reply-To: <199806291335_MC2-519E-ECB0 compuserve.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"vJJ7K2.0.jZ6.LsFcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20185
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



I notice how the name of this thread suddenly changed from "expertise is
essential" to "Ostrowski's comments" , which tends to shift the focus  
of the discussion from the original point in question ,to being about me
personally . This is a "dodge" or a "bait and switch" which more or less
summarizes the remainder of Jed's comments. 


I want to say that I am not in favor of the abandonment of CF research ,
just that I find that the present approaches have not been all that
productive and perhaps other approaches might be in order , for those
willing or having the means to try them .

The original question we were trying to settle was whether or not the
failure to replicate the o/u phenomena (which I am not sure whether or not
was ever achieved in the first place ) is due to some kind of ineptitude
an the part of the researchers attempting the replication . It appears to
me that a responsible , diligent and systematic attempt was made by Scott
who seems to have at his disposal at least a very good lab and equipment 
for the requirements of the basic idea , when evaluated by the standards
of private researchers like myself who have labs in their homes or
garages. 

So what Jed seems to be saying is that this research is not at all 
for "amateurs" like us here on vortex , and it is best left up to the 
"professionals" who have decided to devote their entire careers to it. 


Very well , in that case we should declare Jed's postings off topic
because they do not relate to anything we are capable of doing here 
or deciding here on this forum of dedicated amateurs . 

If one of these professionals were to grace us with some tidbit of
information abouthow he/she achieved some valid effect then that certainly
would be of interest to all of us here , and would be right "on topic".

But Jed does not appear to be one of these people , nor is he interested
in performing any experiments himself . 

What then does he contribute that is "on topic"  here?

Jim Ostrowski

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 08:07:25 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA29387;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:04:24 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:04:24 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:08:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Making CF more "fun" 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"2zT3Z.0.lA7.tvFcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20186
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Mitchell Swartz wrote:

> 
> At 10:43 PM 6/28/98 -0700, Jim Ostrowski wrote:
> > 
> >
> >  Regarding CF research I would like to offer a suggestion that
> > would perhaps make this effort a little more exciting to the
> > amateur scientists who might otherwise not be interested in this
> > phenomena , because it appears so complex , and in my view ,
> > rather boring (you have to do the same experiment over and over
> > again hundreds of times in order to see any effect). 
> > >  I read somewhere that in the early days of this research , at SRI
> > I believe , there was an explosion of a CF cell that was so
> > powerfull it actually killed someone. 
> > 
> 
> 
>   There is nothing responsible about this thread.
> 
>    The tragic death of researcher by an explosive decompression
> is not "fun" in any way whatsoever.   
> 

This suggests that I might have said something to the effect (in the part
you edited out ) that blowing up  researchers is  fun ,and that I somehow
advocated doing so.

Why are you characterizing my suggestion in that way?


The fact that a researcher was killed by an an explosion is certainly   
tragic , but that should not deter those who wish to and can take
appropriate safety measures pertaining to performing explosive experiments
from having "fun" while doing so. They are fun .


Things that are somewhat hazardous and sometimes result in spectacular
mishaps are often considerable "fun" , like auto racing , and the fact
that occasionally a participant may become injured or even killed
does not deter people from continuing in the sport because it is still 
"fun". 


I was just suggesting a CF research approach that might require some extra
safety measures , but would be more "fun" to do ,for those of you who
might enjoy such things, that's all . I might try it myself sometime ,
after I wind up some of my present projects.

Jim Ostrowski


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 08:12:48 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA00688;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:09:34 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:09:34 -0700
Message-ID: <359900A1.6BFD ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:13:37 -0700
From: Akira Kawasaki 
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-NC320  (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Making CF more "fun"
References: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"gh3Rr2.0.eA.j-Fcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20187
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

June 30, 1998

Vortex,

Ostrowski wrote(2):
Swartz wrote:

Before the SRI explosion with the tragic loss of life, and much prior to
Pons and Fleischmann making their CF announcement in 1989, P&F had their
own large explosion which wiped out part of their laboratory.
Fortunately, it happened during their absence at night while a pd sample
was being loaded electrolytically. Never did hear of an adequate
explanation for this except "deloading" conjectures. Thereafter, after
SRI had their accident, an advisory was issued from P&F to experimenters
to use much smaller loading samples since the presumed "deloading" of a
larger sample was dangerous. 
I have never been satisfied of the "deloading" explanation for the two
accidents and suggested (posted here on the Vortex) that an experimental
setup be executed in a safe open space like a desert to replicate a
"deloading" explosion with full instrumentation. 
I have not seen or heard of a full authorized explanation or references
to one for the explosions.
Of course, with no funding budgeted from anywhere for such an exercise,
it's just talk. But doesn't it leave you wondering?

-AK-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 08:28:20 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA09619;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:24:10 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:24:10 -0700
From: Chuck Davis 
To: John Fimognari 
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:21:24 -0700
Message-ID: 
X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck
Organization: ROSHI Corporation
Subject: Jacobson Resonator (fwd)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Resent-Message-ID: <"HAPPa.0.7M2.PCGcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20188
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

*** Forwarded message, originally written by Edward Courtney on 06-May-98 ***

Was watching Strange Universe when a segment showed the Jacobson Resonator.

The inventor was interviewed using his machine. He claimed he is using it
to treat acute pain, including migrains and many neuralogic disorders
including Parkinson's and Altzheimers. He is waiting for FDA approval.

Then did a web search and found the following.

Company Press Release

Pioneer Services International - Research Breakthrough in
Nerve Growth and Repair

BOCA RATON, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 18, 1998--Pioneer Services
International Ltd.

(BULLETIN BOARD:PSVC), of Boca Raton, announced Wednesday the results of
preclinical trials and research conducted at Cornell University Medical 
College on Sciatic Nerve Growth and Repair, utilizing the Jacobson 
Resonator emitting Pico Tesla range magnetic fields.

The research study was conducted over the last six months under the
guidance of Dr. Brij Saxena of Cornell University Medical College, 
New York, N.Y.

The ``in vitro'' studies on the treated nerve pieces dissected from 
sciatic nerves of mice showed a significant growth in length and 
thickness plus an increase in the number and size of axons, growth 
and repair to the myelin sheaths. Schwann cells showed normal 
configurations and mitochondria of condensed formation which is 
indicative of anabolic activity. Normal distribution of microtubules 
and microfilaments in the treated samples further substantiates that
``exposure to Jacobson Magnetic Resonance sustains normal sub-cellular
structures of nerve cells as well as promotes growth and repair,'' 
explained Dr. Jerry Jacobson, chairman of Pioneer Services International 
Ltd. as compared to the untreated samples of sciatic nerves which simply
decayed.

Additional double-blind clinical and research studies are underway at The
National Medical and Research Institute, Boca Raton, using Jacobson 
Resonators for the treatment of Chronic Pain and Osteoarthritis under 
the direction of Roger Gorman, M.D. The company expects to have a full
report of its findings ready for publication by June 1998.

Pioneer Services International Ltd. (PSVC) is one of the leaders in the
emerging field of Bio-Electromagnetic Technology. Applications for our 
patented resonance equipment and products cut across Medical, Food, 
Agricultural, Pharmaceutical, Construction and Environmental industries.

For further information contact: LBI Group Inc. (Investor Relations
Department) at 800/913-9767 or address your inquiries directly to the 
company, attention Dr. Frank A. Chaviano.

Contact:

     LBI Group Inc.
     Investor Relations Department, 800/913-9767
     or
     Pioneer Services International
     Office of the Chairman, 561/477-8020


-- 
    .-.                                                               .-.
   /   \           .-.                                 .-.           /   \
  /     \         /   \       .-.     _     .-.       /   \         /     \
-/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\--
    RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \   /     \_/   `-'     \   /       \     /
           \   /         `-'                     `-'         \   /
            `-'                                               `-'
 http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 08:47:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA08447;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Making CF more "fun"
In-Reply-To: <359900A1.6BFD ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"OwjFO1.0.u32._UGcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20189
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



On Tue, 30 Jun 1998, Akira Kawasaki wrote:

> June 30, 1998
> 
> Vortex,

[...snip...]

> I have never been satisfied of the "deloading" explanation for the two
> accidents and suggested (posted here on the Vortex) that an experimental
> setup be executed in a safe open space like a desert to replicate a
> "deloading" explosion with full instrumentation.

I happen to live by a large Desert (the Mojave)
 
> I have not seen or heard of a full authorized explanation or references
> to one for the explosions.
> Of course, with no funding budgeted from anywhere for such an exercise,
> it's just talk. But doesn't it leave you wondering?
> 

Why would this be any more expensive than other CF endeavors
undertaken by Scott Little , for example?


Jim  O.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 09:00:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA22767;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:59:13 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:59:13 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:59:10 +0800 (SGT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980701000238.2b9f40b2 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: More Insults from Jed
Resent-Message-ID: <"7CaIL1.0.ZZ5.GjGcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20190
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jim Ostrowski posted the following (edited for brevity) at 08:04 1998.06.30
-0700:
>
>
>I notice how the name of this thread suddenly changed from "expertise is
>essential" to "Ostrowski's comments" , which tends to shift the focus  
>of the discussion from the original point in question ,to being about me
>personally . This is a "dodge" or a "bait and switch" which more or less
>summarizes the remainder of Jed's comments. 
>

Jim, you've gotta realize that Jed's justification for
 having an email account is to paint his interests 
  as being highly professional and scholarly
   while brushing the rest of us as loafing amateurs.
It's not personal,
 he's simply pumping up his own ego at your expense.
  If he can't troll you into responding he'll have to
   pick on someone else.

>
>The original question we were trying to settle was whether or not the
>failure to replicate the o/u phenomena (which I am not sure whether or not
>was ever achieved in the first place ) is due to some kind of ineptitude
>an the part of the researchers attempting the replication . It appears to
>me that a responsible , diligent and systematic attempt was made by Scott
>who seems to have at his disposal at least a very good lab and equipment 
>for the requirements of the basic idea , when evaluated by the standards
>of private researchers like myself who have labs in their homes or
>garages. 
>
>So what Jed seems to be saying is that this research is not at all 
>for "amateurs" like us here on vortex , and it is best left up to the 
>"professionals" who have decided to devote their entire careers to it. 
>

In other words, we need to get government to fund it,
 establish a comittee (of proven scholars and academics) 
  to oversee the project.  And wait until hell freezes over to see CF.
  
Maybe a few decades of precision megabucks should be adequate...
 While he's at it, he should seriously investigate criminalizing
  home experimentation.  Maybe prohibit any gadget over 250 volts ac
   and 28 volts dc, unless U.L approved, of course.
He could give lawyers a whole new ballpark to fleece us in.
No experimentation unless you've satisfied Jed's criteria
 as a 'bona-fide' CF-trained electrochemist with suitable doctorates
  in three fields.  Anyone else goes straight to jail.

 Let's not forget the porkbarrel involved - 
  anti - CF experimentation SWAT team training centres.
  Experimentat detection squads roaming the countryside
   with instant warrants to check YOUR basement for 
    clandestine palladium stashes.
Palladium sniff-hounds at all airports


>
>Very well , in that case we should declare Jed's postings off topic
>because they do not relate to anything we are capable of doing here 
>or deciding here on this forum of dedicated amateurs . 
>
>If one of these professionals were to grace us with some tidbit of
>information abouthow he/she achieved some valid effect then that certainly
>would be of interest to all of us here , and would be right "on topic".
>
>But Jed does not appear to be one of these people , nor is he interested
>in performing any experiments himself . 
>
>What then does he contribute that is "on topic"  here?
>
>Jim Ostrowski
>

P.S. -
He's not talking about why pits form, that's for sure.
 I've managed to get my pits to almost 1 mm. 
If they get any bigger they'll be the b*mb you discussed
 on the other thread.

Quit being Jed's punching bag
 and get back to that b*mb we're gonna build ;^}
It's far more real than anything Jed's ever done, that's for certain.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 09:17:36 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA27525;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:11:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:11:54 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19980630121519.00cc1c40 spectre.mitre.org>
X-Sender: eachus spectre.mitre.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:15:19 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: "Robert I. Eachus" 
Subject: RE: The first cold fusion bomb?
Cc: "'Vortex Discussion Group'" 
In-Reply-To: <000201bda3ca$64dbf560$2664a8c0 pc038---brendan>
References: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Y3Lyg3.0._j6.AvGcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20191
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> He said that hydrogen-oxygen recombination has a greater
>explosive power than TNT.  I believe him, but I haven't tried to check that
>out - can anyone here confirm whether this is true?

   Yes, per pound, H2 + O2 is about ten times as powerful as TNT.  (Someone
can do the math if they really care about the ratio, but that was what we
used for "rule of thumb" years ago.)  Well mixed stoichiometric ratio H2 +
O2 is also much more brissiant than TNT.  (Hard word not to use here.  It
means that the explosion wavefront is sharper and/or contains more of the
total energy.)

   Roughly speaking, a worst case shuttle accident on the pad would be
about as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb.

                                        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 Jun 30 09:24:44 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA31035;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:18:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:18:25 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:18:16 -0700
Message-Id: <199806301618.JAA09726 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: FTL travel: how can it be done?
Resent-Message-ID: <"ngEZJ2.0.Ra7.E_Gcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20192
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Greetings;


>>The reason the event horizon is important is not meerly that light and
>>matter cannot escape once they cross that boundary.  mc^2 is the energy
>>required in order to condense the aether!  That is why when you induce
>>fusion reactions, and aether shoots out, your "particles" are accelerated
>>according to that equation.  You are literally shooting out some of the
>>aether that had been confined in and associated with, those particles.
>>
>
>And so second prize goes to whoever can come up with a method
> of confining aether back into particles, right ?

Well, they already did this and I haven't heard that they were going to get
a prize.  Recent work at SLAC using gamma rays back scattered off a laser
beam succeeded in producing positron electron pairs out of two colliding
gammas.  So we have already made "particles" out of "nothing".



>
>
>>
>>Behind the craft, the aether you forced to condense in front of the craft is
>>going to flash vaporize again.  
>
>So what you do if you're smart is condense aether in front into mass
> which you convert back to aether behind the craft.

It is never "not" aether.  You have aether vapor, ie low density aether
filling all of what we call empty space, and you have aether condensate at
the very center of convergence of the standing wave energy we call, "fields"
which surround the "particles".  You must adopt the idea that **aether is
conserved in all interactions**.  and you must adopt the idea that "mass" is
a measure of how much aether is associated with a given soliton.

It is like this.  Blow a smoke ring in the air in front of your mouth.  You
can see it because of the smoke, but the smoke doesn't need to be there to
blow one.  A smoke ring vortex is due to your creating a localized high
pressure vortice in the atmosphere.  Now, what is the "mass" of that smoke ring?

To answer that, the only logical approach is to choose a volume of air that
fully contains the smoke ring.  But the sound speed in air that is
interacting with the atmosphere to propogate that vortex is 1,100 ft/s.  So
how big a box do you really need?  If you want to add many digits of
accuracy, you need to use a box as large as the vortex is old.

FAPP, however, we could demonstrate the idea of measuring the mass of a
vortex by using a 10 foot cube that contains the vortex.  Measure the "mass"
of the air in the box with, and without, the smoke ring vortex.  The mass of
air will be greater when you have the high pressure vortex inside.  Subtract
the two measurements and voila, that is the mass of your vortex.

Now for a particle.  Do the same thing for a volume of aether with an
electron soliton in it, or without an electron soliton in it.  Subtract the
two, and the difference is the "mass" of the electron.  But notice something
important.  The majority of the mass in the region containing the electron
is due to the "atmosphere" of aether, ie, you must think of the universe as
being an ocean, and not as being composed of empty space.

So you aren't converting aether into mass, and back into aether.  You are
causing the aether to take on a more dense configuration, for a short period
of time so that the craft can pass through the vortex you have created in
"empty space", or more accurately, in the aether ocean.  Aether is aether,
it is compressible, condensible, physical.  The only reason we fail to
perceive it is because we are composed of solitons of, aether.  Particles
are not "one thing", while aether is "another thing".  Particles, are
solitons in and composed of, aether.  Spacetime is a structure of standing
wave energy in, and composed of, aether.  Fields are the wave distortion to
spacetime caused by the wave energy emitted from and converging into, the
"particle" solitons.

There is nothing that is not, aether.  Nothing.

>  That way you avoid shock-waves and other relevant losses.

Yes.  The warp bubble ideally wouldn't lose any energy despite it's faster
than c, velocity through the aether ocean.  however, if you generated no
energy inside of the warp bubble, then you would not maintain the
"spacetime" structure of waves inside of the warp bubble and the matter
would begin to essentially, ablate.  ie, the matter would decay via emission
of Cerenkov radiation due to the lack of internal spacetime wave energy.
This decay emits puffs of aether from the solitons, and in turn that leads
to a reforming of the spacetime wave energy.  After all, fusion reactions in
stars are what drive our spacetime wave energy via puffs of aether.

OK, here is another rule:  All exothermic reactions are aether emissive.

>If you convert aether to mass quickly enough, the loss of aether
> at the front of the craft will drag it forward (tractor propulsion)

Again, aether is not lost.

You must conserve Energy, Mass, AND Momentum in all interactions.  

"Energy" is a measure of the motion of a region of aether 1/2 mv^2.
"Mass" is a measure of quantity of aether  m.
"Momentum" is a measure of the local translation of aether, mv

If you think mass was lost in some reaction, read the above rule again.
Then, look to the nature and behavior of the spacetime around the region
where you think mass was lost.  For example, when a new born star first
ignites, you begin for the first time, converting hydrogen into helium in
nuclear reactions.  Physicists would say mass is lost, today.  I would say
that aether was emitted from those nuclei that fused.

Thus, if you believe the physicists, you expect nothing dramatic to manifest
outside of the star.  You expect the star to slowly heat up from the inside
out.  And you expect that the higher in the atmosphere of the star that you
go, the colder the temperature of the gases will be, just like in our
atmosphere when you climb to high altitude, the air temperature drops.  

Unfortunately for physicists, as you climb up through the stellar atmosphere
this only holds true until the density of particles drops low enough.  Then,
suddenly, the temperature shoots up from thousands, to millions of degrees.

In the new born stars, ie T-tauri, jets come blasting out of the natal
hydrogen clouds, such as the Orion nebula.  

The fact is, if you do not conserve mass, ie conserve aether, you fail to
anticipate that fusion reactions bring with them the capability of
distorting spacetime from a completely unsuspected means of transferring
action.  But if you do expect aether to be conserved, then you are suddenly
handed a tool with which to predict exactly where physicists will be
confused by what they observe.  And every time you study any of those
places, you will find that not only are they confused, but they are confused
for the exact reasons you expected them to be confused.

Later, Ross Tessien

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 09:41:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA04760;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:33:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:33:29 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:33:13 -0700
Message-Id: <199806301633.JAA11402 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: More Insults from Jed
Resent-Message-ID: <"CKoqY.0.9A1.KDHcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20193
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>Jim Ostrowski posted the following (edited for brevity) at 08:04 1998.06.30


>>So what Jed seems to be saying is that this research is not at all 
>>for "amateurs" like us here on vortex , and it is best left up to the 
>>"professionals" who have decided to devote their entire careers to it. 
>>
>
>In other words, we need to get government to fund it,
> establish a comittee (of proven scholars and academics) 
>  to oversee the project.  And wait until hell freezes over to see CF.

Well, if you wanted to get amatuer vortexians to produce hot fusion
reactions, what chances do you think they would have?  Zero.  The equipment
that is needed is too expensive, and without it you cannot even acheive what
little has been acheived in that arena.

I think Jed is convinced that individuals in a garage, cannot replicate CF
in it's present form because there are too many details that must be adhered
to, and amateurs don't have the dollars to buy the equipment needed to make
the attempt, and follow the proceedures, and measure the results.  This is a
fair appraisal IMO.  IOW, if producing CF really does require that all of
the procedures be adhered to, then individuals with a few hundred dollars
could not replicate the results.

If, OTOH, there is some as yet undiscovered way to cause cf without all of
that procedure, then there is a chance that individuals could succeed.  No
one can rule out this possibility.

The point being, however, that it is not unreasonable to suggest that
amateurs may not be able to get over the threshold requirements to produce
the effects.  If you take a tiny rubber hammer, the only one you could
afford, and begin tapping on a piece of glass trying to break it, you may
not have a big enough hammer to succeed, even though you are making the
correct motions.  Or, you may be swinging at a glancing blow and not know it
because you are blind folded.

Sad but true, money can buy you more latitude to attempt different technique.

And to close, don't ever forget that if we waited for garage physicists to
produce laser inertial confinement fusion reactions, something that has been
accomplished at LLNL, we would definitely wait until hell froze over because
there is no way a block yard sale could raise enough money to build the thing.

I am not saying that laser ICF research is good bad or otherwise on it's own
merit.  I do think that all research is intrinsically good because we learn
something from all endeavors.  What I am saying, is that it is not
reasonable to think that individuals can conquer all endeavors, they cannot.
Funding is needed for larger, more expensive projects, and so we must work
collectively.  That is what national lab research is.

Slow, inefficient, yes.  But plodding and continuously discoering new things
about nature, yes again.  You need to take the good with the bad and
encourage all avenues of research, vortex being just one.

Ross Tessien






From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 10:11:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA18045;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:06:38 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:06:38 -0700
Message-ID: <008d01bda448$fdc52c00$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: The first cold fusion bomb?
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:02:44 -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: <"5DjGq2.0.oP4.RiHcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20194
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Robert I. Eachus 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Cc: 'Vortex Discussion Group' 
Date: Tuesday, June 30, 1998 10:15 AM
Subject: RE: The first cold fusion bomb?

Robert I. Eachus wrote:


>> He said that hydrogen-oxygen recombination has a greater
>>explosive power than TNT.  I believe him, but I haven't tried to check
that
>>out - can anyone here confirm whether this is true?
>
>   Yes, per pound, H2 + O2 is about ten times as powerful as TNT.

This IS NOT SO, Robert.

The lhv for Hydrogen is 51,593 BTU/pound or
270 BTU/cubic ft. The Natural gas you burn in your home is 970 BTu/fT^3.
Butane is 2,969 BTU/Ft^3 or 19,679 BTU/pound.

The Butane-Propane "Bombs" were dropped and when the gases were dispersed to
the right air-fuel mix, it was ignited. Made a good way to
clear the jungle in "Nam". This WOULD NOT WORK with H2. Being so much
lighter than air it would rise up and disperse too fast. Try it.

The BTUs/lb don't mean much if you don't have an oxidant, TNT is a mix of
toluene and three NO3 oxidizer groups in the molecule , thus about 4500
btu/pound. Don't forget,one BTU (1055 joules)can do 778 ft-lbs of work!

If you don't have any oxygen available it don't matter much how many BTUs/lb
Hydrogen has:

2 H2 (4 lbs) + O2 (32 lbs)---> 2 H20 (36 lbs)

you can put the decimal point any point in front or back of these weights.

Thus 4*51,593/36 = 5,733 Btu/lb for a PURE HYDROGEN-OXYGEN MIX. If mixed
with air the O2
drops to 21% and you get about 1,000 BTU/lb
for the Fuel-oxidizer-air mix.

>(Someone
>can do the math if they really care about the ratio, but that was what we
>used for "rule of thumb" years ago.)

Was that before or after the Hindenburg BURNED
in New Jersey in 1937?  :-) there was NO DETONATION, and the conflagration
was mostly
above the Blimp. The smoke was from O2 burning of the metals-fabrics. Look
up the Pictures.


  Well mixed stoichiometric ratio H2 +
>O2 is also much more brissiant than TNT.

This is true.

>(Hard word not to use here.  It
>means that the explosion wavefront is sharper and/or contains more of the
>total energy.)
>
>   Roughly speaking, a worst case shuttle accident on the pad would be
>about as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb.

I don't think the Challenger Disaster supports that conjecture.

LH2 at 4.4 Lbs/Ft^3 in a 27 ft diameter x 154 ft long external fuel tank,
plus the LOX. You're probably close on that one, Robert.  :-)

Regards,   Frederick
>
>                                        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 Jun 30 10:46:33 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01999;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:41:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:41:46 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:40:39 -0400
From: Soo 
Subject: "Spooky" Sturrock
Sender: Soo 
To: "vortex-L eskimo.com" 
Message-ID: <199806301340_MC2-51C3-E8AF 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 KAA01850
Resent-Message-ID: <"DmY8-1.0.lU.IDIcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20195
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I hear that Peter Sturrock, Prof of Space Science at Stanford reckons lots
of time and money ought to be invested in UFO research.

As head of a recent independent scientific review he believes that there is
"compelling physical evidence" accompanying UFO sightings and that it might
be valuable to evaluate them carefully to "extract information about
phenomena unknown to science".

The challenge, he proudly declares,  is to "do good science on this."

It's a pity our academic institutions aren't willing to focus their
attention (and money)  on more immediate terrestrial concerns.

- Soo

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 10:58:55 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA07007;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:55:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:55:58 -0700
Message-ID: <00c001bda44f$e7d353c0$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Vidicom Media Productions - Documentaries for Prime Time TV (http://www.vidicom
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:52:38 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01BDA41D.9458DB20"
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: <"7IwMc1.0.Oj1.iQIcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20196
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_01BDA41D.9458DB20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hindenburg Disaster Pictures

http://www.vidicom-tv.com/

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BDA41D.9458DB20
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Vidicom Media Productions - Documentaries for Prime Time TV.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Vidicom Media Productions - Documentaries for Prime Time TV.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.vidicom-tv.com/
Modified=60C39CAF4FA4BD011F

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BDA41D.9458DB20--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:13:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA13794;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:10:07 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:10:07 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:06:15 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Ostrowski's comments
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806301408_MC2-51C7-FB2E compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"4Bf2g3.0.LN3.-dIcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20197
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex; Jim Ostrowski >INTERNET:jimostr victor1.mscomm.com

Jim Ostrowski writes:

     I notice how the name of this thread suddenly changed from "expertise is
     essential" to "Ostrowski's comments" , which tends to shift the focus of
     the discussion from the original point in question ,to being about me
     personally . This is a "dodge" or a "bait and switch" which more or less
     summarizes the remainder of Jed's comments . . .

Nope, nothing like that. It was purely administrative. I changed the header to
make it easier to file and retrieve the messages in my internal, home-brew
system (which is not Eurdora). Jim is reading too much into trivial actions.


     The original question we were trying to settle was whether or not the
     failure to replicate the o/u phenomena . . . It appears to me that a
     responsible , diligent and systematic attempt was made by Scott who
     seems to have at his disposal at least a very good lab and equipment for
     the requirements of the basic idea , when evaluated by the standards of
     private researchers like myself who have labs in their homes or garages.

Well, perhaps the equipment is good by the standards of the home or garage,
but it is nowhere near as good as the stuff at places like SRI, Los Alamos or
Mitsubishi, or Ed Storms' home workshop. Scott as not made any diligent or
systematic attempt to measure basic electrochemical and materials parameters
described in the literature. He has tried these techniques. He visited Ed
Storms and discussed them. I think he told me he decided they would be too
difficult. I am sure I could not master them!


     So what Jed seems to be saying is that this research is not at all for
     "amateurs" like us here on vortex , and it is best left up to the
     "professionals" who have decided to devote their entire careers to it.

Jed did not decide that; God did. Amateurs cannot do CF at home for the same
reason they cannot perform open heart surgery or make synthetic diamonds. As
it happens, I know a retired professor who *does* make synthetic diamonds in
his basement, but he was doing similar work at the university for decades, and
he has a room full of old but top quality equipment. Ed Storms is also a
retired professional and has superb equipment in his workshop, which cost a
great deal of money. I do not know any retired profs who do open heart surgery
at home . . .

That has been the case so far, anyway. You never know what might happen
though. An amateur might find some combination of materials and techniques
that *do* work at home. Or a retired professional like Case, working with
crude equipment, might discover sophisticated manufactured materials which
work.


     But Jed does not appear to be one of these people , nor is he interested
     in performing any experiments himself .

That's not quite right. Ostrowski has not read the literature, so he does not
realize that I have performed experiments and collaborated with various people
by doing data processing and translation, including some of the professionals.
I am at a disadvantage when it comes to performing physical hands-on work,
because I suffer from a mild disability which prevents me from manipulating
small objects. I cannot thread a needle or position an OCV luggin capillary.
I'm fine with an ax, but CF experiments do not generally call for brute force.


     What then does he [Jed] contribute that is "on topic"  here?

What does Ostrowski contribute? What *can* he contribute? He refuses to read
the literature. He did not even realize that the SRI explosion was chemical.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:21:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA27286;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:06:27 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: Cost of CF equipment
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806301408_MC2-51C7-FB30 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"UQfCD1.0.Bg6.MkIcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20198
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

Ross Tessien writes:

     Well, if you wanted to get amatuer vortexians to produce hot fusion
     reactions, what chances do you think they would have?  Zero.  The
     equipment that is needed is too expensive, and without it you cannot
     even achieve what little has been achieved in that arena.

     I think Jed is convinced that individuals in a garage, cannot replicate
     CF in it's present form because there are too many details that must be
     adhered to, and amateurs don't have the dollars to buy the equipment
     needed to make the attempt, and follow the procedures, and measure the
     results.  This is a fair appraisal IMO.

Let me rush to say this is not *my* appraisal. This is what people like
Fleischmann, McKubre, Storms and Miles have been saying since March 1989.
After looking over their shoulders, I agree. I see what they mean. Naturally,
if a gifted scientist who is not an electrochemist buckles down and works hard
for a couple of years, she will learn many of the techniques and lose her
amateur status. McKubre recommends you start with a good textbook.

The cost of the equipment is discouraging. Some extremely dedicated scientists
have equipped their labs out of their pockets and by stealing and scrounging
unused or broken equipment. Mizuno and his grad students have done a fabulous
job at this. These people have spent $50,000 to $150,000, which is a hell of a
burden on a middle class professor. Ed Storms had good equipment, but he
discouraged by the limitations it imposes on him. He tells me he is working
with a shovel and the job calls for a bulldozer. The technical details are
over my head, but I gather the researchers dream of having things like mass
spectrometers with high resolution which work automatically. A few researchers
have mass spec units but the machines are old, slow, and manually operated.
Mizuno's salvaged mass spec unit runs off of 8 inch diskettes with creaky
software circa 1975. (However, as one who was cranking out software back then,
I'll bet it is flexible and more reliable than a Windows 95 version would be.)


     If, OTOH, there is some as yet undiscovered way to cause cf without all
     of that procedure, then there is a chance that individuals could
     succeed.  No one can rule out this possibility.

No indeed. I think our best hope is to find some sophisticated industrial
material that has the complexity built-in, along the lines Case is searching.
This is like buying a computer chip or laser pen. You bring home the
sophistication sealed in a box.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:29:43 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA17792;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:24:51 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:24:51 -0700
Message-ID: <00d801bda453$f1e37b20$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject: Texas City disaster changed shipping (http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/pa
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:21:26 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDA421.9AD0E7A0"
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: <"wSn_-3.0.uL4.orIcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20199
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_000F_01BDA421.9AD0E7A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ammonium Nitrate vs H2 + O2, Robert

http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/page1/97/04/14/explosives.2-0.html

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDA421.9AD0E7A0
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="Texas City disaster changed shipping.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="Texas City disaster changed shipping.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=3Dhttp://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/page1/97/04/14/explosives.2-=
0.html
Modified=3DA08040B053A4BD01C5

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01BDA421.9AD0E7A0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:40:07 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22845;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:36:03 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:36:03 -0700
Message-ID: <00f201bda455$79b32180$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject:  April 17 (http://www.thehistorynet.com/picture/0417.htm)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:30:49 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01BDA422.EA37A300"
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: <"BZ57V1.0.qa5.H0Jcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20201
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_0019_01BDA422.EA37A300
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://www.thehistorynet.com/picture/0417.htm

------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BDA422.EA37A300
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name=" April 17.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=" April 17.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.thehistorynet.com/picture/0417.htm
Modified=800A112955A4BD017B

------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BDA422.EA37A300--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:41:06 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA22730;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:35:54 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:35:54 -0700
Message-ID: <00f301bda455$7ab80e60$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Subject:  50 Years Later, Texas City Still Remembers (http://130.80.29.3/content/chronic
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:32:04 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0022_01BDA423.1671A880"
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: <"gLhpj1.0.rY5.90Jcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20200
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_0022_01BDA423.1671A880
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



http://130.80.29.3/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/explosive.html

------=_NextPart_000_0022_01BDA423.1671A880
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name=" 50 Years Later, Texas City Still Remembers.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=" 50 Years Later, Texas City Still Remembers.url"

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://130.80.29.3/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/explosive.html
Modified=400C365655A4BD018F

------=_NextPart_000_0022_01BDA423.1671A880--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:53:43 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA01298;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35994FD9.7771 bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:51:37 -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: Terry Blanton's Slightly Off-Topic Stuff ... Signal Mirror Effect
References: <002401bda410$a5584760$208f85ce default>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"50tDv.0.CK.3EJcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20203
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frederick J Sparber wrote:



> Now you see it, now you don't?  At night if it has it's lights on, a
> different story.

I thought the lights were the natural result of the open-ended
transmission line AG units.

BTW, has anyone ever built one of your 3.15 MHz hula-hoops to test the
idea?

Terry


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 11:54:23 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA01287;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:43:16 -0700
Message-Id: <199806301843.LAA27618 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: Cost of CF equipment
Resent-Message-ID: <"RwY1t3.0.qJ.1EJcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20202
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>To: Vortex
>
>Ross Tessien writes:

>     If, OTOH, there is some as yet undiscovered way to cause cf without all
>     of that procedure, then there is a chance that individuals could
>     succeed.  No one can rule out this possibility.
>
>No indeed. I think our best hope is to find some sophisticated industrial
>material that has the complexity built-in, along the lines Case is searching.
>This is like buying a computer chip or laser pen. You bring home the
>sophistication sealed in a box.
>
>- Jed

Personally, I don't have this hope.  I think that the pioneers are going to
be faced with figuring out the details themselves.  Once this is done, then
mass production techniques can be applied to manufacturing the components
needed to drive the devices.  I have ideas as to how to proceed, but funding
the project will cost $250k.  So that is not something someone in a their
own garage is going to put together.  

Jed, I would say one thing, though.  It would be a help if you didn't change
the thread names, and if your email program doesn't add, "Re:" then you
should add it yourself and post it with the original title.  

The reason is, many of us are tired of the babble going on about everything
except physics, and so don't read most of the posts coming in from vortex.
I probably only read 10 percent of the emails that come in and just dump the
rest.  I refuse to get into the political debates over the correctness of
this or that issue, as vortex is not the place for those debates unless they
deal directly with energy or physical political stuff.

It is lucky that I even read this article to find it was a response to my
previous post.  When the thread changes name and comes out without an Re
affixed to it it is supposed to be a new article on a different topic.  I
keep an eye out for articles I have commented on to respond to follow up
questions.  But when the title changes, I cannot know that you have posted a
follow up to my post.  Hence, any questions that you might have posted would
have gone un answered.

Ross Tessien





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 12:16:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA05023;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:05:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
cc: John Schnurer 
Subject: Off Topic Circuits for Biological signals 
In-Reply-To: <19980629235752.5699.rocketmail send1a.yahoomail.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"pj_R_2.0.DE1.5aJcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20204
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Dear Vo and Anton,

	Following is a BRIEF discussion of the topics below.  As a 
preliminary, some issues should be notes;

	1] Most Biological Signal Acquisition [BSA] and subsequent 
processing is poorly understood.  The human system and nearly every 
biological system is wonderous, non linear and not cooperative in the 
'straight line fits neatly in a box'.... this makes to work fun, too!
	2] Many many systems wind up connection to wall power or line 
operated equipment.  This is DANGEROUS and potentially LETHAL.  Make NO 
mistake.  Galvanic isolation is VERY important and is, more often than 
not, poorly implemented, poorly understood and is, to a greater or lesser
degree, not effective.  This can and will hurt or kill you.
	3] Most of the mathmatical models for the biological systems are 
not useful over a typical organism's actual operation.  A visual model, 
for example, in the human, is possibly valid at one light level but will 
not be for another.... and this presumes ALL else is equal.  Equality 
over time and between humans is absurd...  there is no such thing.

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, Anton Rager wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> Off topic -- but does anyone have a reference for the following types
> of circuits?
> 
> 1 - Lie Detector/Sensitive Galvanometer circuits

	Lie detectors come is several types.  A term often used is "GSR", 
and it means Galvanic Skin Resistance... to some, and Galvanic Skin 
Response, to others.  The GSR in either case will depend on many factors 
including, but not limited to:
	a] electrode surface area
	b] placement
	c] possible polarization and self polarization of electrodes
	d] impedance of circuit
	e] if resistance is measured, then a whole new host of variables 
obtain including but not limited to magnitude of sensing current,  is the 
sensing currect DC, or, if AC, at what frequency,
	NOTE:  The source... the human .. is non linear.

	Lie detectors are also based on multiple biological effects 
including but not limited to GSR, respiration, ECG, muscle motion, eye 
blink, blood pressure.  These deveices or systems are loosely called 
"polygraphs", meaning they measure many things.

	Lie detectors have been based on microtremor or 'voice stress' 
ananlysis. 

	Lie detectors have been based on the Visually Evoked Cortical 
Response. 

	The "source", the human, is non linear and NONE of these methods, 
alone or together truly "detect lies".

 2 - Homemade EEG and electrodes [brainwave monitoring]

	This is a wide field and a non trivial effort.  True, correct and 
effective galvanic isolation of such systems for safety's sake cannot be 
stressed enough.   As little as 10 to 15 microamperes from a moderately 
well connected electrode system can be lethal... and no second chance.

	Much "monitoring" involves analysis, this, in turn, often is 
performed by computers which may or may not be connected to 115 VAC, 60 
cps  [US] .... a fault can be lethal.  Even a battery operated 'lap top' 
has internal levels from 20 to 300 volts, which are easily lethal.

	Effective EEG work requires low noise circuits in the 0.1 to 10 
cps range.  The EEG extends beyond this, but this is a good starting 
specification for the input.   The Stimulated, Steady State Visually 
Evoked Response, or SSVER, can often exhibit a useful 'swing' from 1 
uVolt to 4 uVolt.  A 1 to 2 uVolt noise floor in the 0.1 to 10 cps range
can muddy up over 1/2 your signal.

	Does this mean it cannot be done?  No.  It can be done, but if 
you want real signals you have to pay attention and do it right.  If you 
want to take photographs you can buy a fixed lens dispocable camera, or 
you can use a 4 by 5 inch view camera ... or anywhere in between.  Poor 
instrumentation will yield poor results... just about EVERY time.
	Doing it right does NOT mean paying a lot of money ... it means 
doing it right.

> 3 - Biofeedback circuits

	The term and field of "biofeedback" is probably one of the top 
ten of mis understood, mis applied and generally contaminated areas of 
research.  The process starts with acquisition of the signal.  Then the 
signal is processed, then the resultant is displayed to the subject.  I 
will describe a simple example.

	EMG is Electro Myo Gram.  These are signals from the muscles, 
acquired as an electrical signal.  One use of EMG biofeedback is to allow 
a paralysed person to sense muscle action for which they have lost the 
internal sense.  The object is to allow the subject to know when they are 
actuating a muscle. 
	A typical medical system amplifies the EMG... with no regard to 
its wide dynamic range as a first step.  Then the signal is converted to 
a DC, or direct current, that is SUPPOSED to be equivalent to the muscle 
activity.  This signal is then conveyed to a meter or sound, often as a 
tone.  
	The action of a muscle is the result of many many muscle fibers 
contracting.  The conversion to DC causes averaging, it has to by 
nature of the task.  Any small, brief action, possibly the only clue or 
precursor of the re learning of muscle control, is almost always lost.

	Now let us get back to the display of information to subject.  If 
it is displayed as a sound, then we have two issues at least ... one, 
there is a delay ... and two, the auditory system is non linear...
	How will the subject "know the truth"?   With the highest end 
medical systems, they cannot.

> 4 - Any combination of the above

	If Anton or any Vos want to do REAL work, let me know and we can 
target one or more of the above.  There are also many many other types of 
biological signal acquisition.  


			JHS





> 
> Sorry to bother,
> 
> 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 Jun 30 12:22:22 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA09461;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:15:48 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:15:48 -0700
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:17:23 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: 50 Years Later, Texas City Still Remembers (http://130.80.29.3/content/chronic
Resent-Message-ID: <"VX2n13.0.FJ2.XbJcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20205
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 12:32 PM 6/30/98, Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>http://130.80.29.3/content/chronicle/metropolitan/txcity/explosive.html
>
>Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
>        name=" 50 Years Later, Texas City Still Remembers.url"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>        filename=" 50 Years Later, Texas City Still Remembers.url"
>
>Attachment converted: Hard Disk: 50 Years Later, Texas City Sti
>(????/----) (0000D774)

Fred,

Is there anything you can do to stop sending those attachments?  Are they
an artifact of some procedure or software you are using?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 12:46:12 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA22273;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:42:20 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 12:42:20 -0700
Message-ID: <3599380E.8A09D84E darknet.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:10:06 -0400
From: Steve 
Organization: DarkNet Online/Digital Fusion
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: New Innovations - Biochips
References: <3598E309.6E8040B7 css.mot.com> <3599497E.BFF178F4@ihug.co.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"QP3OU3.0.DR5.P-Jcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20206
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

John Berry wrote:

> Seen GATTACA?
> Where getting too close to, It will happen :-(

I haven't seen Gattaca, but I wanted to.. a lot of my friends disagree with me, but
I think the idea of a genetically engineered society would be great! No more disease!

My family, on both sides, has a history of heart disease and other medical problems,
and there is no doubt that I will end up with something.. I was born with severe
heart problems, so I would LOVE to live in a society where no one had these problems.

I cannot understand the problem with genetic engineering and cloning.. but maybe I'm
just weird! hehe..

anyway, back on topic, I think these biochips sound great.. and could do incredible
things for people, such as cancer tests etc..

ttyl
-Steve
--
     darklord darknet.net | UIN: 5113616
   DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net
Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 13:10:43 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA02794;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:06:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:06:55 -0700
Message-ID: <012001bda45a$d5092480$208f85ce default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: , 
Cc: "George" 
Subject: Re: Terry Blanton's Slightly Off-Topic Stuff ... Signal Mirror Effect
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:11:00 -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: <"r-i_b1.0.Xh.TLKcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20207
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Blanton 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com 
Date: Tuesday, June 30, 1998 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: Terry Blanton's Slightly Off-Topic Stuff ... Signal Mirror
Effect

Terry Blanton wrote:


>Frederick J Sparber wrote:
>
>
>
>> Now you see it, now you don't?  At night if it has it's lights on, a
>> different story.
>
>I thought the lights were the natural result of the open-ended
>transmission line AG units.

They ARE NOT open-ended-Terry. If you want the
(pi)Megahertz current pulses to flow, you MUST
have a LOAD RESISTANCE terminating the current loops, and at the
ampere-meters required, the load resistors should glow red to white hot
depending on the pulse amplitude and width used for AG maneuvering.
>
>BTW, has anyone ever built one of your 3.15 MHz hula-hoops to test the
>idea?

Hula-hoops,LOL! Nobody is talking about it if they are.  :-)

Regards,    Frederick
>
>Terry
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 13:25:10 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA09603;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:21:50 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:21:50 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199806301340_MC2-51C3-E8AF compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:20:39 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: "Spooky" Sturrock
Resent-Message-ID: <"WYNui1.0.NL2.SZKcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20208
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Soo -

   >  It's a pity our academic institutions aren't
   >  willing to focus their attention (and money)
   >  on more immediate terrestrial concerns.

Who says UFOs aren't terrestrial, or at least that the concern about them
isn't?

There's a movie out in the US called "The Truman Show", about a fellow
who's been on TV all his life in a gigantic domed stage and doesn't know
it. One day a stage light comes whistling down out of the sky and crashes
onto the street. A tape label on it says "Sirius-A" or something starry
like that. It goes to Truman's actual life situation, you see. It was
quickly hustled away and a story was issued about parts falling off an
airliner or something.

Isn't science about inventigating our situation here? Or would you rather
they just sweep away the evidence and leave us alone to enjoy our simpler
pleasures?

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 14:16:16 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA29485;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:11:38 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:11:38 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:07:41 -0400
From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
Subject: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
Sender: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256 compuserve.com>
To: Blind.Copy.Receiver compuserve.com
Message-ID: <199806301711_MC2-51C8-446 compuserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"U1xed3.0.aC7.9ILcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20209
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

I hope I am not spilling the beans on the next issue of the magazine, but too
bad if I am . . .

There have been some tentative, successful replications of the experiment
reported by Ohmori and Mizuno at ICCF7. The effect they saw has been in the
literature for some time. Hal Fox brought an paper about this to our
attention: Herbert H. Kellogg, "Anode Effect in Aqueous Electrolysis," Journal
of the Electrochemical Society, April 1950.

I saw a video of an Ohmori replication. It looks like the behavior described
in this paper. The effect was first described in 1916 and again in 1923.
Kellogg measured the water temperature, but Ohmori is probably the first to
measure enthalpy. If there is an energy anomaly, the earlier researchers would
not have seen it. Kellogg did observe very high electrode temperatures: "By
use of a nickel wire, 0.81 mm diameter, as an anode, the author was able to
obtain such a high electrode temperature the nickel melted (mp = 1452 C)" (p.
137).

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 14:35:37 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA05859;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:30:55 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:30:55 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:29:46 -0400
From: Soo 
Subject: Re: "Spooky" Sturrock
Sender: Soo 
To: "INTERNET:vortex-l eskimo.com" 
Message-ID: <199806301730_MC2-51C9-19EC 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 OAA05835
Resent-Message-ID: <"_lhVK3.0.QR1.EaLcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20210
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Not I, Mr Monteverde dearest.....bit of inference on your part there, I
think.

< or at least that the concern about them isn't?>

If you have proof of concern elsewhere in the galaxy, publish at once!!!



Movie sounds a bit passe.........hope the popcorn was good.



Exactly.  My point (which was clearly lost) was that these people at
Stanford (or wherever, I'm just citing them as they were in the article I
saw) are most likely the same people who would condemn outright, say,
research into new energy devices, ways of confirming and/or tapping vacuum
energy, cold fusion....self-inflating swimwear for surfers with poor
balance etc.,  but appear to be wholeheartedly embracing a field which is
much less reproducible under lab. conditions......under any conditions.

That they are prepared to invest in hearsay and intricately examine
second-hand accounts from distressed subjects as a priority is........well,
as insight-provoking as living in a dome and regularly getting hit by bits
dropping off fictional aircraft actually.



No.  I don't approve of suppression at all, in any form.  I just have
different priorities, which doesn't mean I dismiss all others out of hand. 
There is potentially room for the investigation of everything........I just
wish they'd hurry up and take some of the room-dividers down.

- Soo

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 15:17:57 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA21893;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:15:02 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:15:02 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 16:13:33 -0600 (MDT)
From: Steve Ekwall 
X-Sender: ekwall2 november
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: amateur astronomers  FYI $) 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"UQxrc1.0.-L5.bDMcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20211
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi all, 

  FYI, todays paper had this little blurb in the science section:

Quote:
ASTRONOMY
  Award for amateur star-gazers

  CAMBRIDGE, Mass.-- A new annual award will honor amateur 
astronomers who discover new comets.  The Edgar Wilson Award, 
named for a late Kentucky businessman with a love for the  
heavens, will provide as much as $20,000.00 annually to be 
distributed amoung eligible discoverers.
   Every amateur discoverer of a comet whose name is officially 
assigned to that comet by the International Astronomical Union 
will qualify for a portion of the total prize.
   The official counting for this year's award began June 10; 
the first award will be announced on or about July 1, 1999.

End Quote

Best of luck!
-=se=-
ekwall2 diac.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 15:58:29 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA06086;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980630184726.007d43b0 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:47:26 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
In-Reply-To: <199806301711_MC2-51C8-446 compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"dYIsf3.0.zU1.OpMcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20212
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


At 05:07 PM 6/30/98 -0400, Jed wrote:
>To: Vortex
>
>I hope I am not spilling the beans on the next issue of the magazine, but too
>bad if I am . . .
>
>There have been some tentative, successful replications of the experiment
>reported by Ohmori and Mizuno at ICCF7. The effect they saw has been in the
>literature for some time. Hal Fox brought an paper about this to our
>attention: Herbert H. Kellogg, "Anode Effect in Aqueous Electrolysis,"
Journal
>of the Electrochemical Society, April 1950.
>

   I discussed this interesting, but not quite
very relevant, paper years ago on spf, and perhaps in one
of the early issues of the Cold Fusion Times.

  The effect occurs on the ANODE.

  Ohmori's process (180 watts, tungsten cathode, carbon anode,
Na2S04 and K2CO3 0.5M)
takes place at the cathode with purported isotopic
changes at that location.
   Is that not true?

  Please explain how the en bloc loss of gas at the anode
is either overunity.
 Please explain how the en bloc loss of gas at the anode
is what Dr. Ohmori reports at the other electrode.

   Mitchell Swartz


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 17:42:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA00139;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:39:25 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:39:25 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:39:19 -0700
Message-Id: <199807010039.RAA06545 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="iso-8859-1"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: tessien oro.net (Ross Tessien)
Subject: SOHONEWS 1998-06-30: Efforts to recover SOHO continue
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA00107
Resent-Message-ID: <"L9-5C2.0.32.zKOcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20213
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>X-Authentication-Warning: esa.nascom.nasa.gov: majordom set sender to
owner-sohonews using -f
>Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 16:02:02 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Luis Sanchez Duarte 
>Subject: SOHONEWS 1998-06-30: Efforts to recover SOHO continue
>To: sohonews esa.nascom.nasa.gov
>Content-MD5: 3zKDM2R74tJUUguKQvBH0w==
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by esa.nascom.nasa.gov
id QAA17738
>Sender: owner-sohonews esa.nascom.nasa.gov
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: sohonews esa.nascom.nasa.gov
>X-UIDL: 9cd7f84c6c6c242e6b2a15e195970467
>
>Don Savage
>Headquarters, Washington, DC                        June 30, 1998
>(Phone:  202/358-1727)
>
>Bill Steigerwald
>Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD
>(Phone:  301/286-5017)
>
>Franco Bonacina
>European Space Agency Headquarters, Paris, France
>(Phone:  33-1-5369-7713)
>
>RELEASE:  98-118
>
>EFFORTS TO RECOVER SOHO SPACECRAFT CONTINUE 
>AS INQUIRY BOARD CO-CHAIRS NAMED
>
>       Engineers are continuing efforts to reestablish contact 
>with the NASA/European Space Agency (ESA) Solar and Heliospheric 
>Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft using NASA's Deep Space Network 
>(DSN).  Contact with SOHO was lost on June 24 during maintenance 
>operations.
>
>       A team of experts from ESA and Matra Marconi Space, prime 
>contractor for the SOHO spacecraft, gathered at NASA's Goddard 
>Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, to assist the NASA Flight 
>Operations Team in assessing the situation and analyzing the 
>spacecraft status should contact be reestablished.
>
>       Engineers are concentrating on gaining a full understanding 
>of the events which led to the loss of signal, information which 
>might help them devise procedures which may recover contact with 
>SOHO.  Commands are being sent to SOHO about once per minute 
>through the DSNŐs 34-meter antennas instructing the spacecraft to 
>activate its transmitters.  
>
>       Based on the last telemetry data received from SOHO, 
>engineers said it appears most likely that the spacecraft is 
>slowly spinning in such a way that its solar arrays, which 
>generate power, either do not face the Sun at all or do not 
>receive adequate sunlight to generate power.  However, based on 
>the last data received, it appears that SOHO's solar panels may be 
>exposed to an increasing amount of sunlight each day as it orbits 
>the Sun.  If this assumption is correct, within a few weeks enough 
>sunlight might be hitting the solar panels to generate power to 
>charge its batteries.  
>
>       The incident will be the subject of a joint ESA/NASA 
>inquiry board co-chaired by Prof. Massimo Trella, ESA Inspector 
>General, and Dr. Michael Greenfield, Deputy Associate 
>Administrator for the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, NASA 
>Headquarters, Washington, DC.  The other members of the board will 
>be selected from ESA and NASA as well as from the scientific 
>community.  The board is expected to convene later this week at 
>NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD.
>
>       More information, images and status reports from SOHO can 
>be found on the Internet at:
>
>            http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/
>
>                          - end -
>
>
>_____________________________________________________________________________
>To subscribe to SOHONEWS send mail to Majordomo sohomail.nascom.nasa.gov with
>an empty 'Subject:' line and 'subscribe sohonews' as the body of the message.
>To send information to be distributed in SOHONEWS, please, send e-mail to
>editor sohomail.nascom.nasa.gov
>_____________________________________________________________________________
>Luis Sanchez Duarte
>SOHO Science Data Coordinator
>European Space Agency
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 18:02:17 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA00600;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <003101bda489$b1bbed80$abb4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "Lynda" 
Subject: ALMANAC OF DISASTERS (http://disasterium.com/)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:45:36 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0032_01BDA457.459BF280"
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: <"IHuni3.0.89.WbOcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20214
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_0032_01BDA457.459BF280
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



...Fires...............................................Earthquakes.......=
..................................Transportation=20


Jan 1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30 31  =20
             Feb  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29=20
             Mar  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30 30   =20
            =20
            Apr  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30    =20
             May  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30 31   =20
             Jun  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30    =20
            =20
            Jul  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30    =20
             Aug  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30 31   =20
             Sep  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30   =20
            =20
            Oct  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30 31  =20
             Nov 1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30    =20
             Dec  1 2 3 4 5 6=20
                        7 8 9 10 11 12 13=20
                        14 15 16 17 18 19 20=20
                        21 22 23 24 25 26 27=20
                        28 29 30 31   =20
            =20
   =20
mail to : Disasterium
cati Laporte on WWW






------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BDA457.459BF280
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable





ALMANAC OF DISASTERS




 




...Fires...............................................Earthquakes.........................................Transportation=20






    
    

        
            

                
                

                    Jan
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    31
                    
                    

        
            

                
                

                    Feb 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29

        

            

                
                

                    Mar 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    30
                    
                    
                    

    

        
            

                
                

                    Apr 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    
                    
                    
                    

        
            

                
                

                    May 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    31
                    
                    
                    

        
            

                
                

                    Jun 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    
                    
                    
                    

    

        
            

                
                

                    Jul 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    
                    
                    
                    

        
            

                
                

                    Aug 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    31
                    
                    
                    

        
            

                
                

                    Sep 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    
                    
                    

    

        
            

                
                

                    Oct 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    31
                    
                    

        
            

                
                

                    Nov
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    
                    
                    
                    

        
            
                    =


                
                

                    Dec 
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6

                

                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    12
                    13

                

                    14
                    15
                    16
                    17
                    18
                    19
                    20

                

                    21
                    22
                    23
                    24
                    25
                    26
                    27

                

                    28
                    29
                    30
                    31
                    
                    


mail to : Disasterium

cati Laporte on WWW







------=_NextPart_000_0032_01BDA457.459BF280--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 18:22:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA08360;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <35997F96.53F7 earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:15:18 -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: Shanahan: ultra shallow depth profiling and other stuff 6.30.98
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"ej2I11.0.W22.HxOcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20215
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Received: from gateway1.srs.gov (gateway1.srs.gov [192.33.240.10])
	by slovakia.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA07467
	for ; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 06:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: kirk.shanahan srs.gov
Received: by gateway1.srs.gov id AA01970
  (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for rmforall earthlink.net);
  Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:09:43 -0400
Message-Id: <199806301309.AA01970 gateway1.srs.gov>
Received: by gateway1.srs.gov (Internal Mail Agent-2);
  Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:09:43 -0400
Received: by gateway1.srs.gov (Internal Mail Agent-1);
  Tue, 30 Jun 1998 09:09:43 -0400
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: ultra shallow depth profiling and other stuff
To: rmforall earthlink.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: phrrv titanic.csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: Re: ultra shallow depth profiling
To: surface surf.ssw.uwo.ca
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain


     Hi Rich,
     
     I have received the McKubre report and the copies.  Thanks for getting 
     it back to me.
     
     I have attached a post from the surface science mailing list.  It 
     deals with SIMS surface profiling.  Of interest was the remark about 
     non-normal incidence ion beams.  On a curved surface, almost the 
     entire surface is non-normal, so I expect some roughening and 
     subsequent quantification problems...  There's a pointer to a web page 
     for followup.
     
     Kirk
     
     BTW, I had lost some pages from the A&Z paper somehow in all the 
     shuffling I had been doing, but we finally got an officail copy.  Had 
     to FAX the Japanese National Diet Library to get it!


______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Re: ultra shallow depth profiling
Author:  phrrv titanic.csv.warwick.ac.uk at Mailhub
Date:    6/11/98 11:14 AM


Hello,
     
I have only just started reading this list and noticed that there was 
a question about ultra shallow depth profiling using SIMS.
     
The answer is that there IS a market for this type of analysis, and 
we provide a specialist service doing it!  There has been alot of 
discussion about which instrument/conditions work for this type of 
analysis but we have found the use of quadrupole instruments (with a 
normally incident ion beam) to  be the most sympathetic to the 
technique.  Non-normal incidence (in magnetic sector and some quad 
instruments) generates a severe surface roughening almost 
immediately.  With an oxygen flood this is reduced but some loss
of depth resolution or change in near surface sputter rate is still observed. 
At normal incidence everything is much more well behaved.  The TOF
data that I have seen show quite poor sensitivity and have a relatively 
large amount of noise.
     
We routinely use primary ion beams down to 150 eV and occaisionally to 
100 eV.  The highest routine energy we use is now 1 keV (oxygen) with 
a current of around 500 nA.  This gives us a profiling rate that is 
very comparable with higher energy equipment.
     
The sub-keV energy conditions permit quantification from less than 
1 nm from the sample surface and we can separate 1 nm spaced layers
up to 1 micron into the material.  The type of samples this technique 
is useful for are low energy implants (both dosimetry and shape), fine 
layered structures (layer spearation and shape) and
near interface measurement.  It is also used for diffusion studies 
where the expected movement is on the nm scale.  Most of our 
applications are semiconductor research based, with a few from 
further in production.
     
I hope that this answers some of the general questions, I could talk all 
day on the subject, but if anyone has any specific questions I would be 
willing to answer them.
     
Please feel free to visit our website at 
http://www.warwick.ac.uk/asp
     
regards,
     
Dr Graham Cooke
Applied SIMS Profiling


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 19:08:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA24807;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:05:58 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:05:58 -0700
Message-Id: <199807010203.WAA15013 mercury.mv.net>
Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 22:09:45 -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 TAA24781
Resent-Message-ID: <"Y3PuM2.0.U36.5cPcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20216
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vortexians:

Jed wrote:
>I hope I am not spilling the beans on the next issue of the magazine, but too
>bad if I am . . 

That's OK Jed, there will be much information, indeed, on this unusual phenomenon in Issue #20 of Infinite Energy, which is going to the printer soon and will be out around July 22nd.
>
>There have been some tentative, successful replications of the experiment
>reported by Ohmori and Mizuno at ICCF7. The effect they saw has been in the
>literature for some time. Hal Fox brought an paper about this to our
>attention: Herbert H. Kellogg, "Anode Effect in Aqueous Electrolysis," 
>Journal
>of the Electrochemical Society, April 1950.

This is correct.

Here is an introduction in the form of a recipe I sent a few others, including Prof. John Dash recently. They will both try the experiment to see if they confirm the excess energy that others have seen:


FROM:

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

*********************************
A word of WARNING right up front: This is potentially VERY DANGEROUS work and must not be done without maximum, safety precautions and supervision by those thoroughly versed in laboratory safety!  It involves high-temperatures, high-voltages, explosive mi
xtures of oxygen and hydrogen, caustic solutions, and steam generation that if improperly contained could cause a deadly explosion. These are just the beginning hazards. This is unknown territory.  Drs. Ohmori and Mizuno measured the transmutation of elem
ents in this experiment. Thus, until further notice ‹ and despite your possible skepticism about their claim of transmutation ‹ this work must be considered, by definition, nuclear experimentation.  With that said, we encourage every thoughtful group who 
can do this experiment safely to attempt it. Infinite Energy and Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. take no responsibility for the known or unknown radiation or other hazards that are associated this experiment.

*********************************

Dear Colleagues:

After much work we now have what appears to be a marvelous do-it-yourself "cold fusion" experiment. Any reasonably equipped chem/physics lab can see the effect within days to a week -- if they get their act together. The experiment has the following quali
ties:

1. It is visually and audibly spectacular -- brilliant glowing, pink, purple, lavender with white flashes on an underwater tungsten (W) electrode ( e.g. 2 mm x 5 mm W foil or 1 cm x 1.6 mm diameter tungsten welding rod). A plasma-like underwater discharge
 on the electrode that often manages to disintegrate or melt tungsten underwater with only about 50 to 80 watts of power over a short period. (Tungsten's melting point is 3680 K or thereabouts.) The sound of the underwater "explosions" on the cathode -- b
rilliant white flashes on the purple background plasma -- is very impressive.

2. It is *totally reproducible*  -- at will -- with no loading time as in the Pd/heavy water experiments

3. Calorimetry is simple to do because there is so much steam energy evolved from the reaction that by simply tallying the amount of water vaporized as steam, one gets over-unity every time (so far). Three groups have already gotten *preliminary* over-uni
ty results: 1. Ohmori and Mizuno in Japan, who introduced the phenomenon at ICCF-7 (O/U estimated at 2.6/1); 2. Gene Mallove and FAA engineer Ed Wall here in Bow, NH during the past ten days -- work continuing -- (CONSERVATIVELY 1.4/1); 3. Engineer Mark H
ugo of Northern States Power in Minnesota (but his affiliation has nothing to do with his home experiment) --  (CONSERVATIVELY 1.5/1), but owrk still continuing to check for errors. Chemist John Thompson in the Bahamas, who attended ICCF-7, was the first 
person outside of Japan to reproduce the effect and will do calorimetry on it soon. This will be in  IE #20 out on July 22.

4. No one has patents or may be able to get them since the effect was noticed in other forms (1916!) and reported extensively in the Journal of the Electrochemical Society, April, 1950, p.133 in an article titled ("The Anode Effect in Aqueous Electrolysis
," by Herbert Kellogg of the School of Mines, Columbia University. New York -- Hal Fox found this marvelous article, since it relates to some of the work his Trenergy Company is doing weith charge clustgers and radioactivity reduction. This may, indeed, b
e  related to the underwater  electrolysis ability to remediate nuclear waste. But -- OF COURSE! -- NO *calorimetry* was done in 1950. No one had any idea that such simple systems could be O/U. The systems were studied for other reasons.  Further: the pre
sent tungsten effect is seen mainly on the cathode, but it can make the Pt anode incandescent too at lower water temperature (say 50 C) -- we normally work over 80 C. It is very mysterious -- was so to Kellogg in 1950 and remains so.

5. Ohmori and Mizuno found major evidence for transmutation of elements and volcanic ejection of metals from the tungsten surface -- these SEM photos were reproduced in their article. They find Hg, Os, Kr, Zn, Cu, Ni, Fe, Cr, Si, and Mg -- with anomalous 
isotopic content. Just as I said, in IE #15/16, this subject is more properly called łElectro-Alchemy"

6. WARNING: Ohomori and Mizuno experienced significant apparent electromagnetic effects on their instruments. They were unsure whether some of the effect on their neutron counter were evidence of neutrons -- I doubt the latter, as did Srinivasan of BARC a
t ICCF7. I have kept a Geiger counter on during our experiments -- absolutely no sign of major ionizing radiation, but of course it could be localized within the cell.

Ohmori and Mizuno's paper at ICCF7: " Strong Excess Energy Evolution, New Element Production, and Electromagnetic Wave And/Or Neutron Emission in the Light Water Electrolysis with a Tungsten Cathode."  T. Ohmori and T. Mizuno, Catalysis Research Center, H
okkaido University

Here is  my recommended recipe for an experiment to demonstrate the effect:

1. Take a 250 ml glass beaker, fill to about 200 ml level with 0.5 molar (0.5 M) K2CO3 -- potassium carbonate solution

2. Get 0.5 mm diameter Pt wire for both anode and cathode leads -- about 15 cm for each lead is adequate length. Shield them with teflon tubing down to the connection point with the Pt or W.

3. Use a small piece of Pt foil -- about 2 mm x 5mm on the anode (positive lead) crimped mechanically to the Pt wire -- no welding is needed. 

4. Use a 2 mm x 5 mm size W foil on the cathode - negative side. It is tricky to attach the W foil (we used 0.1 mm thickness, which can be pierced with difficulty and the Pt lead wired through). Or, if W welding rod 1/16-inch diameter is available, wrap t
he Pt wire around the W piece about 0.5 to 1 cm long. Warning: The reaction is so violent that it is hard to get the cathode piece in rod form not to fall out of its Pt wire cage! Runs up to 10 minutes or so are usually OK. Mark Hugo has run for up to 75 
minutes , condunsing steam from the reaction -- but he has put other ingredients into the brew such as Li, and he has used a thicker cathode of 1/8-inch W rod.

5. Get a DC power supply up to 5 amps capacity and up to 200 volts. (I am eager to try beyond 180 volts, but we may need a concrete bunker before we try that! Eager also to try heavy water!)  You can use a variac AC source to make DC power-- use a bridge 
rectifier and capacitor to make DC from the AC output. Install voltage and current metering devices -- digital display preferred, data acquisition system if you want to get fancy on the calorimetry later. I'm sure Scott Little and Mitch Swartz cojuld do t
his soon if they put their equipment into this specialized service. This is an excellent experiment for Barry Merriman too!

6. Heat up the beaker solution to 80 C either by electrolysis at low DC input power  -- e.g. 20 V, 1.8 to 2 amps  -- or with an external hot plate. (Turn off the hot plate and **remove it** if calorimetry is being used.) At about 80 deg --sometimes at a l
ower temperature -- crank up the volts to 120 to 180. The effect changes appearance as voltage increases. Current will drop substantially to 0.2 to 0.4 amps as the sheath of steam surrounds the glowiing plasma-sheathed cathode. Keep an alcohol thermometer
 suspended in the solution to measure the temperature. I would *initially* avoid thermocouples because of the threat of violent electromagnetic interference in this unknown phenomena. 

In calorimetric assessment: Heating credit should be taken for the full mass of water in the cell from the initial temperature of say 80 C to the boiling point. However, you may find it difficult to push the average solution temperature up to 100C (we wer
e only in the low to mid 90s), because the steam ejected cools the solution so rapidly. The boiling point is elevated -- McKubre estimated to me in aprivate communciation by only 0.25 deg C for such a solution). This is wonderful, because we WANT steam. I
t will be no problem at all to power steam engines with this, if pending thorough verification of excess energy (This *is* work in progress that must be confirmed!) we figure out how to get the power ratio high enough, if it is not there already. The main
 source of the excess is the amount boiled off: water vaporized requires about  2260 J/gm.

Why was this missed by other cold fusion people? Simple: everyone was looking for a sedate reaction that P&F had started with when the real pay off was in these higher voltage systems that trigger with metals like tungsten. W is recommended due to its tem
perature resistance, but John Thompson has found that other metals such as Al, Cu, Ni, and Zr also work -- as far as the *visible* effect. The colors of the emissions are different -- different hot plasma near the cathode surface.

Other parameters that need to be explored:

* Higher voltage
* Can energy be extracted from the recycled water after steam condensation or if Mills-type hydrinos are formed, do they become "inert"?

* Other electrolytes -- KCl also works, according to Thompson,  try higher molarity values
* Other metals
* Pressurized systems -- BE CAREFUL!!!
* Recombine oxygen and hydrogen -- but a very small part of the effect, undoubtedly -- to get extra energy in the output
* Try heavy water in various mixtures with light water
* Detect electromagnetic pulse from the device -- if it is there as they found in Japan
* Examine the element production and non-natural isotope ratios formed
* SEM imaging for morphology of craters
* Look for radiation -- use film fogging techniques, CR-39 plastic detectors, etc.

This will keep a lot of people busy for a long time. As soon as we pin down the thermal characteristics a bit more, we and others well be hell-bent to scale up to larger power-producing units -- with SAFETY FIRST as our motto.

**********


This is a typical, very brief O/U investigation run that Ed Wall and I performed here recently. In and uninsulated glass beaker on a metal surface -- VERY rough calculation, conservative, we think. Among other factors reducing effect apart from ZERO insul
ation is the recondensation and re-boiling of material -- we had a plastic cover on the beaker  with holes drilled in it. A distillation recondensation device would be preferred to observe water evolved as steam. 

Input: 0.7 to 0.8 amps, avg 0.75 A input at 168 volts = 26,590 J

Duration: 3 minutes, 31 seconds

Solution reduced from 183 ml to 173 ml due to boil-off

Output = 10 x 2260 J/gm H2O  +  183 x  (about 15 C rise during heating to full boiling at  about 92 C) x 4.18 J/gm C  = 34,060

output/input = 1.28

Credit for uninsulated vessel and re-bailing of condnsedliquid could easily push this to 1.40 and beyond. Much more work needs to be done.

I hope that other Vortexians will try this -- CAREFULLY, please!

************

Ohmori and Mizuno did calorimatry on the last few mintues BEFORE boiling and compared the rate of temperature rise to that of a joule heater's effect on the same volume of electrolyte. That's how they got their 2.6/1. 


****** See Infinite Energy #20 for more information in late July.



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 19:56:50 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07090;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:53:27 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:53:27 -0700
Message-Id: <199807010251.WAA23069 mercury.mv.net>
Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 98 22:53:12 -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: <"cq2w32.0.Wk1.bIQcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20217
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Mitch Swartz wrote:

>   I discussed this interesting, but not quite
>very relevant, paper years ago on spf, and perhaps in one
>of the early issues of the Cold Fusion Times.
>
>  The effect occurs on the ANODE.

Kellog also writes of the "cathode effect ", so the title of his paper is 
a little misleading. See my previoulsy posted message  describing a 
simple way of observing this effect on a tungsten cathode.
>
>  Ohmori's process (180 watts, tungsten cathode, carbon anode,
>Na2S04 and K2CO3 0.5M)
>takes place at the cathode with purported isotopic
>changes at that location.
>   Is that not true?

Ohmori/Mizuno in their recent paper from ICCF7 used a Pt  mesh anode, but 
 Pt foil will do.
>
>  Please explain how the en bloc loss of gas at the anode
>is either overunity.

This is eplained in my pevious post.

> Please explain how the en bloc loss of gas at the anode
>is what Dr. Ohmori reports at the other electrode.

Ohmori reports violent boiing at the cathode. There is absolutely no 
doubt that he and the others mentioned in my "recipe" posting see the 
cathode engulfed in massive steam ejection.

A clear distinction must be made between the quiescent regime in which 
"normal" electrolysis elvolution of hydrogen and oxygen is occurring and 
the regime where violent effects -- light flashes, steam, explosions, and 
loud udnerwater sounds are happening.

I hope this clarifies your questions. I will go back and see what you 
wrote about the Anode effect in the Cold Fusion Times.

Best wishes,

Gene Mallove

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 20:06:20 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA13761;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:03:43 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:03:43 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199806301730_MC2-51C9-19EC compuserve.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:02:33 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: "Spooky" Sturrock
Resent-Message-ID: <"niReR3.0.gM3.DSQcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20218
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Soo -

  >  My point (which was clearly lost)[...]

Plenty of that on both sides of this one.

  >  < or at least that the concern about them isn't?>

  > If you have proof of concern elsewhere
  > in the galaxy, publish at once!!!

Oh now that Tinsley's out of the way, *you've* taken over the job of making
fun my damaged attempts at making use of that dopey language you people
invented. Hmmph.

I think that examination of UFO evidence by the scientists is a good thing.
It might very well provide a solid enough cover for the mil to roll some
old but extraordinary goodies out into the public domain without revealing
that they've had them all along if that's the case. Or, the research just
might turn something up interesting on its own. Evidence of the details of
a field effect propulsion system could point research in a promising
direction.

On the other hand, it might just help legitimize subjects like UFOs that
otherwise take a beating from the academic pack. Like this "CF" or "vacuum
energy" nonsense for instance.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 20:29:42 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA20991;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:26:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:26:26 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980630232351.007d8840 world.std.com>
X-Sender: mica world.std.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:23:51 -0400
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Mitchell Swartz 
Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
In-Reply-To: <199807010251.WAA23069 mercury.mv.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"p993h1.0.r75.YnQcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20219
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:53 PM 6/30/98 -0000, Gene wrote:
>
>Mitch Swartz wrote:
>
>>   I discussed this interesting, but not quite
>>very relevant, paper years ago on spf, and perhaps in one
>>of the early issues of the Cold Fusion Times.
>>
>>  The effect occurs on the ANODE.
>
>Kellog also writes of the "cathode effect ", so the title of his paper is 
>a little misleading. See my previoulsy posted message  describing a 
>simple way of observing this effect on a tungsten cathode.

   I have the paper, and your interpretation is not what
is shown in his picture within that paper, if memory serves.
Also, the gas evolutions are different in chemical
character and rate at the two electrodes.


>>  Ohmori's process (180 watts, tungsten cathode, carbon anode,
>>Na2S04 and K2CO3 0.5M)
>>takes place at the cathode with purported isotopic
>>changes at that location.
>>   Is that not true?
>
>Ohmori/Mizuno in their recent paper from ICCF7 used a Pt  mesh anode, but 
> Pt foil will do.
>>
>>  Please explain how the en bloc loss of gas at the anode
>>is either overunity.
>
>This is eplained in my pevious post.


   There is no evidence for o/u; or rather as much as
for the Potatov device.  Merely stating it may be
sufficient for some, but is not scientific.


>
>> Please explain how the en bloc loss of gas at the anode
>>is what Dr. Ohmori reports at the other electrode.
>
>Ohmori reports violent boiing at the cathode. There is absolutely no 
>doubt that he and the others mentioned in my "recipe" posting see the 
>cathode engulfed in massive steam ejection.


   Take a closer look at the paper.


>A clear distinction must be made between the quiescent regime in which 
>"normal" electrolysis elvolution of hydrogen and oxygen is occurring and 
>the regime where violent effects -- light flashes, steam, explosions, and 
>loud udnerwater sounds are happening.
>
>I hope this clarifies your questions. I will go back and see what you 
>wrote about the Anode effect in the Cold Fusion Times.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Gene Mallove
>

   No.  Light flashes, steam, etc. are not necessarily signs
of over unity.  
   Suggest you look closer and consider exactly what was
discussed in that article.

   Best wishes.

   Dr. Mitchell Swartz


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 20:41:03 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA25725;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:38:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:38:53 -0700
Message-ID: <006301bda4a1$57f7f600$abb4bfa8 default>
From: "Frederick J Sparber" 
To: "Vortex-l" 
Cc: "George" , 
Subject: Solar Hydrogen Storage Doodle
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 21:35:40 -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: <"cxhUV2.0.qH6.CzQcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20220
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

To: Vortex

See if you can make this one go,Robin. :-)

1, MgCO3 + 3 H2 <---> MgO + CH3OH + H2O
    -242              -135   -40    -54

     84#    6#         40#    32#   18#

2, MgO  +  CO2 --->   MgCO3
  -135     -94         -242

Almost as good as "Milk of Magnesia"  for H2 storage and I.C. or Fuel Cell
use?

Regards,     Frederick



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 20:49:54 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA30413;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:48:06 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:48:06 -0700
From: Chuck Davis 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:46:34 -0700
Message-ID: 
X-Mailer: YAM 1.3.5 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck
Organization: ROSHI Corporation
Subject: Unusual Finding... (fwd)
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 UAA30361
Resent-Message-ID: <"2qjRu1.0.xQ7.r5Rcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20222
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

*** Forwarded message, originally written by Chuck Davis on 30-Jun-98 ***
Article <359945b5.2205632 news.twics.com>
Path:
nntp.earthlink.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!xfer.kren.ne.kr!xfer.kren.nm.kr!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!news1.kddnet.ad.jp!news.tokyo.sannet.ad.jp!misc.twics.com!not-for-mail
From: patanie pasdepub.com (Patanie)
Newsgroups:  bionet.neuroscience
Subject: Unusual finding
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:08:33 GMT
Organization: Twics Co. Ltd., Japan  http://www.twics.com
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <359945b5.2205632 news.twics.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp22-max02.twics.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
Xref: nntp.earthlink.net bionet.neuroscience:17628
Previous Issue | Next Issue || | Index | || Previous Article | Next
                                  Article
                    Volume 11 : Number 4 : Article 1
              (Journal of Scientific Exploration)

            Topographic Brain Mapping of UFO Experiencers 
                                    by
                            Norman S. Don 
    Kairos Foundation and University of Illinois at Chicago, 1187
               Wilmette Ave., #174, Wilmette, IL 60091 
                                    and
                              Gilda Moura 
  Kairos Foundation, Caixa Postal 14528, CEP 22412-000, Rio de
                              Janeiro, Brazil 
                  Volume 11 Number 4: Page 435. 

A cohort of Brazilian subjects, claiming experiences with UFOs
involving contact or abduction, were selected for topographic brain
mapping. One of the most important selection criteria was the
ability to enter into a self-reported, non-ordinary state of
consciousness or trance that developed spontaneously after their
abduction or contact experiences. Analysis of their EEGs revealed
that all subjects entered voluntarily into an hyperaroused trance.

 In this state, they maintained a condition of muscular relaxation and
immobility while their EEGs exhibited high frequency (beta) activity
at all 19 electrode sites, but with maximum activity at the prefrontal
and adjacent loci. Inspection of the EEGs from the prefrontal/frontal 
sites revealed intermittent trains of rhythmic, approximately 40 Hz 
activity, attaining very high amplitudes, at times exceeding 40 microvolts.

 This activity was distinct in morphology and frequency from faster, 
usually concurrent activity, probably attributable to scalp muscle 
discharge (EMG). Analysis of 40 Hz, midline scalp activity, statistically
controlling for the effects of EMG, revealed significantly more 40 Hz 
activity in trance than in baseline (p < .006). Also, the dominant alpha
frequency increased during trance (p < .01). 

Both EEG findings suggest the occurrence of a state of hyperarousal. 
There was no evidence of epileptiform discharges in our data or clinical
indications of possible epilepsy. Also, there was no brain activity 
suggestive of psychopathology, particularly schizophrenia, nor were 
there clinical indications of psychopathology. The EEG results were 
related to the physiological effects of highly focused attention and 
recent findings in neuroscience. Also noted were similarities to 
advanced meditative states and differences from psychopathology. 
[Followup to this article] [Reply via e-mail]

Please, no flames :)
-- 
    .-.                                                               .-.
   /   \           .-.                                 .-.           /   \
  /     \         /   \       .-.     _     .-.       /   \         /     \
-/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\--
    RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \   /     \_/   `-'     \   /       \     /
           \   /         `-'                     `-'         \   /
            `-'                                               `-'
 http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html
-- 
    .-.                                                               .-.
   /   \           .-.                                 .-.           /   \
  /     \         /   \       .-.     _     .-.       /   \         /     \
-/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\--
    RoshiCorp ROSHI.com \   /     \_/   `-'     \   /       \     /
           \   /         `-'                     `-'         \   /
            `-'                                               `-'
 http://www.his.com/~emerald7/roshi.cmp/roshi.html

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 20:55:04 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA19700;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199807010203.WAA15013 mercury.mv.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:35:15 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
Resent-Message-ID: <"nk-zp2.0.kp4.D6Rcr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20221
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed & Gene -

I've known how anodization of aluminum was done for a long time, with the
tubular-cell aluminum oxide coating building up than can be dyed. But I
only recently learned that the anodized metal jewelry fad of the mid 80's
with titanium and niobium principally involved the formation of oxides on
the anode target in very thin diffractive layers at high voltage (100V+ is
high relative to the 12v aluminum in sulphuric acid process) which create
beautiful colors without dyes. What caught my attention and made me wonder
about possible CF related anomalies in these systems was when I read that
when you anodize a target with a certain voltage, you can't go back to a
lower voltage (the colors won't change and nothing happens), and that the
color tint due to thickness varies with voltage. Perhaps this has something
to do with 'contaminants' being created in the process. Probably not, but
it's interesting anyway that such dramatic CF-like effects are now claimed
for a substantially similar process. Various salts, Calgon, or other odd
things like wine, etc. are used to make electrolyte for the HV anodizing
process. Someone in a jewelry article said Calgon was the best, but if
you're boiling the electrolyte, you'd probably get too many bubbles.

Does the anode effect under these more extreme conditions make the anode
pretty, or does it just get eaten up and destroyed? I was just now
considering making a high power rectifier and cap filter for my Variac
anyway for some attempts at HV anodization. If I do that maybe I'll kick it
up a notch...

Gene says  >> * Pressurized systems -- BE CAREFUL!!!

Increased pressure at a fairly constant value would be obtainable even in
an open steam-releasing system just by having some head in a pipe above the
working cell tank, but I guess everyone knew that. Shield for tank blowouts.

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 21:00:01 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA01312;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:58:26 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 20:58:26 -0700
X-Sender: monteverde postoffice.worldnet.att.net
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <199807010203.WAA15013 mercury.mv.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:57:17 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde 
Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
Resent-Message-ID: <"K3ewC.0.PK.XFRcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20223
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Dumb Question: is boiling water the same as evaporating the water, in terms
of *power*? Sure the net energy involved ends up the same, but isn't the
violent mixing and frothing allowing the water to evaporate much faster due
to agitation and increased surface area exposure to the surrounding
open-ended air supply? I bet I could hurl water out of a beaker off a cliff
on a warm day and it will "boil" away before hitting the ground, involving
much more energy transfer than the power in my arm or the PE of the
altitude could account for.

Were any of the experiments done in a closed system with calorimetry?
Otherwise someone's going to claim this is just a big electric powered
dunking-bird!

- Rick Monteverde
Honolulu, HI


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 22:13:31 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA24591;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:10:29 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:10:29 -0700
Message-ID: <3599B72F.64D3 earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:12:31 -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: Mallove: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper, incandescent W  6.30.98 resent with short lines
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"7XQk73.0.106.4JScr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20224
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Subject: Re: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper
 Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:05:58 -0700
Resent-From:  vortex-l eskimo.com
       Date:  Tue, 30 Jun 98 22:09:45 -0400
       From:  "E.F. Mallove" 
    Reply-To:  vortex-l eskimo.com
         To:  "VORTEX" 
Vortexians:

Jed wrote:
>I hope I am not spilling the beans on the next issue of the magazine, but too
>bad if I am . . 

That's OK Jed, there will be much information, indeed, on this unusual
phenomenon in Issue #20 of Infinite Energy, which is going to the
printer soon and will be out around July 22nd.
>
>There have been some tentative, successful replications of the experiment
>reported by Ohmori and Mizuno at ICCF7. The effect they saw has been in the
>literature for some time. Hal Fox brought an paper about this to our
>attention: Herbert H. Kellogg, "Anode Effect in Aqueous Electrolysis," 
>Journal
>of the Electrochemical Society, April 1950.

This is correct.

Here is an introduction in the form of a recipe I sent a few others,
including Prof. John Dash recently. They will both try the experiment to
see if they confirm the excess energy that others have seen:

FROM:
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

*********************************
A word of WARNING right up front: This is potentially VERY DANGEROUS
work and must not be done without maximum, safety precautions and
supervision by those thoroughly versed in laboratory safety!  It
involves high-temperatures, high-voltages, explosive mixtures of oxygen
and hydrogen, caustic solutions, and steam generation that if improperly
contained could cause a deadly explosion. These are just the beginning
hazards. This is unknown territory.  Drs. Ohmori and Mizuno measured the
transmutation of elements in this experiment. Thus, until further notice
‹ and despite your possible skepticism about their claim of
transmutation ‹ this work must be considered, by definition, nuclear
experimentation.  With that said, we encourage every thoughtful group
who can do this experiment safely to attempt it. Infinite Energy and
Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. take no responsibility for the known or
unknown radiation or other hazards that are associated this experiment.

*********************************

Dear Colleagues:

After much work we now have what appears to be a marvelous
do-it-yourself "cold fusion" experiment. Any reasonably equipped
chem/physics lab can see the effect within days to a week -- if they get
their act together. The experiment has the following qualities:

1. It is visually and audibly spectacular -- brilliant glowing, pink,
purple, lavender with white flashes on an underwater tungsten (W)
electrode ( e.g. 2 mm x 5 mm W foil or 1 cm x 1.6 mm diameter tungsten
welding rod). A plasma-like underwater discharge on the electrode that
often manages to disintegrate or melt tungsten underwater with only
about 50 to 80 watts of power over a short period. (Tungsten's melting
point is 3680 K or thereabouts.) The sound of the underwater
"explosions" on the cathode -- brilliant white flashes on the purple
background plasma -- is very impressive.

2. It is *totally reproducible*  -- at will -- with no loading time as
in the Pd/heavy water experiments

3. Calorimetry is simple to do because there is so much steam energy
evolved from the reaction that by simply tallying the amount of water
vaporized as steam, one gets over-unity every time (so far). Three
groups have already gotten *preliminary* over-unity results: 1. Ohmori
and Mizuno in Japan, who introduced the phenomenon at ICCF-7 (O/U
estimated at 2.6/1); 2. Gene Mallove and FAA engineer Ed Wall here in
Bow, NH during the past ten days -- work continuing -- (CONSERVATIVELY
1.4/1); 3. Engineer Mark Hugo of Northern States Power in Minnesota (but
his affiliation has nothing to do with his home experiment) -- 
(CONSERVATIVELY 1.5/1), but work still continuing to check for errors.
Chemist John Thompson in the Bahamas, who attended ICCF-7, was the first
person outside of Japan to reproduce the effect and will do calorimetry
on it soon. This will be in  IE #20 out on July 22.

4. No one has patents or may be able to get them since the effect was
noticed in other forms (1916!) and reported extensively in the Journal
of the Electrochemical Society, April, 1950, p.133 in an article titled
("The Anode Effect in Aqueous Electrolysis," by Herbert Kellogg of the
School of Mines, Columbia University. New York -- Hal Fox found this
marvelous article, since it relates to some of the work his Trenergy
Company is doing weith charge clusters and radioactivity reduction. This
may, indeed, be  related to the underwater  electrolysis ability to
remediate nuclear waste. But -- OF COURSE! -- NO *calorimetry* was done
in 1950. No one had any idea that such simple systems could be O/U. The
systems were studied for other reasons.  Further: the present tungsten
effect is seen mainly on the cathode, but it can make the Pt anode
incandescent too at lower water temperature (say 50 C) -- we normally
work over 80 C. It is very mysterious -- was so to Kellogg in 1950 and
remains so.

5. Ohmori and Mizuno found major evidence for transmutation of elements
and volcanic ejection of metals from the tungsten surface -- these SEM
photos were reproduced in their article. They find Hg, Os, Kr, Zn, Cu,
Ni, Fe, Cr, Si, and Mg -- with anomalous isotopic content. Just as I
said, in IE #15/16, this subject is more properly called
"Electro-Alchemy".

6. WARNING: Ohomori and Mizuno experienced significant apparent
electromagnetic effects on their instruments. They were unsure whether
some of the effect on their neutron counter were evidence of neutrons --
I doubt the latter, as did Srinivasan of BARC at ICCF7. I have kept a
Geiger counter on during our experiments -- absolutely no sign of major
ionizing radiation, but of course it could be localized within the cell.

Ohmori and Mizuno's paper at ICCF7: " Strong Excess Energy Evolution,
New Element Production, and Electromagnetic Wave And/Or Neutron Emission
in the Light Water Electrolysis with a Tungsten Cathode."  T. Ohmori and
T. Mizuno, Catalysis Research Center, Hokkaido University

Here is  my recommended recipe for an experiment to demonstrate the
effect:

1. Take a 250 ml glass beaker, fill to about 200 ml level with 0.5 molar
(0.5 M) K2CO3 -- potassium carbonate solution

2. Get 0.5 mm diameter Pt wire for both anode and cathode leads -- about
15 cm for each lead is adequate length. Shield them with teflon tubing
down to the connection point with the Pt or W.

3. Use a small piece of Pt foil -- about 2 mm x 5mm on the anode
(positive lead) crimped mechanically to the Pt wire -- no welding is
needed. 

4. Use a 2 mm x 5 mm size W foil on the cathode - negative side. It is
tricky to attach the W foil (we used 0.1 mm thickness, which can be
pierced with difficulty and the Pt lead wired through). Or, if W welding
rod 1/16-inch diameter is available, wrap the Pt wire around the W piece
about 0.5 to 1 cm long. Warning: The reaction is so violent that it is
hard to get the cathode piece in rod form not to fall out of its Pt wire
cage! Runs up to 10 minutes or so are usually OK. Mark Hugo has run for
up to 75 minutes , condensing steam from the reaction -- but he has put
other ingredients into the brew such as Li, and he has used a thicker
cathode of 1/8-inch W rod.

5. Get a DC power supply up to 5 amps capacity and up to 200 volts. (I
am eager to try beyond 180 volts, but we may need a concrete bunker
before we try that! Eager also to try heavy water!)  You can use a
variac AC source to make DC power-- use a bridge rectifier and capacitor
to make DC from the AC output. Install voltage and current metering
devices -- digital display preferred, data acquisition system if you
want to get fancy on the calorimetry later. I'm sure Scott Little and
Mitch Swartz could do this soon if they put their equipment into this
specialized service. This is an excellent experiment for Barry Merriman
too!

6. Heat up the beaker solution to 80 C either by electrolysis at low DC
input power  -- e.g. 20 V, 1.8 to 2 amps  -- or with an external hot
plate. (Turn off the hot plate and **remove it** if calorimetry is being
used.) At about 80 deg --sometimes at a lower temperature -- crank up
the volts to 120 to 180. The effect changes appearance as voltage
increases. Current will drop substantially to 0.2 to 0.4 amps as the
sheath of steam surrounds the glowing plasma-sheathed cathode. Keep an
alcohol thermometer suspended in the solution to measure the
temperature. I would *initially* avoid thermocouples because of the
threat of violent electromagnetic interference in this unknown
phenomena. 

In calorimetric assessment: Heating credit should be taken for the full
mass of water in the cell from the initial temperature of say 80 C to
the boiling point. However, you may find it difficult to push the
average solution temperature up to 100C (we were only in the low to mid
90s), because the steam ejected cools the solution so rapidly. The
boiling point is elevated -- McKubre estimated to me in a private
communciation by only 0.25 deg C for such a solution). This is
wonderful, because we WANT steam. It will be no problem at all to power
steam engines with this, if pending thorough verification of excess
energy (This *is* work in progress that must be confirmed!) we figure
out how to get the power ratio high enough, if it is not there already.
The main source of the excess is the amount boiled off: water vaporized
requires about  2260 J/gm.

Why was this missed by other cold fusion people? Simple: everyone was
looking for a sedate reaction that P&F had started with when the real
pay off was in these higher voltage systems that trigger with metals
like tungsten. W is recommended due to its temperature resistance, but
John Thompson has found that other metals such as Al, Cu, Ni, and Zr
also work -- as far as the *visible* effect. The colors of the emissions
are different -- different hot plasma near the cathode surface.

Other parameters that need to be explored:

* Higher voltage
* Can energy be extracted from the recycled water after steam
condensation or if Mills-type hydrinos are formed, do they become
"inert"?

* Other electrolytes -- KCl also works, according to Thompson,  try
higher molarity values
* Other metals
* Pressurized systems -- BE CAREFUL!!!
* Recombine oxygen and hydrogen -- but a very small part of the effect,
undoubtedly -- to get extra energy in the output
* Try heavy water in various mixtures with light water
* Detect electromagnetic pulse from the device -- if it is there as they
found in Japan
* Examine the element production and non-natural isotope ratios formed
* SEM imaging for morphology of craters
* Look for radiation -- use film fogging techniques, CR-39 plastic
detectors, etc.

This will keep a lot of people busy for a long time. As soon as we pin
down the thermal characteristics a bit more, we and others well be
hell-bent to scale up to larger power-producing units -- with SAFETY
FIRST as our motto.

**********


This is a typical, very brief O/U investigation run that Ed Wall and I
performed here recently. In and uninsulated glass beaker on a metal
surface -- VERY rough calculation, conservative, we think. Among other
factors reducing effect apart from ZERO insulation is the recondensation
and re-boiling of material -- we had a plastic cover on the beaker  with
holes drilled in it. A distillation recondensation device would be
preferred to observe water evolved as steam. 

Input: 0.7 to 0.8 amps, avg 0.75 A input at 168 volts = 26,590 J

Duration: 3 minutes, 31 seconds

Solution reduced from 183 ml to 173 ml due to boil-off

Output = 10 x 2260 J/gm H2O  +  183 x  (about 15 C rise during heating
to full boiling at  about 92 C) x 4.18 J/gm C  = 34,060

output/input = 1.28

Credit for uninsulated vessel and re-bailing of condensed liquid could
easily push this to 1.40 and beyond. Much more work needs to be done.

I hope that other Vortexians will try this -- CAREFULLY, please!

************

Ohmori and Mizuno did calorimatry on the last few minutes BEFORE boiling
and compared the rate of temperature rise to that of a joule heater's
effect on the same volume of electrolyte. That's how they got their
2.6/1. 

****** See Infinite Energy #20 for more information in late July.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 22:26:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA29153;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3599B8FC.6480 earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:20:12 -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: Schultz: Mallove: Robert Park's Cover-Up of Clarke's Message 6.30.98
Content-Type: message/news
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Resent-Message-ID: <"hsj6u1.0.R77.vWScr" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20225
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!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsm.ibm.net!ibm.net!news.biu.ac.il!gefen!schultr
From: schultr gefen.cc.biu.ac.il (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Robert Park's Cover-Up of Clarke's Message
Date: 1 Jul 1998 04:39:19 GMT
Organization: Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel.
Message-ID: <6ncehn$n54$5 cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
References: <199806261351.JAA03330 mercury.mv.net>
Reply-To: correct address in .sigfile
NNTP-Posting-Host: gefen.cc.biu.ac.il
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: nntp.earthlink.net sci.physics.fusion:22329

E.F. Mallove (editor infinite-energy.com) wrote:
: Robert Park (American Physical Society) Deception about Arthur C. Clarke 
: Essay in Science

Perhaps you would be willing to give the name of the Fellow of the 
Royal Society to whom Clarke alluded as being a CF believer, and the
name of the Cold Fusion device that comes with a money-back guarantee?

-----
Richard Schultz                              schultr mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry                      tel: 972-3-531-8065
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel       fax: 972-3-535-1250
-----
"P&F are getting so much heat that you hardly need any calorimetry at all."
               --Jed Rothwell, sci.physics.fusion, 19 Jul 1992
"The palladium based systems are a useless dead end. Who cares about them?"
               --Jed Rothwell, sci.physics.fusion, 10 Dec 1992

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 23:26:47 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA07008;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:23:35 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:23:35 -0700
Message-ID: <3599C85B.2863 earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 00:25:47 -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
Subject: Britz: Miles rebuttal in J Phy Chem (4.30.98) : Murray: Jones, Shkedi recombination 6.29.98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ho9d02.0.Qj1.cNTcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20226
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Subject: Miles rebuttal out
       Date:  Mon, 29 Jun 1998 13:51:57 +0200
       From:   britz 
Organization:  DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University
 Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion

A week or so ago, I emailed Mel Miles to ask yet again whether his
rebuttal of the Jones et al paper in J. Phys. Chem. is out. It is, and
has been for a couple of months, I guess (I don't check JPC regularly).
There is a page in my web site devoted to this saga, which is now at an
end. As most of you will know, Jones et al's (1995!) polemic was
critical of the published work of Miles et al. Miles' first go at
writing a rebuttal was knocked back by referees (an unusual thing to
happen, most journals do not referee rebuttals). Upon Steve Jones' and
my pleading the case to the journals' editor, that editor did reconsider
and appointed new referees. Miles' rebuttal must have been rather long,
because what has now been published (see the abstract in Recent
Additions in my web site) is still quite long for a rebuttal, and Miles
tells me he was forced to cut out a lot. A further unusual thing is that
this rebuttal, which comes about 3 years after the polemic it responds
to, is followed, in the same issue, by a re-rebuttal by Jones et al; and
this is followed by a re-re-rebuttal by Miles (very short), who thus has
the last word. I think.

-- Dieter Britz.    Visit me at http://www.kemi.aau.dk/~db

http://kemi.aau.dk/~db/fusion/Blabla.html  June 26, 1998:
This is polemic week - apart from a lone patent (Oyabe et al, I'm not
even sure the object is cold fusion). The big news is, of course, that
the Miles rebuttal is out at last - has been, in fact, since the April
30 issue of the J. Phys. Chem., I didn't know until I emailed Miles and
he informed me. He writes that he was forced by a referee to cut the
paper down a lot; at 4.5 pages, however, it is unusually long still. I
guess he thought he had a lot to complain about. Also unusually, this
rebuttal is followed, in the same issue of the journal, by a re-rebuttal
by Jones et al, criticising Miles of some things he doesn't actually
say, certainly not in his rebuttal. For example, they write that his
theory, the dd fusion goes to 4He and the energy into the lattice, can't
be right. He certainly does not write that in the rebuttal. Even more
unusually, the re-rebuttal of Jones et al is then followed by a brief
re-re-rebuttal by Miles, where he makes the point that he presents only
experimental data and that is trumps. There is also a rebuttal by Jones,
Hansen et al in J. Electroanal. Chem. of a paper by Will, who has
overinterpreted them. They do not, they state clearly, say that
recombination can explain away all excess heat, just that it, and any
other possible prosaic explanation, needs to be ruled out before excess
heat is claimed. One of these, for example, is Notoya's notorious demo
at Nagoya, where heat was dissipated into the air from a thin wire, as
found by Jones; Will still cites that demo as evidence, write Jones et
al. I don't think there will ever be agreement about the degree of
recombination and how much it affects excess heat calculation, and
thermal gradients in these cells. I should have had a paper (or 2?) from
a recent issue of Fusion Technol., but I was sent the wrong issue, so
that will have to wait until next week, maybe. Oh yes, there was also a
peripheral, on calorimetry in electrochemical cells (Zhang et al), that
might interest calorimetry freaks.

Comments by Rich Murray on Jones and on Shkedi, both in 1995, on
recombination artifacts in calorimetry.  I can snail mail a collection
of these papers and Miles' rebuttals upon request.:

Zvi Shkedi et al, Bose Corp., "Calorimetry, Excess Heat, and Faraday
Efficiency in Ni-H2O Electrolytic Cells, Fusion Technology, Nov., 1995,
28, p. 1720-31.  

Shkedi ran four light-water Ni cells at 180 to 600 mA for up to 4 days a
run with an average power accuracy of 0.6 mW.  All released H2 and O2
were carefully recombined and returned to the cells.   Assuming 100 %
Faraday efficiency, as did most studies of this reaction, he found
apparent excess power of 15 to 37 %, reduced to zero when the actual
recombination efficiency was factored in.  Shkedi also ran, but did not
describe in detail, 154 palladium D2O cells, with the same null results.

Confirming was a report by JE Jones et all at Brigham Young U.,
"Faradaic Efficiencies Less Than 100 % during Electrolysis of Water Can
Account for Reports of Excess Heat in "Cold Fusion" Cells," J. Physical
Chem., 1995, 99, p. 6973-79. 20 references. They used low current
densities of 1-2 mA/cm2.  Some studies seemed to find more excess heat
with K2CO3 than with Na2CO3.  Jones wrote on page 6978:

"In agreement with a recent report (20) showing that different
electrolytes produce differing bubble sizes in aqueous solution, our
experiments show that the difference between NaCO3 and K2CO3 as
electrolytes probably is due to differences in interfacial properties of
the solutions at the electrodes.  The H2 bubbles were smaller when K2CO3
was the electrolyte than when Na2CO3 was the electrolyte in the same
cell.  Smaller bubbles allow better mobility of gases in the electrolyte
and contact between the electrolyte and the electrode surface, thus
allowing more frequent reaction of dissolved gases.  When detergent was
aded to the Na2CO3 electrolyte, the bubbles became much smaller, did not
adhere to the electrode, and resulted in about the same rate of apparent
excess heat as was observed with the K2CO3 electrolyte."

This shows how subtle and unexpected the artifacts can be in these
deceptively simple experiments.

Miles re-re-rebuttal: J. Phys. Chem. B, April 30, 1998, 102, 3648:
states, "Our calorimetric experiments generally used currents of 400-600
mA.  We always employed long, narrow calorimetric cells that provide
rapid radial and axial mixing of the electrolyte by the electrolysis gas
bubbles."  Shkedi's extensive, exhaustive, and expensive tests of
recombination artifacts, producing false excess heats of 15-37 %,
published in 11 pages in Fusion Technology, Nov., 1995, used long,
narrow cells and currents of 180-600 mA, which is the same range as
Miles' cells, assuming that the effective cathode areas and current
densities are in the same range.  Miles does not refer to Shkedi's
results.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 23:28:48 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA07838;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:25:39 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:25:39 -0700
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 02:19:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Schnurer 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
cc: Discussion Group - Vortex ,
        John Schnurer 
Subject: Re: New Innovations - Biochips
In-Reply-To: <3598E309.6E8040B7 css.mot.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"BR2BS.0.Nw1.YPTcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20227
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Dear Vo.,

	In 1992... to 1994 Dave Tume and myself designed and tested the 
modules for 'wet nets' ... we invneted these chemical cells to serve the 
function of the weights in neural networks.  Quite effective.  

					JHS 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 23:30:34 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA09067;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:29:08 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:29:08 -0700
Message-ID: <3599C9B1.3EF3 earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 00:31:29 -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: Robin van Spaandonk , Vortex-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mallove: 1950 "Anode Effect" paper, incandescent W  6.30.98 resent with short lines
References: <3599B72F.64D3 earthlink.net> <359ec9b9.13598542@mail-hub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"JHq2E.0.WD2.pSTcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20228
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

July 1, 1998

Hi Robin,  On my system, using Netscape 3.0, the original message had
lines too long for my screen.  Resending it corrected the problem, which
I assumed affected other readers.

Regards,  Rich Murray

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Jun 30 23:54:59 1998
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA13027;
	Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:51:46 -0700
Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:51:46 -0700
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Ostrowski 
Reply-To: Jim Ostrowski 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Ostrowski's comments
In-Reply-To: <199806301408_MC2-51C7-FB2E compuserve.com>
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"liPvf3.0.TB3.2oTcr" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List:  archive/latest/20229
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


 Jed Rothwell wrote: 
 
> Jim Ostrowski writes: 
 
>> I notice how the name of this thread suddenly changed from 
"expertise is essential" to "Ostrowski's comments" , which tends to
shift the focus of the discussion from the original point in  question
to being about me personally . This is a "dodge"  or a "bait and
switch" which more or less summarizes the remainder of Jed's comments
.
. . 
 
> Nope, nothing like that. It was purely administrative.  I changed the
> header to make it easier to file and retrieve the messages in my
> internal, home-brew system (which is not Eurdora).  Jim is reading too
> much into trivial actions. 
 
   Uh-huh.  I suppose then we'll start seeing the other threads you
 participate in being renamed in honor of your respondents , too,
 for the same reasons that you changed this one . 
 
 I'm sure all the subscibers on vortex will really appreciate this
 sort of initiative on your part , Jed .  After all ,if it helps
 YOUR SYSTEM keep track of things , who could possibly object ? 
 
 [snip]
 
 >> So what Jed seems to be saying is that this research is not at all for
 >> "amateurs" like us here on vortex , and it is best left up to the
 >> "professionals" who have decided to devote their entire careers to it. 
 
 > Jed did not decide that; God did. 
 
 Oh really ? Chats with you regularly about such things , does
 He ? 
 
 > Amateurs cannot do CF at home
 > for the same reason they cannot perform open heart surgery or make
 > synthetic diamonds. As it happens, I know a retired professor who
 > *does* make synthetic diamonds in his basement,
 
    Thank you for defeating the theorem you propose in one sentence
 with a fact you report in the next . 
 
   [....snip....]
 
>> But Jed does not appear to be one of these people , nor is he 
>> interested in performing any experiments himself . 
 
> That's not quite right. Ostrowski has not read the literature, so he
> does not realize that I have performed experiments and collaborated with
> various people by doing data processing and translation, including some
> of the professionals. 
 
 Let me be the first to announce that the sum total of all the
 things that I am unaware of is WAAAAY more than that which I am
 aware of. 
 
 Of course , I never claimed to be omnicient , nor does He Who IS
 communicate with me about matters pertaining to C F. 
 
 That's where you seem to have a real advantage in this
 conversation , Jed. 
 
 > I am at a disadvantage when it comes to performing physical
 > hands-on work, because I suffer from a mild disability which
 > prevents me from manipulating small objects. 
 
 This God I have heard about is supposedly able to fix things like
 that .  But I'm sure that is a private matter between the two of
 you , so I will not comment further about it. 
 
 >> What then does he [Jed] contribute that is "on topic"  here? 
 
 > What does Ostrowski contribute? 
 
  That IS on topic?  Well , when a thread has one's own name contained
 in it's title EVERYTHING said by that person is ON TOPIC , in my book. 
 
 
 > What *can* he contribute? 
 
 You have NO idea what I can contribute. The question is : is this
 group ready for it? 
 
 > He refuses to read the literature. He did not even realize that
 > the SRI explosion was chemical. 
 
 Ummm ....just checking ... Did God tell you THAT too? 
 
 Ostrowski